[Timon3]

> I said "If they only deleted comments from comments on the left, I think the sub would still be representative, maybe less so, but still so."

Exactly, do you not see the logical contradiction? As we both agree, they currently delete comments from both "the left" and dissenting conservatives. The only change in your proposed scenario is that they stop deleting comments from dissenting conservatives. How can the sub be less representative in that scenario?

> Now, a third time, let me ask you again: Do you think any subs are representative of conservatives?

I have no idea! I haven't spent any time looking at other conservative subs than the two you mentioned. How should I know?

> Do you think all the numerous people defending the murder of Renee Good and defending ICE were bots?

No?

> What about X, or Gab, where it's easy to find mass opinions mirroring those subs?

No?

> Where is the conservative home on the internet where everyone is against what is happening?

I have no idea, why are you asking me like I should know?

-----

I get the very strong impression that you think I'm trying to make some bigger argument about the opinions present in the current conservative movement in the US. I am not. All I'm saying is: the community you're pointing at is objectively not representative of the opinions of its users because it's heavily moderated and propagandized.

By arguing that it still is representative, you're legitimizing this propaganda. Instead of accusing people who present counterarguments of being aligned with the conservative movement (I am very much not, and you can check my comment history to see that I've been arguing against them for years), maybe take a step back and consider the effect of what you're doing?

[JCattheATM]

> How can the sub be less representative in that scenario?

Because there would be more messages that deviate from the average viewpoint as reflected across other social media and media platforms. There is no contradiction.

> I haven't spent any time looking at other conservative subs than the two you mentioned. How should I know?

They by what metric can you say the conservative sub isn't representative? You're just assuming it because they delete some dissenting comments?

> > Do you think all the numerous people defending the murder of Renee Good and defending ICE were bots?

> No

So then you would agree the people doing so to some extent are representative of the conservative point of view?

> the community you're pointing at is objectively not representative of the opinions of its users because it's heavily moderated and propagandized.

I don't think that equates to not being representative though! If, despite that, general sentiment in the sub still matches conservative viewpoints outside of it, in general/on average, then surely it still is?

[Timon3]

> They by what metric can you say the conservative sub isn't representative? You're just assuming it because they delete some dissenting comments?

No, not because they delete "some dissenting comments", but because they delete large amounts of dissenting comments from their long-time users, as well as threads that don't perform as they want, which I know because I've watched it happen time and time again!

"Maybe the propagandists are just always censoring as to be accurately reflecting the opinions of the masses" is a logical contortion that I simply can't fathom. We have to call out these things when we see them, because - again - you're otherwise legitimizing their propaganda. But you don't seem to understand that, so I won't help you help them any further.

[JCattheATM]

> No, not because they delete "some dissenting comments", but because they delete large amounts of dissenting comments from their long-time users, as well as threads that don't perform as they want, which I know because I've watched it happen time and time again!

I think you're exaggerating the extent to which they delete comments from longtime users, it's easily less than 10%. Even if we generously adopt your view, however, that still doesn't prove your point or even come close to doing so. You're missing a point in your argument and don't seem to realize you're making an unwarranted leap. That you don't seem to understand that is a problem, and I agree there is no point in trying to discuss this further with you.