[MichaelZuo]

Which parts specifically?

[nawgz]

It is interesting to me to ponder why you carried on an alternate thread instead of the original one which you wished to challenge.

[MichaelZuo]

Almost anyone on HN can see through this type of low effort passive-aggressive commenting. So this makes it even less likely me, or anyone else, well provide a substantive response.

[nawgz]

The only low effort passive aggressive posting in this thread is from you - posting gotcha questions that aren’t gotchas and then tucking tail when sources come thru.

You already were clearly at 0% probability of a substantive reply. Nice attempt at deflection tho - I see you’re learning from the republicans whose boots you love to lick

[MichaelZuo]

> The only low effort passive aggressive posting in this thread is from you - posting gotcha questions that aren’t gotchas and then tucking tail when sources come thru. You already were clearly at 0% probability of a substantive reply. Nice attempt at deflection tho - I see you’re learning from the republicans whose boots you love to lick

This does not increase your credibility, especially when hiding behind a pseudonym account made in 2020 replying to someone using their real name since 2014 on HN.

So it seems like a losing proposition to continue digging a hole.

But it's no skin off my back.

[nawgz]

Let's see if I have this straight.

I post: corporate power is growing.

You post: prove it.

I prove it.

You stop responding about this idea.

Then, given an opening when I called you out on it, you have tried to imply:

* I am at fault for your lack of "substantive reply"

* I am at fault for using a pseudonym

* Because you use your "real name", you have street cred

I would like you to explain to me why you even bothered asking me to prove the regulatory environment was weakened in the states by Trump, that is obvious. It really makes no sense why you've come in and introduced such a bad faith chain of arguments on a topic you have made absolutely 0 points about.