[KittenInABox]

What is the good faith way to link to "(It doesn't help that all males currently under the age of 40 were raised to be supercucks.)"? The link exists in the post but you object to that link as a bad faith way to link. So what is a good faith way to link to this tweet?

[CupricTea]

One that links to the primary source and fully in-context as an absolute starting point.

Even your pseudoquote here gives me nothing to work with.

"It" doesn't help? Seriously? What am I supposed to make with this vague out of context snippet?

[KittenInABox]

The subredditdrama post in question does in fact contain a link to the full tweet, which you objected to as bad faith. So I'm asking what is a good faith way to link to this tweet.

[CupricTea]

It could have been linked here directly instead of presented through the lens of a toxic smear community.

Presenting it through a community called "SubredditDrama" is poisoning the well[1]. I am not going to entertain that smear tactic.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poisoning_the_well

[swiftcoder]

I don't think "Drama" implies which side of said drama is in the right. That drama surrounds a bunch of Blow's public statements is maybe the one thing everyone can agree on

[CupricTea]

That community has no oversight for what gets posted. It's a free-for-all for anyone to gather (read: cherrypick) low quality information and present it in an overtly sensationalist way and intentionally misrepresent what they quote.

They have no standards, no oversight, no formal methodology, so naturally it attracts gossip-oriented people who want to stir up drama for fun.

[KittenInABox]

Why link you to the handful of individual links directly when you clearly can identify and sort through the source yourself? The poisoning the well clearly wouldn't work on you. Well, here the links are:

"This is true, the gaming press is super left-wing, but on the other hand they have almost no impact now. I would say that the social pressure keeping "indies" in line mostly comes from them being socially fearful in the normal way. (It doesn't help that all males currently under the age of 40 were raised to be supercucks.)" https://x.com/Jonathan_Blow/status/1854708962462982465

(Feb 2025 for context)"Are you kidding? He is the best President we have had in my entire life, by far. It's a miracle. I just hope it doesn't abruptly go bad." https://x.com/Jonathan_Blow/status/1887599339037663629

"Interest is not the same as ability. I believe it is likely that the sexes have different interests on average, and that biological factors play a large part in this. This is *NOT REMOTELY* a controversial opinion except on Weird Far Left Twitter 2017." https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DRT4vNEUIAEJgP3.jpg

"There's a weird disconnect in this vaccine mandate debate: many are still pretending that Covid-19 is of natural origin, which gives such mandates a different feel than they otherwise have." https://x.com/Jonathan_Blow/status/1447601578123296769

[CupricTea]

Alright, I don't agree with half of what he said here, but really? Is that supposed to make him look like some irredeemably bad person?

Are we seriously going to pretend that men and women—on average—do not differ in their general interests, and furthermore get mad at people for pointing that out?

And I'm not fond of the current administration, but it's a bit extreme to write someone off as a person for liking who is president. You would be writing off literally half of the entire country, and no, that's not something to feel virtuous about, that's just nonsense.

Frankly I think I would rather have a conversation with someone like him instead of someone who would get disproportionately upset at those points.