Adult Film Producer Unmasks Prolific 'John DOE' Torrent Pirate as Meta Executive
Posted by speckx 4 days ago
Comments
Comment by drewg123 4 days ago
“Just hours later, Strike 3 first recorded BitTorrent infringement on John Doe’s residential IP Address,” the motion reads.
“This may suggest that Meta desired to shift infringing activity to this hidden residential IP Address in order to prevent further detection,”
Seems like there are 2 different reads to that. (a) is like they say, and Meta was using porn for AI training or something else official. Or (b) that he was personally downloading porn either at the office or a corp VPN and was told to stop by their corp It folks..
Comment by gchamonlive 4 days ago
I wonder how much porn you have to personally download to be considered prolific.
EDIT: "Reality Labs executive downloaded nearly 20,000 files at his home for work purposes"
Yeah, you can't consume that much porn for your own amusement.
Comment by jnwatson 4 days ago
Comment by gchamonlive 4 days ago
Comment by fidotron 4 days ago
The noise has always been about the UN private network which is apparently absolutely full of anything you might ever want.
Comment by torginus 4 days ago
Comment by idiotsecant 3 days ago
Comment by paimapi 4 days ago
and I assume this was just for content from Reality Labs. god knows how much other torrenting was done outside of Reality Labs IP
Comment by RaftPeople 4 days ago
You could run them in parallel, like a Zoom or Teams mtg, but with each square a different movie.
Would be more entertaining than the next status mtg.
Comment by subw00f 3 days ago
Comment by O5vYtytb 3 days ago
Comment by disdegeneration 2 days ago
Comment by gchamonlive 4 days ago
Comment by benoau 4 days ago
But I wonder if there is software like Sonarr / Radarr / Lidarr / etc for this media... I made Radarr automatically download insane quantities of movies by following actors on it, I had to stop doing that!
Comment by stonecharioteer 3 days ago
Comment by gchamonlive 4 days ago
Comment by ozozozd 3 days ago
Comment by LtdJorge 3 days ago
Comment by Lammy 4 days ago
You are making the mistake of assuming someone can only have one monitor displaying porn at once. Have you never seen a real gooncave?
Comment by notahacker 4 days ago
Comment by gchamonlive 3 days ago
Comment by ElProlactin 4 days ago
So is this what Zuck's bunker in Hawaii is all about?
Comment by testing22321 4 days ago
Sir, I accept your wager.
Comment by gchamonlive 3 days ago
Comment by testing22321 3 days ago
Comment by gchamonlive 3 days ago
Comment by jasonfarnon 4 days ago
Comment by heavenlyblue 3 days ago
Comment by fhn 4 days ago
Comment by fhn 4 days ago
Comment by stevenwoo 4 days ago
Comment by busterarm 4 days ago
Law enforcement didn’t get involved and nobody did shit about it.
Not even the last time that company was massively hacked. ;)
Comment by sandworm101 4 days ago
Comment by axus 4 days ago
Comment by autoexec 4 days ago
I think the MPAA has more money to throw around these days, but don't let the RIAA tell you that piracy is killing them. They're doing just fine (https://www.riaa.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/08/2026-Mid-Yea...)
Comment by Brybry 4 days ago
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cox_Communications,_Inc._v._So...
[2] https://www.scotusblog.com/cases/cox-communications-inc-v-so...
Comment by sandworm101 4 days ago
Comment by joemi 4 days ago
For example, in 2009 I worked at a record store that got raided due to such claims. The RIAA's informant claimed he had seen people selling hidden bootlegs, which absolutely wasn't happening, and that was all they needed to have cops raid the store, arrest several people and cart off boxes of not-bootlegged, sold-by-major-CD-distributors CDs. Court dates followed and the case was eventually dismissed (or settled due to being more convenient than continuing the case? I can't remember), but it still took time, money, and lawyers. And this was in 2009, when the recording industry wield less power than in 2001.
(I was running late for work that day or else I would have ended up arrested too, since I was one of the managers scheduled then. Thank god I was running late!)
Comment by k310 3 days ago
Tomorrow.
Comment by stevenwoo 3 days ago
Comment by shimman 4 days ago
Comment by alex7o 4 days ago
Comment by abofh 4 days ago
Essentially - this is not a suggestion.
Residential ip's map to a specific person, and it's a lot harder for them to deflect and say I'm not responsible for my own Internet connection
Comment by teiferer 4 days ago
Since when does every household member have their own residential IP?
Even in single households that's not true (friends visiting, on-and-off partner, one night stands, helping the neighbor out cause their wifi is broken, ...)
And I don't know the logging + data retention requirements for CGNAT.
Comment by autoexec 4 days ago
Isn't that the dream of IPv6? Every member and device in your home trackable all the time?
Comment by bityard 4 days ago
Comment by cube00 4 days ago
https://discussion.fedoraproject.org/t/ipv6-privacy-option-a...
Comment by b112 4 days ago
Comment by autoexec 4 days ago
In cases where the company wifi is open or places like hotels the person who did it could be long gone. Unsecured residential wifi connections aren't much of a thing anymore, but I've seen a lot of people lending out their residential connection when they airbnb their vacation homes to strangers.
Comment by rolph 3 days ago
most residential wifi are not very secure, put the black hat on for a second, then send a message telling a user there is something they cant have; cant do; or will lose, unless they log in, or sign in. then you see the joe password, and many times its the same password for everything.
Comment by ryandvm 4 days ago
Man, if Facebook is hiring people this dumb, it's going to make me feel a lot worse about getting rejected after interviewing there.
Comment by bartread 4 days ago
I've lived in and around Cambridge for a very long time now. I've met a lot of Cambridge undergrads and graduates. Let me tell you: they are a mixed bag.
Don't misunderstand me: there are some very smart people at Cambridge University. Very smart indeed. And I think if you took any cohort from Cambridge Uni versus a similar cohort from another university you'd certainly find that, against most universities, the Cambridge cohort would be smarter on average. In fact the place is genuinely awash with very smart people literally everywhere.
But that doesn't mean there aren't plenty of people that went to Cambridge who clearly found a way to blag their way through the interview process that may not have been particularly closely correlated with their intellect. The same will be true of Meta, Google, etc. I swear, the interview processes at these companies are probably more of a sop to the egos of company leadership and people who already work there than they are any more effective at filtering down to good talent than less byzantine and overwrought hiring processes.
You just have to make your peace with it.
Comment by foobarbecue 4 days ago
Comment by hunterpayne 4 days ago
Comment by godelski 3 days ago
> say the top ranked CS school
I've worked with and written papers with enough people from top ranked CS schools (multiple from top 5 on csrankings) while I was at a top 100 and it is a very mixed bag. There were plenty of idiots in the top 5 and plenty of geniuses in the top 100s.I'd agree that average shows a difference but I don't think it is nearly as big as people act. Even the intra-university variance isn't what people would think (top universities have a very narrow distribution while lower ranks have wider). The trend follows, but the variance of the variances is not that large.
Comment by Symbiote 3 days ago
But there's going to be a difference between the students who finished with the highest grades, and those who scraped through.
Comment by hunterpayne 3 days ago
You know that there are places outside of England right?
Comment by foldr 3 days ago
Comment by anonym00se1 4 days ago
Comment by echelon 4 days ago
Which interviewers you get, vibes, which team is hiring, whether the folks in your hiring bar are grumpy, ...
Best thing you can do is know several people who can act as direct hiring manager.
Comment by hunterpayne 4 days ago
Comment by bitexploder 3 days ago
Comment by drewg123 4 days ago
Comment by eyepea2007 4 days ago
https://torrentfreak.com/meta-confirms-data-engineer-is-behi...
Comment by defrost 4 days ago
Today's Torrentfreak article is about "an executive" and references the article you have linked thus:
This is not the first time a Reality Labs employee has surfaced in the case. Earlier this summer, Meta confirmed that a former data engineer at the division was behind a Comcast connection linked to 97 films.
Close reading of both allows for a not spelled out possibility ... that "the data engineer" is also the son of the first mentioned "an executive".Or not - still much is under the fog of reporting ongoing partial disclosures.
Comment by ryandrake 4 days ago
Comment by ChrisMarshallNY 4 days ago
Comment by trhway 4 days ago
"Stat reported that in 2017, Richard Graydon self-published a book titled The Genetic Risks of Cancer: The Effects of DNA, Genomics and Inheritance on Aging and Survival.” The book described Graydon as an oncologist who had served as a chief medical officer in the biotech and drug development industry. It had no reviews on Amazon.
In October 2022, Atossa Therapeutics, a Seattle-based biotech, announced it had hired Richard Graydon as its interim chief medical officer.
“We are privileged to welcome Richard to Atossa, where his deep experience in CAR-T cell therapy fits well with our current strategic direction as we explore our opportunities in cell therapy,” Steven Quay, Atossa’s CEO, said in a statement at the time.
In March, Immix announced hiring Graydon, calling him a “board-certified hematologist-oncologist with over 20 years of experience in clinical development, most recently at Merck & Co. and Johnson & Johnson, where he led new and supplemental new drug applications and biologics license applications for 7 approved drugs including Darzalex, Carvykti, Keytruda, and Imbruvica.” Stat noted that these are some of the bestselling cancer medicines in the world."
Comment by vorpalhex 4 days ago
There's then a much more serious alignment pass.
Relationships can and do pre-vouch for big pieces of this such as alignment - if you've worked with someone for a decade, you are probably mission aligned.
Comment by jjtheblunt 4 days ago
Comment by red-iron-pine 4 days ago
e.g. they own all of Finance (or Ops, or Legal, or whatever), and have the ability to hire, fire, and use their own budget, albeit it with strings.
Comment by phonon 4 days ago
Comment by SmasherEpilepti 4 days ago
Usually, people who can make large decisions for the business without approval from higher-level employees.
Comment by dozerly 4 days ago
Comment by morkalork 4 days ago
Comment by dfxm12 4 days ago
Comment by red-iron-pine 4 days ago
this has happened at two (2) orgs I've been at.
executives take risks and responsibility, so the CTO/CISO got sign offs from everyone and took it to the board and got full CYA in both cases, too.
Comment by kotaKat 4 days ago
also all the incident reports i used to file about doctors getting malware went to the circular file.
maybe that's why they got nailed with ransomware years later (:
Comment by ElProlactin 4 days ago
Comment by sandworm101 4 days ago
Comment by gammarator 4 days ago
Comment by red-iron-pine 4 days ago
but i ain't dumb enough to do it off work IPs
Comment by bluefirebrand 4 days ago
Comment by mcmcmc 4 days ago
Comment by dgellow 4 days ago
Comment by red-iron-pine 4 days ago
you don't need 75k generals or fighter pilots, you need average folks who are going to STFU and get the unfun, unsexy tasks done.
you go trying to hire a Stanford/MIT hot-shot rockstar type and they'll either crash out or jump ASAP once they realize they got nailed with drudgery.
Comment by ElProlactin 4 days ago
This task might have been the sexiest work available at Meta, and there's nothing average about a guy that can single-handedly "process" 2,973 porn vids.
If Mark ever needs a right hand, this man is it.
Comment by itronitron 4 days ago
Comment by dgellow 4 days ago
Comment by doublerabbit 4 days ago
Comment by dgellow 4 days ago
Comment by giancarlostoro 4 days ago
Comment by throwyawayyyy 4 days ago
Comment by read_the_articl 4 days ago
> The company logged all BitTorrent activity detected from the executive’s connection, which was nearly 20,000 files.
> This includes VR adult titles made for Meta’s Quest headset. Strike 3 suggests the downloads are consistent with work to make the headset compatible with adult films.
> As recently as August 25, Strike 3 says it recorded more than 150 daily downloads, from multi-language “Mega Packs” of TV shows, movies, software and books to what it describes as AI-generated pornography and VR adult films. That included nearly a dozen of its own titles.
Comment by chorizo 4 days ago
Comment by darth_avocado 4 days ago
And I’m sure meta paid for some specific content but they generally wouldn’t want to set a precedent where they paid everyone.
Comment by fn-mote 4 days ago
Are you? I don’t understand why you think this. It seems like the only payments in this area are settlements after the fact.
Counterexamples welcome.
Comment by chorizo 4 days ago
Comment by triceratops 4 days ago
I can't think of any ToS that prohibit a device manufacturer from testing whether the content plays on their device. That's literally why anyone buys content - to play it on their device.
How would they enforce those anyway? And how would being sued for that be worse than being sued for torrenting?
Comment by salawat 3 days ago
Comment by LoganDark 4 days ago
Comment by jasonlotito 4 days ago
I hope they drag Meta hard and get every penny for this.
Comment by huijzer 4 days ago
Seems plausible. The material contains many hours of highly detailed human interaction plus I don’t expect Meta would have moral objections given their track record.
Comment by infinite_spin 4 days ago
Comment by cucumber3732842 4 days ago
Comment by infinite_spin 4 days ago
Comment by cindyllm 4 days ago
Comment by _trampeltier 4 days ago
Comment by infinite_spin 4 days ago
Comment by overtone1000 4 days ago
Comment by infinite_spin 4 days ago
e.g. if someone is reciting a poem they wrote in a public park, and I make a recording of that recitation, I have not violated their copyright in doing so, however I might violate their copyright by reconstructing that poem and then distributing it
Comment by jpc0 4 days ago
And likewise if you distribute any sort of copy of the recording you made you are violating at least one if not more copyrights.
Comment by infinite_spin 4 days ago
Comment by staticman2 3 days ago
Comment by infinite_spin 3 days ago
> however I might violate their copyright by reconstructing that poem and then distributing it
My argument is that the recording itself is not a copyright violation, not that distributing such a recording couldn't be construed as one (however I disagree on principle with that being illegal as well, as it puts an undue burden on the exercise of free speech, which should include the ability to accurately and entirely recite what I had experienced in a public place).
Comment by irthomasthomas 4 days ago
Comment by infinite_spin 4 days ago
Comment by mmsc 4 days ago
Comment by johnnyanmac 4 days ago
- produce your own movies/animation - identity movies/animation from context - identify actors/characters and cross-reference them in other works
You apply these parallels with porn, a more anonymous and intimate setting, and you can see how the kinds of results can be more morally dubious. And that's before getting into if the kinds of porn being trained on is even legal in your given jurisdiction.
Comment by 1vuio0pswjnm7 4 days ago
Comment by mc32 4 days ago
Legal is usually the one initiating then engaging with HR to do enforcement.
Comment by hackingonempty 4 days ago
Comment by mullingitover 4 days ago
Let me break out the world's tiniest violin for them.
[1] https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2025/02/meta-torrented-o...
Comment by tencentshill 4 days ago
Comment by sureMan6 4 days ago
Your ethics shouldn't be dictated by US copyright law
Comment by ceejayoz 4 days ago
If your ethics deem Meta ethical, they probably need recalibrating.
Comment by s1artibartfast 4 days ago
Comment by nkrisc 4 days ago
Comment by soulofmischief 4 days ago
Comment by mcmcmc 4 days ago
Comment by bitpush 4 days ago
That's an odd hill to die own. Lots of despicable people use iPhones. Does that Apple is somehow complicit?
Comment by mcmcmc 4 days ago
Comment by soulofmischief 3 days ago
Comment by mcmcmc 3 days ago
Comment by soulofmischief 3 days ago
Or you can just keep on making unfounded assumptions about my "moral grounding" if you'd like, you didn't leave a good first impression with me and I'm not terribly interested in discussing this with you if this is how it's going to be. Discussions are about finding common ground, but you seem to be looking for an argument.
Comment by pibaker 4 days ago
An example is Meta striking deals with telecom operators to offer unmetered access to Meta services making Facebook synonymous with the Internet in some countries.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet.org
Actions and actors live in a context. Stop being so autistic and start looking at the bigger picture. You are not immune to propaganda.
Comment by Ylpertnodi 3 days ago
We talking tech or Hell's Angels' teddy bear runs. Oh, wait....
Comment by s1artibartfast 4 days ago
I don't have to take a brain-dead shortcut of claiming every deed is bad. Not even every deed that is self-serving is bad O_O
Comment by Henchman21 4 days ago
> I don't have to take a brain-dead shortcut of claiming every deed is bad.
What? Reconcile these seemingly opposing statements?
Comment by s1artibartfast 4 days ago
The first post could or should have been more clearly written with an em-dash, but then people would start calling me a clanker. /s
> Actor and action conflation is incredibly common these days — If someone is bad and worth condemnation, all their actions must also be bad.
My position: Bad person can do good thing for bad motives. example: The evil wife beating doctor who saves a baby just because they get paid for it.
My "autistic" brain can recognize that saving babies is still a good thing. I don't have to like the doctor, or their reasons. For whatever reason, a large portion of people see a comparable situation and instantly start arguing that saving babies is bad.
Comment by Henchman21 4 days ago
Comment by ceejayoz 4 days ago
Comment by nitterclick 4 days ago
Comment by bigfatkitten 4 days ago
None of these make him a good person any more than Meta’s occasional positive acts make it a good company.
Comment by s1artibartfast 4 days ago
My whole point was bad actor /= bad deed.
Comment by throwway120385 4 days ago
Comment by s1artibartfast 4 days ago
Comment by overfeed 4 days ago
Corporate lawlessness has no good outcomes for humans.
Comment by doc_ick 4 days ago
I think that’s more hopium ethics.
Comment by efficax 4 days ago
Comment by fn-mote 4 days ago
Comment by fckgw 4 days ago
It sounds like this person/IP was just downloading a ton of different content, of which these VR videos were are part of.
Doesn't that water down their complaint a bit? If they are trying to say they moved to a residential IP to specifically download VR content for training data, why are they also downloading unrelated eBook and other media? Seems like VR content made up a pretty small percentage of overall downloaded content.
Comment by foolfoolz 4 days ago
Comment by leni536 4 days ago
Comment by stewartadam 4 days ago
Comment by paxys 4 days ago
Comment by drooby 4 days ago
"Hey... we need to improve our porn detection AI... but we want to avoid paying for all that porn... is anyone open to taking on some personal liability for a nice bonus this year"
I'm just saying... maybe...
Comment by Arcuru 4 days ago
Comment by kotaKat 4 days ago
I would quite like to think that GDP references... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GirlsDoPorn - where "six people involved with the website were charged on counts of sex trafficking by force, fraud, and coercion".
A little yikes on that card today. Dude was ripping hundreds of videos of assault and coerced rape pornography for training.
Comment by WaitWaitWha 4 days ago
I am hard pressed to believe that this was for the exec.
what is sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander
I just wnat to know what bandwidth this exec has at his house. I want it.
Comment by hackingonempty 4 days ago
Comment by Hamuko 4 days ago
Comment by well_ackshually 4 days ago
This was mostly a hoarding thing. Hoarders gonna hoard.
Comment by brnt 4 days ago
It's about having the library, not about reading the books.
Comment by hiccuphippo 4 days ago
Comment by tonyedgecombe 4 days ago
Comment by wvbdmp 4 days ago
Comment by boomboomsubban 4 days ago
Comment by nostrademons 4 days ago
Comment by red-iron-pine 4 days ago
Comment by SV_BubbleTime 4 days ago
Comment by stevenwoo 4 days ago
Comment by chad_strategic 4 days ago
Comment by ahartmetz 4 days ago
Comment by tyre 4 days ago
Comment by cgannett 4 days ago
Comment by shadowgovt 4 days ago
Comment by staticman2 4 days ago
Comment by SV_BubbleTime 4 days ago
Comment by paxys 4 days ago
Comment by kodoman 4 days ago
Comment by mminer237 4 days ago
Comment by aeon_ai 4 days ago
If the materials were publicly available on a site and scraped? Fair use.
If they were distributed illegally and acquired through that distribution? Cooked.
If you scraped it AND saved it? Cooked.
Comment by mminer237 3 days ago
Comment by hackingonempty 4 days ago
Comment by gorbachev 4 days ago
The only exception would be a very small startup, which isn't the case here, or all IT, admin and engineering staff told the company they aren't doing anything illegal for Zuckerberg. That's not going to happen at Meta either.
Comment by ElProlactin 4 days ago
Maybe an ethically bankrupt company with a "move fast and break things" ethos looking for exactly the plausible deniability your comment hints at?
Comment by 12_throw_away 4 days ago
Well now I'm hoping this makes it to a courtroom, so that the plaintiffs can ask, on the court record and under penalty of perjury, exactly what he was using that quantity of pornography for. When, how often, and so on. (Not that there's anything wrong or shameful about that, in general, but it would confirm my biases about what executives do all day.)
Comment by horsawlarway 4 days ago
Comment by modeless 4 days ago
Comment by loeg 4 days ago
Comment by treetalker 4 days ago
Comment by loeg 4 days ago
> Meta also flags a contradiction in Strike 3’s theory that downloads were switched to the home connection hours after the March 2025 warning. Strike 3’s own complaint alleges that Meta’s “off-infra” activity started in 2018, and that downloads on corporate IP addresses continued long after the notice.
Oh. The connection is maybe more tenuous than Strike 3 claims.
Comment by mewse-hn 4 days ago
Yeah they seem to be following the time-honored legal strategy of throwing shit at the wall and seeing what sticks
Comment by iamflimflam1 2 days ago
Comment by Seattle3503 4 days ago
Comment by bravoetch 4 days ago
Comment by RealityVoid 4 days ago
Comment by tonyedgecombe 4 days ago
Comment by KaiserPro 4 days ago
because in some cases VPNs tie to you neatly to an action better than just home internet.
With a VPN, you have much less deniability, because its tied to a device often with a username and password.
Comment by CatchACode 4 days ago
Comment by KaiserPro 3 days ago
Thats an assumption. the source is out of date https://vpntesting.com/no-logs/
but basically the point is, you are indellibly linking your machine to a service.
The difference between that an normal internet is because of NAT, you can argue that at home it wasn't your machine, it was someone else on the network.
Comment by dymk 4 days ago
Comment by throw03172019 4 days ago
Comment by NoMoreNicksLeft 4 days ago
I'd be shocked if anyone in the United States is still downloading stuff without a VPN. There are entire countries that don't have to worry about it, but none in Europe or North America where that is the case.
Comment by Joel_Mckay 4 days ago
Comment by NoMoreNicksLeft 4 days ago
Are they going to commit treason and start snitching on me to Hollywood lawyers for shits and giggles? How would that play out do you think?
Comment by Joel_Mckay 4 days ago
This was an old Quid pro quo arrangement that predates the Patriot act.
Have a nice day =3
Comment by NoMoreNicksLeft 18 hours ago
Comment by kodoman 4 days ago
Of course legal professionals are always needed but so much of what is done today is just a kind of rent seeking.
Comment by sanex 4 days ago
Comment by ranger_danger 4 days ago
Comment by harshreality 4 days ago
It's not really a VPN for piracy purposes unless it's a commercial, no-log VPN. Since when a VPN is used to move the point at which traffic enters the internet, the owner of the VPN exit will be held to account.
They can try to claim they were running a "private" VPN and gave random people (from reddit and discord) internet access through it. They can try to claim they don't keep logs. Meanwhile, for a facebook VP with suspected activity tied to facebook corporate, the rightsholder will subpoena every digital device in the person's home, depose all their family and close friends, subpoena their facebook email...
Comment by ranger_danger 3 days ago
Comment by nostrademons 4 days ago
With Tor, you connect to a random Tor node (which may be another residential computer), which connects to a node in the middle, which connects to an exit node, which forwards your requests on to their final destination. All connections look like they come from the exit node, which might be someone's residential IP.
Comment by ranger_danger 3 days ago
No
> With a VPN the IP is a commercial server run by the VPN provider
That is not a requirement... anyone can run VPN server software on a computer they control, whether it's on a personal/residential connection or a VPS/VM you rent, or something else. Many privacy-conscious people do this regularly whether or not a commercial VPN provider is involved.
Comment by pmkary 3 days ago
Comment by flerchin 4 days ago
Comment by eli 4 days ago
Comment by loeg 4 days ago
Comment by shadowgovt 4 days ago
Backdoored dad's work computer, how diabolical. ;)
Comment by autoexec 4 days ago
Comment by tyre 4 days ago
Comment by hashstring 3 days ago
Comment by meindnoch 4 days ago
Comment by jnaina 3 days ago
Comment by negura 3 days ago
Comment by pier25 4 days ago
Comment by mirekrusin 4 days ago
Comment by omegadynamics 4 days ago
Comment by subarctic 4 days ago
So is it a Reality Labs executive or a Meta executive? Is the headline lying?
Comment by jnwatson 4 days ago
Comment by lisp2240 4 days ago
Comment by mirekrusin 4 days ago
Comment by lisp2240 4 days ago
Comment by mirekrusin 3 days ago
Comment by red-iron-pine 4 days ago
there is 0 evidence for either discussion in the article
Comment by lisp2240 4 days ago
Comment by petesergeant 4 days ago
Comment by lisp2240 4 days ago
Comment by jaredhansen 4 days ago
As Hitchens' Razor puts it: "what can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence." u/petesergeant was pointing that out to you, fairly gently if slightly obliquely.
Comment by lisp2240 4 days ago
Does this site not have a policy against incivility?