“I should go through the eviction process first” is an answer to what do if there’s no evictions?
Google doesn’t have feedback about alternate realities yet unfortunately.
Are you trying to post in bad faith? How many times does Sabo need to say he’s talking about the status quo? In any place that has an eviction moratorium do you think a landlord can just change the locks?
I’m the one posting in bad faith. Ok bud.
What the quatus sto and your bad faith interpretation of it is is what the last 500 posts in this thread have been going around in circles discussing.
It’s not a “stumpier”. You even answered the Q yourself above ITT. SMH.
- @Alex is ‘arguing’ in bad faith
- Bastard !!!1!
0 voters
Hard to tell if this one is bad faith or being obtuse.
It’s pretty damn clear Sabo is talking about the moratorium being permanent. Arguing about whether that does or doesn’t count as status quo is incredibly lame and at this point either remarkably obtuse or in bad faith.
And like a miniature train ride in a park, we’re back around to the liberal’s bizarre triggering by the term ‘status-quo’.
Look we all know why Sabo is trying to pull this jedi mind trick for over 500 posts now. He wants to be
able to say “See there are no evictions and everything is fine!”
When the reality is that if there were truly a (non-temporary) ban on evictions, there would be tons of consequences that we’d be seeing ranging from political fallout to escalation of violence between renters and owners to a collapse of the housing market.
The reason that you can’t see that is because despite your status here, you’re a blind partisan just like everyone else.
Then why does he refuse to just say that he wants to ban evictions instead of peddling this quatus sto nonsense??
Uses the term status-quo in every post
“Why are you all so triggered? Can we just drop status-quo already??”
We need you on that wall, is it?
Lol. This is trolling. For one, have you even read my posts itt? I have questioned the impact on housing development.
Look through my posts early itt and then apologize.
In fact, read all of my posts itt, then apologize twice.
The partisan part is you thinking he’s arguing in good faith and I’m arguing in bad faith.
With characteristic generosity, I have revealed to you that I am currently living in a place with no evictions. It’s not yet clear if the moratorium extends to commercial leases; the wording of the bill suggests so, but there’s broad consensus that that wasn’t intended.
Any questions?
Sure, some people know (hint: nutrients), but you guessed wrong. The fact that it does indeed work like a Jedi Mind trick on the liberals is LOL-tastical.
Yep. The liberals can drop it, or I will keep on keeping on triggering the liberals. I’m cool either way.
I’m not sure this post is in good faith. What a weird thing to call me partisan by acknowledging that you aren’t saying I agree with Sabo on all the substance of the debate, yet I’m deciding who I think argues in good faith based on??? Whether or not I agree with them???
I don’t think you went through all that thought process; more like just posting something that sounds like an argument without giving it much thought at all.
Another good faith post by a “smart guy with something interesting” to say!
How is that weird? Being partisan doesn’t mean you agree with everything he says. It just shows where your sympathies and bias lie.
Have I presented myself as someone without sympathies and bias?
But, I do try to be fair and honest.
Show me where you think Sabo is posting in bad faith. He’s doing a lot of things and being quite difficult, but I don’t think he’s doing any of it in bad faith. He’s quite openly stating that his objective here includes baiting and making fun of people. I’d call that trolling - bad faith or not.
But…what are you doing itt? The same? Just baiting and ridiculing?