For now

I trust Meta’s moderation more than Twitter. Elon opened the floodgates

If I had to put odds on it, I’d say it’s more likely he goes to the election.

Remindme! 30 billion years

Just give me a little bit of time, I got this. You’re gonna see!

I’d be willing to bet that, as a % of active users, there’s more humans on Threads than Twitter

Kamala?

I can see the headlines about the first time it’s rolled out… all the headlines are short people being mad that they were flagged as kids

Cool. Wait until you realize some of those garbage headlines represent great articles though. Obviously not all of them, but it seems very weird to filter out such specific words

We had a shooting in the USA in the last 24 hours, how insensitive of you to raise the topic

So what you’re saying is, all I need to do to get one of my exes jailed is get to know another disgruntled ex of theirs? Awesome!

How is that neutrality? If you’re going to troll, do better dude

So what you’re saying is, all I need to do to get one of my exes jailed is get to know another disgruntled ex of theirs? Awesome!

This doesn’t insinuate it’s a lie? You’re being disingenuous now lol.

I’m going to copy and paste my reply from elsewhere:

Of course we shouldn’t lock someone up based on an accusation but courts are imperfect. Many people are convicted of crimes they did not commit and other crimes are difficult to convince people on. It’s also highly unlikely Gaiman will ever go to a criminal trial over this, like so many other people who commit sexual assault. That’s why you don’t wait for a conviction to support women.

Estimates of false accusations are usually under 1 in 20. This article claims 2-10%. why would you default to that position? Again, we are not a court of law. You do not need a conviction to make up your mind.

Regardless, the evidence presented so far is more than sufficient for a conviction. In the Gaiman cases, we have multiple witnesses and contemporaneous evidence for both women. It’s not just 2 random people making claims. Why would this be a vast conspiracy of 2 women who faked contemporaneous evidence and both have multiple witnesses and physical evidence? What evidence do you have that all of their evidence is fake?

Edit: let’s go one step farther. The 2 women have witnesses and contemporaneous evidence. Gaiman made a claim that one woman had a memory disorder, which has already been proven false. Not only are you siding with the party with no evidence, you are siding with the one whose only evidence has been debunked within hours. Again, why?

Of course we shouldn’t lock someone up based on an accusation but courts are imperfect. Many people are convicted of crimes they did not commit and other crimes are difficult to convince people on. It’s also highly unlikely Gaiman will ever go to a criminal trial over this, like so many other people who commit sexual assault. That’s why you don’t wait for a conviction to support women.

Estimates of false accusations are usually under 1 in 20. This article claimsUnder 10% are false. Why would you default to that? claims 2-10%… why would you default to that position? Again, we are not a court of law. You do not need a conviction to make up your mind.

Regardless, the evidence presented so far is more than sufficient for a conviction. In these cases, we have multiple witnesses and contemporaneous evidence for both women. It’s not just 2 random people making claims. Why would this be a vast conspiracy of 2 women who faked contemporaneous evidence and both have multiple witnesses and physical evidence? Why is that hard to believe?

How dare you insult the greatest American tradition?!

Yes, it’s a conspiracy! That’s a great first assumption. Classic misogyny

The list repeats until a name is “retired,” as this one probably will be

He did public rallies?

E day is not Inauguration Day

They’re always so vocal on the posts about Biden not being a perfect saint and weirdly absent on these

Except the whole “women coming after him” is steeped in misogyny and not reality. How many people get accused by multiple victims of the same thing, with evidence and witnesses? I’m not clear about the 2005 case, but the more recent one has physical evidence and witnesses. Gaiman’s evidence is an already disproven claim. One side has physical evidence while one is lying.