World News
A community for discussing events around the World
Rules:
-
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
-
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
-
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
-
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
-
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
-
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
-
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
-
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
Lemmy World Partners
News !news@lemmy.world
Politics !politics@lemmy.world
World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world
Recommendations
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
- Consider including the article’s mediabiasfactcheck.com/ link
view the rest of the comments
... Literally how legal precedent works mate
No it's not. You need to have a trial to have legal precedent. You can't base a legal precedent on "Those other times were the same I reckon."
Lazy, wrong bullshit like this gets 7 upvotes, how? Brigading.
Yup you're right of course. It was a throwaway reply to someone clearly arguing in bad faith. While it isn't legal precedent, it is a fairly compelling defense.
It is not in any way compelling unless you're just looking for excuses. Take your bad faith genocide apologia to someone gullible enough for it.
EDIT: Also just take a moment to notice how fucking wild it is that "Yeah, I was totally wrong but the other guy was also wrong I reckon so it's fine also I think what I said was good actually," was their defense. That sure was a bunch of words they said.
Again, the fact anybody liked this comment is a definite sign of brigading.
It's one of most basic things about Law that merelly "somebody else did the same and got away with it" isn't at all a valid defense.
The act itself is lawful or unlawful, quite independently of other people having done the same and gotten away with it.
Good luck with the "those other guys did it too and didn't get a ticket" argumentation in a Court of Law when you try to contest a speeding ticket...
"It was done before and never taken to court" does not create a legal precedent and even if taken to court, it requires a high enough court and it's specifically about interpreting certain points of Law, so merelly "A similar situation yielded Not Guilty" means nothing.