No. They’re trying to say its problem with violence is substantially lower than all those places with substantially lower violent crime rates. That’s how crime rates work, in fact it’s why they are useful.
Okay, so there’s a super instructive thing that can be done with this user. Look over their profile. Just sort of let your eyes wander over a couple screens worth of it, let it sink in (especially on the comments side). It gives a really good flavor of what kind of “cover” comments these accounts like to spread around to dilute their payload of weird MAGA-friendly talking points. There’s some generic tech stuff, there “imma smoke a bong fellow kids,” you know, but there’s just a very particular flavor of kind of low-effort one or two sentence messages, with no followup intended or desired, that starts to get recognizable after a while.
Of course not every user that doesn’t try to make a masterpiece out of every comment is automatically a troll. But, in combination with the inevitable:
It will reveal more democrats that shouldn’t be in office.
… type of comment, it actually does start to look recognizably different from the type of “human voice who is typing a comment because they care on some level about what’s being talked about” comment that most people leave most of the time.
Another really interesting thing is the way they conduct themselves in the comments during a back-and-forth. It’s a separate set of behaviors from the low-effort comment “mode,” but it’s still a very recognizable way of interacting.
They never come off the main point. It basically doesn’t matter what anyone says, they’ll basically just stick to the same script of two or three main arguments, and they’ll just keep saying them over and over (and they don’t seem to be interested in stopping, ever).
They frequently tell other people in the conversation what the other people believe. Of course, plenty of real human Lemmy users do this too, the weird accounts don’t have a monopoly on it. But these go to it a lot more shamelessly and consistently (often just straight-up ignoring other people’s statements completely.) Look at the whole exchange that starts with “Are you trying to say chicago doesn’t have a problem with violence?” “No.” and really just kind of study the pattern of the conversation. It’s almost like a Magic 8 Ball, where one participant is just repeating a variety of the exact same thing, over and over, without regard for anything else going on in the conversation. Well, it’s not “almost like” that, it is that.
Their non-cover-argument participation almost always lines up with some kind of stock talking point or other, and there’s usually a variety. Again, just look at the profile, and this time focus on the talking points: There’s social media censorship, big cities are violent and dangerous, Democrats are bad, it’s like a little bingo card. But they don’t argue for them. They just repeat them, forcing them into the mental landscape, in a little waiting-on-hold-message type loop.
This one’s actually a little bit unusual in that their messaging is lining up with traditional MAGA messaging. I honestly have no idea what’s up with that. Most of the time, they’re on a little bit of a different script (like Russian ones will talk about “deindustrialization,” they’ll be mad about green energy, they’ll obviously have stuff to say about Ukraine, they also don’t like Democrats, and so on.)
I spent way too much time arguing with dbzer0 people yesterday, and I never once got the impression that anyone I was talking with was any kind of propaganda operation. It’s not just that someone’s “not with me” and so I jump to that they’re obviously one of the weird accounts. But, yes, this is definitely one of the weird accounts.
You didn’t answer a very specific question: Have you been to Chicago or do you live in Chicago?
Understanding your perspective on a question is important to answering a question.
Stop accusing others of deflection, when you are not giving supporting information. Now quit being defensive and answer any other questions people may have.
Are you trying to say chicago doesn’t have a problem with violence?
No. They’re trying to say its problem with violence is substantially lower than all those places with substantially lower violent crime rates. That’s how crime rates work, in fact it’s why they are useful.
Other cities being violent doesn’t mean chicago is not violent.
Does anyone here have any actual answers, or are you all just trying to distract from the issue?
Okay, so there’s a super instructive thing that can be done with this user. Look over their profile. Just sort of let your eyes wander over a couple screens worth of it, let it sink in (especially on the comments side). It gives a really good flavor of what kind of “cover” comments these accounts like to spread around to dilute their payload of weird MAGA-friendly talking points. There’s some generic tech stuff, there “imma smoke a bong fellow kids,” you know, but there’s just a very particular flavor of kind of low-effort one or two sentence messages, with no followup intended or desired, that starts to get recognizable after a while.
Of course not every user that doesn’t try to make a masterpiece out of every comment is automatically a troll. But, in combination with the inevitable:
… type of comment, it actually does start to look recognizably different from the type of “human voice who is typing a comment because they care on some level about what’s being talked about” comment that most people leave most of the time.
If I’m not with you, I’m against you.
That’s how tribalism works and you’re clearly not above it.
I’m going to block you now because you don’t have anything relevant or constructive to say.
Another really interesting thing is the way they conduct themselves in the comments during a back-and-forth. It’s a separate set of behaviors from the low-effort comment “mode,” but it’s still a very recognizable way of interacting.
This one’s actually a little bit unusual in that their messaging is lining up with traditional MAGA messaging. I honestly have no idea what’s up with that. Most of the time, they’re on a little bit of a different script (like Russian ones will talk about “deindustrialization,” they’ll be mad about green energy, they’ll obviously have stuff to say about Ukraine, they also don’t like Democrats, and so on.)
I spent way too much time arguing with dbzer0 people yesterday, and I never once got the impression that anyone I was talking with was any kind of propaganda operation. It’s not just that someone’s “not with me” and so I jump to that they’re obviously one of the weird accounts. But, yes, this is definitely one of the weird accounts.
You didn’t answer a very specific question: Have you been to Chicago or do you live in Chicago?
Understanding your perspective on a question is important to answering a question.
Stop accusing others of deflection, when you are not giving supporting information. Now quit being defensive and answer any other questions people may have.
If you think chicago isn’t violent, just say so.
Oh, fuck off.
Do you know what cognitive dissonance is?
It appears that you just like typing for replies and think that if someone disagrees with you they are prime for ridicule.
You are what you accuse mr. Projector.
I’ll take that as a no.
I’ll answer your question directly:
No, Chicago doesn’t have a problem with violence.