A good New York Times piece on Portland nevertheless demonstrates how the conventions of objective reporting fail to accurately capture the bad faith driving pro-Trump propaganda.
A good New York Times piece on Portland nevertheless demonstrates how the conventions of objective reporting fail to accurately capture the bad faith driving pro-Trump propaganda.
She’s so exposed. I’m just waiting for her to get domed in playing sight with the police.
It’s “in plain sight”, as in, very easily visible.
And no, I’m not calling you an AI. A clanker would have known the difference.
For all intensive purposes, it doesn’t matter. Case and point, I understood fine.
No need to call out a clanker as an escape goat.
Ultimately it’s all a moo point.
Edit: ugh, I see what you’re doing.
its becoming more gobberish by the mole and I am definitely not here for it
FTFY
In “playing” sight isn’t a misheard phrase I’ve encountered before, but that’s a little surprising given how much sense it makes.
Autistic much? It’s a typo. Bravo. Clearly nobody knew what was up. But thank you for the lesson.
Maybe you’re the clanker, lacking in ability to read the context and understand somebody might have made a typo.
…the AI thing is referring to your username.
And what’s wrong with being autistic?
Nothing in particular, it has just led to a pointless and annoying conversation over swype typos.
Awwww. head pats
😭