Upload
Login or register

captainfuckitall

Last status update:
-
Date Signed Up:4/12/2010
Stats
Comment Ranking:#1548
Highest Content Rank:#8779
Highest Comment Rank:#49
Content Thumbs: 42 total,  99 ,  57
Comment Thumbs: 80356 total,  98544 ,  18188
Content Level Progress: 77.96% (46/59)
Level 0 Content: Untouched account → Level 1 Content: New Here
Comment Level Progress: 30.7% (307/1000)
Level 369 Comments: FJ Noble → Level 370 Comments: Immortal
Subscribers:22
Content Views:10934
Total Comments Made:21158
FJ Points:41121

latest user's comments

#363 - It took you 12 hours to come up with that zinger?  [+] (10 replies) 11/08/2016 on fucking comey 0
#364 - jahmannington (11/09/2016) [-]
unlike you, I have a life outside of FJ.
User avatar
#365 - captainfuckitall (11/09/2016) [-]
Ultimately not, if you take the time to come back to a comment just to call me an idiot.

Besides, you thumbed me down when I made the thing. You're saying you could spare a second to show your disdain but not three seconds to leave such a simple comment?

Surely you do not have SUCH a busy life, and if you do, then my comment left such a drag on you that you took time OUT of your busy day just to call me an idiot. Flattering, really.
#366 - jahmannington (11/09/2016) [-]
You really are an idiot.
That's why it's fun to fuck with you.
User avatar
#367 - captainfuckitall (11/09/2016) [-]
Rather than doing all those other important things that take up your life? My oh my, you must really like me.

I think it's more likely I struck a nerve with you, though.
#368 - jahmannington (11/09/2016) [-]
not really. sitting here beating off with one hand while shit talking with the other is just how i wanted to spend my pre-election night so I don't just explode when Trump starts complaining about his loss.
User avatar
#369 - captainfuckitall (11/09/2016) [-]
Sure you are. I know I'm not going to be able to get you to ADMIT that you got riled up over a comment on an image-posting site, but I also don't need to.

You can have the last comment, I'm sure you'll take advantage of it. Have fun with whatever's left of your day.
#370 - jahmannington (11/09/2016) [-]
I will have a great night. You enjoy wallowing in self pity when the Trump train breaks down
User avatar
#371 - captainfuckitall (11/09/2016) [-]
Looks like it cleared right on through, huh?

www.politico.com/2016-election/results/map/president

Believe me, my 'pity' is palpable. Ah. Ha.
#372 - jahmannington (11/09/2016) [-]
Congratulations

I can't wait to see what you've done to bring the US to a holdup of bullshit for the next 4 years.

Also you suck
User avatar
#373 - captainfuckitall (11/09/2016) [-]
You know what actually is palpable? Your asspain. Have fun.
#26 - You didn't even reply to my comment on how you were either ret…  [+] (1 reply) 11/08/2016 on Haha little crooked Hillary 0
User avatar
#27 - platinumaltaria (11/08/2016) [-]
I don't even know what you're referring to.

This comment netted be a fresh, crisp $25 bill. Gotta pay that rent.
#21 - People can like a candidate without voting for them, and they …  [+] (1 reply) 11/08/2016 on Haha little crooked Hillary +1
User avatar
#23 - Ruspanic (11/08/2016) [-]
Thanks for the link, but I'm not seeing the actual source... it's just Kingpin summarizing something that was supposedly leaked, with no link to the primary source and no explanation of how he got that info himself. (My guess is he got it from another 4chan post and not a primary source.) So...

1. There's nothing implausible about mocking people with whom you happen to share ideals - people here mock Ted Cruz and Jeb Bush all the time - but more to the point, nothing in anon's post even indicates that he shares ideals with Clinton. In fact he doesn't say anything positive about Clinton at all, only that FJ's obsession with Trump was a hopeless endeavor. Which is an opinion, I guess.
2. Right.
3. Regardless, there is no way that they outnumber the legitimate commenting users of this site, which number - I'm guessing - in the thousands or tens of thousands. For any given anti-Trump or even pro-Clinton comment, it is a pretty safe bet to assume they're not paid shills, even if you think they're being willfully dishonest.
4. Ranting, trolling, shit-flinging etc are all perfectly normal behaviors on the Internet. Not everyone comes here to have a debate. "Trump is a just a meme" may be shitflinging, trolling, or a way to express the view that he was never a serious option, but you would not be logically justified in concluding that this comment is probably a paid shill. Insulting my intelligence doesn't make you right.

Again, while you may know that CTR is paying some people to shill on Hillary Clinton's behalf, you also know that many more routinely comment for free, even if those comments are not constructive. So your reasoning just does not make sense.

Calling people shills, especially on such broad and tenuous grounds, almost always does more harm than good. Talking with or simply ignoring somebody you suspect is a shill does no harm, but calling people shills for mocking or disagreeing with popular opinions can create an environment that is extremely hostile to dissent, where comments that stray from the commonly-accepted beliefs are met with thoughtless dismissals like "$0.02 has been deposited into your account" or its precursor, "JIDF pls go". And then you have an intellectually stunted echo chamber.
#19 - No, I'm saying that ranting about the Trump campaign while say…  [+] (4 replies) 11/08/2016 on Haha little crooked Hillary 0
#25 - anon (11/08/2016) [-]
Don't bother with Ruspanic, dude. He's a violently retarded libcuck. His opinion can be freely disregarded.
User avatar
#20 - Ruspanic (11/08/2016) [-]
'"It's just a meme guise" isn't what someone who supports Trump says," you said, as if that's somehow an argument that anon is CTR.

Even if you hadn't made that comment, your conclusion is illogical regardless.
1. anon straight-up said Hillary Clinton had gotten away with breaking the law
2. saying that Hillary will beat Trump is not an inherently pro-Hillary statement
3. Even if CTR is actively shilling on Funnyjunk, the odds of a given pro-Clinton or anti-Trump post being CTR are low, because the number of actual users far outnumber however many people CTR employs
4. Whatever metric you use to determine whether a post says something "of substance", there's nothing unusual about people on Funnyjunk making comments that are relatively insubstantial or rant-like. You will find no shortage of substance-less comments on this site insulting liberals, Clinton supporters etc or simply posting pro-Trump memes. That doesn't mean anyone is justified in assuming those people are paid for their posts.

Also, I haven't seen any such list. Would you mind linking to it?
User avatar
#21 - captainfuckitall (11/08/2016) [-]
People can like a candidate without voting for them, and they can also support/advertise for a candidate for ironic reasons, but nobody with any bit of sense ACTUALLY likes and supports a candidate for genuine reasons whilst belittling anyone who believes they will win. You must be scraping hard at the bottom of the barrel if you believe that is more likely than them being a shill.

1. Yes he did, people mock their own organizations all the time to appeal to their opponents to seem more credible. Or is making fun of people who share the same ideals with you a normal thing you do?
2. Correct.
3. Plausible, but we have no idea. All we do know is that they get paid for quantity of posts and that their point is to derail arguments and support. They're literally 'expert shitposters', and so the calling card is something antagonizing whilst not taking much (if any) effort at all to write.
4. "Of substance" means anything that can actually be debated or discussed. You can argue with "Communism is an ideal economic principle in small scale environments and businesses as well as medium ones, but shows very poor success with large scale environments such as countries", that's something you can argue about. "Communism is just a meme" is just shit flinging. Once more, you are either too dense to make that conclusion for yourself or you INTENTIONALLY don't want to make that conclusion because it doesn't support your own views. Either way, you're looking shoddy.

You're absolutely right, someone flinging shit is no reason to think they'd paid to do so, except for the fact that we have proof that CTR, which is extremely pro-Hillary, their entire POINT being to go around and 'correct the record' of information about her, pays people to do just that. No such thing has surfaced from the Trump campaign, unless you have evidence otherwise.

Certainly: /Ctr+and+you+a+love+story/funny-pictures/6062317/

In the description about halfway down.
User avatar
#23 - Ruspanic (11/08/2016) [-]
Thanks for the link, but I'm not seeing the actual source... it's just Kingpin summarizing something that was supposedly leaked, with no link to the primary source and no explanation of how he got that info himself. (My guess is he got it from another 4chan post and not a primary source.) So...

1. There's nothing implausible about mocking people with whom you happen to share ideals - people here mock Ted Cruz and Jeb Bush all the time - but more to the point, nothing in anon's post even indicates that he shares ideals with Clinton. In fact he doesn't say anything positive about Clinton at all, only that FJ's obsession with Trump was a hopeless endeavor. Which is an opinion, I guess.
2. Right.
3. Regardless, there is no way that they outnumber the legitimate commenting users of this site, which number - I'm guessing - in the thousands or tens of thousands. For any given anti-Trump or even pro-Clinton comment, it is a pretty safe bet to assume they're not paid shills, even if you think they're being willfully dishonest.
4. Ranting, trolling, shit-flinging etc are all perfectly normal behaviors on the Internet. Not everyone comes here to have a debate. "Trump is a just a meme" may be shitflinging, trolling, or a way to express the view that he was never a serious option, but you would not be logically justified in concluding that this comment is probably a paid shill. Insulting my intelligence doesn't make you right.

Again, while you may know that CTR is paying some people to shill on Hillary Clinton's behalf, you also know that many more routinely comment for free, even if those comments are not constructive. So your reasoning just does not make sense.

Calling people shills, especially on such broad and tenuous grounds, almost always does more harm than good. Talking with or simply ignoring somebody you suspect is a shill does no harm, but calling people shills for mocking or disagreeing with popular opinions can create an environment that is extremely hostile to dissent, where comments that stray from the commonly-accepted beliefs are met with thoughtless dismissals like "$0.02 has been deposited into your account" or its precursor, "JIDF pls go". And then you have an intellectually stunted echo chamber.
#16 - "It's just a meme guise" isn't what someone who supp…  [+] (7 replies) 11/08/2016 on Haha little crooked Hillary +1
User avatar
#18 - Ruspanic (11/08/2016) [-]
are you saying that not supporting Trump makes you CTR?
User avatar
#19 - captainfuckitall (11/08/2016) [-]
No, I'm saying that ranting about the Trump campaign while saying nothing of substance is indicative of CTR behaviour on a website that's on a LIST of major sites CTR should visit.

How is that not clear to you?
#25 - anon (11/08/2016) [-]
Don't bother with Ruspanic, dude. He's a violently retarded libcuck. His opinion can be freely disregarded.
User avatar
#20 - Ruspanic (11/08/2016) [-]
'"It's just a meme guise" isn't what someone who supports Trump says," you said, as if that's somehow an argument that anon is CTR.

Even if you hadn't made that comment, your conclusion is illogical regardless.
1. anon straight-up said Hillary Clinton had gotten away with breaking the law
2. saying that Hillary will beat Trump is not an inherently pro-Hillary statement
3. Even if CTR is actively shilling on Funnyjunk, the odds of a given pro-Clinton or anti-Trump post being CTR are low, because the number of actual users far outnumber however many people CTR employs
4. Whatever metric you use to determine whether a post says something "of substance", there's nothing unusual about people on Funnyjunk making comments that are relatively insubstantial or rant-like. You will find no shortage of substance-less comments on this site insulting liberals, Clinton supporters etc or simply posting pro-Trump memes. That doesn't mean anyone is justified in assuming those people are paid for their posts.

Also, I haven't seen any such list. Would you mind linking to it?
User avatar
#21 - captainfuckitall (11/08/2016) [-]
People can like a candidate without voting for them, and they can also support/advertise for a candidate for ironic reasons, but nobody with any bit of sense ACTUALLY likes and supports a candidate for genuine reasons whilst belittling anyone who believes they will win. You must be scraping hard at the bottom of the barrel if you believe that is more likely than them being a shill.

1. Yes he did, people mock their own organizations all the time to appeal to their opponents to seem more credible. Or is making fun of people who share the same ideals with you a normal thing you do?
2. Correct.
3. Plausible, but we have no idea. All we do know is that they get paid for quantity of posts and that their point is to derail arguments and support. They're literally 'expert shitposters', and so the calling card is something antagonizing whilst not taking much (if any) effort at all to write.
4. "Of substance" means anything that can actually be debated or discussed. You can argue with "Communism is an ideal economic principle in small scale environments and businesses as well as medium ones, but shows very poor success with large scale environments such as countries", that's something you can argue about. "Communism is just a meme" is just shit flinging. Once more, you are either too dense to make that conclusion for yourself or you INTENTIONALLY don't want to make that conclusion because it doesn't support your own views. Either way, you're looking shoddy.

You're absolutely right, someone flinging shit is no reason to think they'd paid to do so, except for the fact that we have proof that CTR, which is extremely pro-Hillary, their entire POINT being to go around and 'correct the record' of information about her, pays people to do just that. No such thing has surfaced from the Trump campaign, unless you have evidence otherwise.

Certainly: /Ctr+and+you+a+love+story/funny-pictures/6062317/

In the description about halfway down.
User avatar
#23 - Ruspanic (11/08/2016) [-]
Thanks for the link, but I'm not seeing the actual source... it's just Kingpin summarizing something that was supposedly leaked, with no link to the primary source and no explanation of how he got that info himself. (My guess is he got it from another 4chan post and not a primary source.) So...

1. There's nothing implausible about mocking people with whom you happen to share ideals - people here mock Ted Cruz and Jeb Bush all the time - but more to the point, nothing in anon's post even indicates that he shares ideals with Clinton. In fact he doesn't say anything positive about Clinton at all, only that FJ's obsession with Trump was a hopeless endeavor. Which is an opinion, I guess.
2. Right.
3. Regardless, there is no way that they outnumber the legitimate commenting users of this site, which number - I'm guessing - in the thousands or tens of thousands. For any given anti-Trump or even pro-Clinton comment, it is a pretty safe bet to assume they're not paid shills, even if you think they're being willfully dishonest.
4. Ranting, trolling, shit-flinging etc are all perfectly normal behaviors on the Internet. Not everyone comes here to have a debate. "Trump is a just a meme" may be shitflinging, trolling, or a way to express the view that he was never a serious option, but you would not be logically justified in concluding that this comment is probably a paid shill. Insulting my intelligence doesn't make you right.

Again, while you may know that CTR is paying some people to shill on Hillary Clinton's behalf, you also know that many more routinely comment for free, even if those comments are not constructive. So your reasoning just does not make sense.

Calling people shills, especially on such broad and tenuous grounds, almost always does more harm than good. Talking with or simply ignoring somebody you suspect is a shill does no harm, but calling people shills for mocking or disagreeing with popular opinions can create an environment that is extremely hostile to dissent, where comments that stray from the commonly-accepted beliefs are met with thoughtless dismissals like "$0.02 has been deposited into your account" or its precursor, "JIDF pls go". And then you have an intellectually stunted echo chamber.
User avatar
#17 - fireeaters (11/08/2016) [-]
I think he's probably just lost hope, what with all the rampant corruption and what not.
#13 - I did, it doesn't change what I said. Anybody who's b…  [+] (9 replies) 11/08/2016 on Haha little crooked Hillary 0
User avatar
#14 - fireeaters (11/08/2016) [-]
My point is that you implied that anon there was CTR. He wasn't because he acknowledges the illegal stuff killary did is true; therefore, he supports trump.
User avatar
#16 - captainfuckitall (11/08/2016) [-]
"It's just a meme guise" isn't what someone who supports Trump says.
User avatar
#18 - Ruspanic (11/08/2016) [-]
are you saying that not supporting Trump makes you CTR?
User avatar
#19 - captainfuckitall (11/08/2016) [-]
No, I'm saying that ranting about the Trump campaign while saying nothing of substance is indicative of CTR behaviour on a website that's on a LIST of major sites CTR should visit.

How is that not clear to you?
#25 - anon (11/08/2016) [-]
Don't bother with Ruspanic, dude. He's a violently retarded libcuck. His opinion can be freely disregarded.
User avatar
#20 - Ruspanic (11/08/2016) [-]
'"It's just a meme guise" isn't what someone who supports Trump says," you said, as if that's somehow an argument that anon is CTR.

Even if you hadn't made that comment, your conclusion is illogical regardless.
1. anon straight-up said Hillary Clinton had gotten away with breaking the law
2. saying that Hillary will beat Trump is not an inherently pro-Hillary statement
3. Even if CTR is actively shilling on Funnyjunk, the odds of a given pro-Clinton or anti-Trump post being CTR are low, because the number of actual users far outnumber however many people CTR employs
4. Whatever metric you use to determine whether a post says something "of substance", there's nothing unusual about people on Funnyjunk making comments that are relatively insubstantial or rant-like. You will find no shortage of substance-less comments on this site insulting liberals, Clinton supporters etc or simply posting pro-Trump memes. That doesn't mean anyone is justified in assuming those people are paid for their posts.

Also, I haven't seen any such list. Would you mind linking to it?
User avatar
#21 - captainfuckitall (11/08/2016) [-]
People can like a candidate without voting for them, and they can also support/advertise for a candidate for ironic reasons, but nobody with any bit of sense ACTUALLY likes and supports a candidate for genuine reasons whilst belittling anyone who believes they will win. You must be scraping hard at the bottom of the barrel if you believe that is more likely than them being a shill.

1. Yes he did, people mock their own organizations all the time to appeal to their opponents to seem more credible. Or is making fun of people who share the same ideals with you a normal thing you do?
2. Correct.
3. Plausible, but we have no idea. All we do know is that they get paid for quantity of posts and that their point is to derail arguments and support. They're literally 'expert shitposters', and so the calling card is something antagonizing whilst not taking much (if any) effort at all to write.
4. "Of substance" means anything that can actually be debated or discussed. You can argue with "Communism is an ideal economic principle in small scale environments and businesses as well as medium ones, but shows very poor success with large scale environments such as countries", that's something you can argue about. "Communism is just a meme" is just shit flinging. Once more, you are either too dense to make that conclusion for yourself or you INTENTIONALLY don't want to make that conclusion because it doesn't support your own views. Either way, you're looking shoddy.

You're absolutely right, someone flinging shit is no reason to think they'd paid to do so, except for the fact that we have proof that CTR, which is extremely pro-Hillary, their entire POINT being to go around and 'correct the record' of information about her, pays people to do just that. No such thing has surfaced from the Trump campaign, unless you have evidence otherwise.

Certainly: /Ctr+and+you+a+love+story/funny-pictures/6062317/

In the description about halfway down.
User avatar
#23 - Ruspanic (11/08/2016) [-]
Thanks for the link, but I'm not seeing the actual source... it's just Kingpin summarizing something that was supposedly leaked, with no link to the primary source and no explanation of how he got that info himself. (My guess is he got it from another 4chan post and not a primary source.) So...

1. There's nothing implausible about mocking people with whom you happen to share ideals - people here mock Ted Cruz and Jeb Bush all the time - but more to the point, nothing in anon's post even indicates that he shares ideals with Clinton. In fact he doesn't say anything positive about Clinton at all, only that FJ's obsession with Trump was a hopeless endeavor. Which is an opinion, I guess.
2. Right.
3. Regardless, there is no way that they outnumber the legitimate commenting users of this site, which number - I'm guessing - in the thousands or tens of thousands. For any given anti-Trump or even pro-Clinton comment, it is a pretty safe bet to assume they're not paid shills, even if you think they're being willfully dishonest.
4. Ranting, trolling, shit-flinging etc are all perfectly normal behaviors on the Internet. Not everyone comes here to have a debate. "Trump is a just a meme" may be shitflinging, trolling, or a way to express the view that he was never a serious option, but you would not be logically justified in concluding that this comment is probably a paid shill. Insulting my intelligence doesn't make you right.

Again, while you may know that CTR is paying some people to shill on Hillary Clinton's behalf, you also know that many more routinely comment for free, even if those comments are not constructive. So your reasoning just does not make sense.

Calling people shills, especially on such broad and tenuous grounds, almost always does more harm than good. Talking with or simply ignoring somebody you suspect is a shill does no harm, but calling people shills for mocking or disagreeing with popular opinions can create an environment that is extremely hostile to dissent, where comments that stray from the commonly-accepted beliefs are met with thoughtless dismissals like "$0.02 has been deposited into your account" or its precursor, "JIDF pls go". And then you have an intellectually stunted echo chamber.
User avatar
#17 - fireeaters (11/08/2016) [-]
I think he's probably just lost hope, what with all the rampant corruption and what not.
#10 - Indeed. There was a list of 'top sites' from CTR where they wa…  [+] (1 reply) 11/08/2016 on Haha little crooked Hillary +3
User avatar
#15 - incoming (11/08/2016) [-]
Neat! We made Santa's, I mean, Satan's list!
#6 - >Funnyjunk happens to be on a Wikileaks list of targeted si…  [+] (3 replies) 11/08/2016 on Haha little crooked Hillary +1
User avatar
#9 - incoming (11/08/2016) [-]
Wait there was a wikileaks list?
User avatar
#10 - captainfuckitall (11/08/2016) [-]
Indeed. There was a list of 'top sites' from CTR where they wanted their attention diverted most to, to support Hillary.

If I remember correctly, out of a top ten, first was /pol/, second was /x/, third was reddit (r/thedonald), fourth was Funnyjunk.
User avatar
#15 - incoming (11/08/2016) [-]
Neat! We made Santa's, I mean, Satan's list!
#2 - CTR out in force today.  [+] (19 replies) 11/08/2016 on Haha little crooked Hillary +19
User avatar
#22 - platinumaltaria (11/08/2016) [-]
"Anyone who remotely disagrees with me is a shill"

I disagree. I got paid $900 for this comment alone.
User avatar
#26 - captainfuckitall (11/08/2016) [-]
You didn't even reply to my comment on how you were either retarded or intentionally trying to antagonize people on issues of American Gun Control.

Seeing that, it seems obvious it was the latter.

You have fun baiting people.
User avatar
#27 - platinumaltaria (11/08/2016) [-]
I don't even know what you're referring to.

This comment netted be a fresh, crisp $25 bill. Gotta pay that rent.
User avatar
#12 - fireeaters (11/08/2016) [-]
Read the whole comment.
User avatar
#13 - captainfuckitall (11/08/2016) [-]
I did, it doesn't change what I said.

Anybody who's been here for any significant length of time is no stranger to wikileaks and ALL the issues of corruption Hillary has been caught in. For anyone to legitimately believe that she was found innocent because nothing illegal was done is someone who chooses to remain blind.
User avatar
#14 - fireeaters (11/08/2016) [-]
My point is that you implied that anon there was CTR. He wasn't because he acknowledges the illegal stuff killary did is true; therefore, he supports trump.
User avatar
#16 - captainfuckitall (11/08/2016) [-]
"It's just a meme guise" isn't what someone who supports Trump says.
User avatar
#18 - Ruspanic (11/08/2016) [-]
are you saying that not supporting Trump makes you CTR?
User avatar
#19 - captainfuckitall (11/08/2016) [-]
No, I'm saying that ranting about the Trump campaign while saying nothing of substance is indicative of CTR behaviour on a website that's on a LIST of major sites CTR should visit.

How is that not clear to you?
#25 - anon (11/08/2016) [-]
Don't bother with Ruspanic, dude. He's a violently retarded libcuck. His opinion can be freely disregarded.
User avatar
#20 - Ruspanic (11/08/2016) [-]
'"It's just a meme guise" isn't what someone who supports Trump says," you said, as if that's somehow an argument that anon is CTR.

Even if you hadn't made that comment, your conclusion is illogical regardless.
1. anon straight-up said Hillary Clinton had gotten away with breaking the law
2. saying that Hillary will beat Trump is not an inherently pro-Hillary statement
3. Even if CTR is actively shilling on Funnyjunk, the odds of a given pro-Clinton or anti-Trump post being CTR are low, because the number of actual users far outnumber however many people CTR employs
4. Whatever metric you use to determine whether a post says something "of substance", there's nothing unusual about people on Funnyjunk making comments that are relatively insubstantial or rant-like. You will find no shortage of substance-less comments on this site insulting liberals, Clinton supporters etc or simply posting pro-Trump memes. That doesn't mean anyone is justified in assuming those people are paid for their posts.

Also, I haven't seen any such list. Would you mind linking to it?
User avatar
#21 - captainfuckitall (11/08/2016) [-]
People can like a candidate without voting for them, and they can also support/advertise for a candidate for ironic reasons, but nobody with any bit of sense ACTUALLY likes and supports a candidate for genuine reasons whilst belittling anyone who believes they will win. You must be scraping hard at the bottom of the barrel if you believe that is more likely than them being a shill.

1. Yes he did, people mock their own organizations all the time to appeal to their opponents to seem more credible. Or is making fun of people who share the same ideals with you a normal thing you do?
2. Correct.
3. Plausible, but we have no idea. All we do know is that they get paid for quantity of posts and that their point is to derail arguments and support. They're literally 'expert shitposters', and so the calling card is something antagonizing whilst not taking much (if any) effort at all to write.
4. "Of substance" means anything that can actually be debated or discussed. You can argue with "Communism is an ideal economic principle in small scale environments and businesses as well as medium ones, but shows very poor success with large scale environments such as countries", that's something you can argue about. "Communism is just a meme" is just shit flinging. Once more, you are either too dense to make that conclusion for yourself or you INTENTIONALLY don't want to make that conclusion because it doesn't support your own views. Either way, you're looking shoddy.

You're absolutely right, someone flinging shit is no reason to think they'd paid to do so, except for the fact that we have proof that CTR, which is extremely pro-Hillary, their entire POINT being to go around and 'correct the record' of information about her, pays people to do just that. No such thing has surfaced from the Trump campaign, unless you have evidence otherwise.

Certainly: /Ctr+and+you+a+love+story/funny-pictures/6062317/

In the description about halfway down.
User avatar
#23 - Ruspanic (11/08/2016) [-]
Thanks for the link, but I'm not seeing the actual source... it's just Kingpin summarizing something that was supposedly leaked, with no link to the primary source and no explanation of how he got that info himself. (My guess is he got it from another 4chan post and not a primary source.) So...

1. There's nothing implausible about mocking people with whom you happen to share ideals - people here mock Ted Cruz and Jeb Bush all the time - but more to the point, nothing in anon's post even indicates that he shares ideals with Clinton. In fact he doesn't say anything positive about Clinton at all, only that FJ's obsession with Trump was a hopeless endeavor. Which is an opinion, I guess.
2. Right.
3. Regardless, there is no way that they outnumber the legitimate commenting users of this site, which number - I'm guessing - in the thousands or tens of thousands. For any given anti-Trump or even pro-Clinton comment, it is a pretty safe bet to assume they're not paid shills, even if you think they're being willfully dishonest.
4. Ranting, trolling, shit-flinging etc are all perfectly normal behaviors on the Internet. Not everyone comes here to have a debate. "Trump is a just a meme" may be shitflinging, trolling, or a way to express the view that he was never a serious option, but you would not be logically justified in concluding that this comment is probably a paid shill. Insulting my intelligence doesn't make you right.

Again, while you may know that CTR is paying some people to shill on Hillary Clinton's behalf, you also know that many more routinely comment for free, even if those comments are not constructive. So your reasoning just does not make sense.

Calling people shills, especially on such broad and tenuous grounds, almost always does more harm than good. Talking with or simply ignoring somebody you suspect is a shill does no harm, but calling people shills for mocking or disagreeing with popular opinions can create an environment that is extremely hostile to dissent, where comments that stray from the commonly-accepted beliefs are met with thoughtless dismissals like "$0.02 has been deposited into your account" or its precursor, "JIDF pls go". And then you have an intellectually stunted echo chamber.
User avatar
#17 - fireeaters (11/08/2016) [-]
I think he's probably just lost hope, what with all the rampant corruption and what not.
User avatar
#5 - generaljosh (11/08/2016) [-]
That's exactly how you win, by telling everyone who disagrees with you they're shills
User avatar
#6 - captainfuckitall (11/08/2016) [-]
>Funnyjunk happens to be on a Wikileaks list of targeted sites for CTR
>Comments with absolutely no substance go around insulting Trump and Trump supporters
>We're expected to believe these aren't shills

Did I understand that correctly?
User avatar
#9 - incoming (11/08/2016) [-]
Wait there was a wikileaks list?
User avatar
#10 - captainfuckitall (11/08/2016) [-]
Indeed. There was a list of 'top sites' from CTR where they wanted their attention diverted most to, to support Hillary.

If I remember correctly, out of a top ten, first was /pol/, second was /x/, third was reddit (r/thedonald), fourth was Funnyjunk.
User avatar
#15 - incoming (11/08/2016) [-]
Neat! We made Santa's, I mean, Satan's list!