This is the address https://write.as/dyq6yf91tvp3h880
I'll post it in some other subs and sites, you have recommendations?
Here are some quotes I liked:
Q: So we established the fact that the better a search engine gets, the fewer the incentives users will have to click its ads.
A: It makes sense at the moment, but users do click ads there. Plenty of times actually, even I do.
Q: Because that is a fake SE. You get great results when no ads appear, like when you search for very specific things, or things that are unlikely to produce a revenue from the searcher, but once you see an ad or four, along with the results, you can be certain you're getting shitty results. Real shitty results.
A: I see.
Q: Beyond that, they also apply what can be called "One hand washes the other". Part of the "shitty-on-purpose search results" algorithm is to include results that send you to the same url the ads will. They really have no other choice if they want to maximize revenue. This gives more incentives to the advertisers and consequently they pay more, which results in even worse results.
A: So the good results where no ads appear are really just a hidden advertisement, to lure users to believe they're always getting good results? What can one do?
Do you think leftists needs lots of talent or experience in order to call us and blame us the way they do? Do you think the first ones in their hierarchies (Lots of followers, attention, influence) are very different from those in the end, or those who just started their journey?
Q: What does a leftist newbie needs to do in order to climb the ladder?
A: Step over, in one way or another, other lefties
Q: But just for intellectual curiosity, could, for instance, a white man accuse a black one for being a racist?
A: Well of course kohai, many blacks actually are. Think how they use other blacks, mislead and brainwash them for their own political and monetary purposes. A person could easily hate himself so could, even more easily, hate any group you can imagine, which includes of course ones he belongs to.
Q: And how would you respond if a woman will ever accuse you in such matter, or if you were to become righty?
A: First I would just accuse back, telling her she is a women hater. No reason needed, the saying is what's important. Then, if she is relatively high-hierarchy, would tell that she behaves like a man, that she's vulgar and extrovert like a man – because what real woman accuses a man of hating women? - and actually adore men and try to hide it by accusing men for hating women, but that everyone can see that about her, she's not fooling anyone.
Then I would question her followers (indirectly, by the public/social media correspondence with her) as being suspected of women hate as well. And if she's in some sort of organization, I'll question the donors and sponsors of hating women and ask "Does the donors know about you and your hatred for women? Do they hate women too? Does anybody know who they are, it needs to be published that they hate women and give money to people who hate them too". Hopefully righties who will follow that correspondence will understand and join me in the accusations, but the damage to her will be done either way.
Those would be great news for righties, if they could see it. Humans can't care deeply about more than 100 other humans, and also can't engage directly with many at the same time. Long story short, you can blame anyone, constantly, for being a racist for million reasons, and all you have to do is pick one.
A: So all one has to do is pick one against a black person, then pick ONE news anchor from CNN or the likes and accuse him/her, time and again, of being a racist for not covering that crime. Or a women hater for not saying a thing about a certain crime against a woman that happened that day. Then accuse the network for the very same things. Then the viewers of that network for watching such racist/misogynistic network. It should be very clear to you by now, don't pretend otherwise.
there doesn't seem to be anything here