@Cowbee@lemmy.ml

I’m confused - my whole point is that it’s not available for the public to go and get. You yourself can’t go and get it, nor can anyone else in this thread that lacks persuasive credentials. So, and I swear to god I’m sincerely asking, how does something with a selective application process meet your idea of publicly available? It’s quite literally bourgeoisie control of information.

And… yes. Perhaps calling you an outright liar was wrong - but you have knowingly misrepresented multiple aspects of this, and stooped to truly dishonest argumentative techniques while doing it. The initial criticism was of you implying a survey was a reflection of the functioning of various governments, not people’s opinions on them. You then went on to insist that your interpretation is within the scope of the study - but you cannot have any idea if that’s true, because you have not read the portion of the study where the scope is explained. You even briefly attempted to reject the very idea of caring about the authors interpretations instead of the data itself, but then later admitted your interpretations are themselves based on some other peoples interpretations of the data anyways.

You came into this like it’s a fight - and it’s stayed that way. You cannot admit to ghe initial fault, and you can’t let someone else have the last word, because the goal is to give your arguments the appearance of legitimacy. This is all a considered act, and that’s… Gotta be a little hollow.

Have you ever accepted fault, or is (seriously) the concern of de-legitimizing your arguments in the eyes of the bystanders truly the entire point for you?