And I'm Irish, so I know a little about my ancestors being enslaved.

Come on, TECSHARE. You know that money laundering is a term that is used to keep people stuck with Fed fiat. Private money has been around for ages - grocery store coupons, Bitcoin, bearer bonds, etc.

When people find that there isn't any benefit in/from Black Lives Matter funding, they will quit. Of course, there will always be some that will never quit.

ActBlue is a fundraising platform. Bernie used so the money he raised via ActBlue went to his campaign. Biden used it so the money he raised via ActBlue went to his campaign. There is no evidence that money raised for BLM went "directly to the DNC" or that any money laundering is taking place.

There is no argument because they've reached a consensus.

I have found it strange that someone could choke via pressure on the back of their neck. That is not something I have heard of until about two weeks ago.

Sadly, this probably doesn't matter. Chauvin has already been tried in public. There had been about 20+ police officers stationed outside his house protecting him when he turned himself in (before he was charged), and I have heard that "protestors" were stopping multiple food deliveries to his house. Ben Crump, the ambulance chasing attorney representing the family, was calling for Chauvin to get the death penalty I believe before there was any type of medical report on Floyd's death.

If you are right, the root cause of death is really that one person was having to train two new Police officers. Cutting police funding is only going to cause more of these types of situations, not less.

What vendetta? You're the one making the contrived circular accusation of excusing "sock puppeting, extortionist, trust system abusers" merely because nutildah removed red trust. By that logic every single person on this forum is excusing "sock puppeting, extortionist, trust system abusers" because no one has posted a red trust rating (or any kind of rating) for StonerStanley about him being a "sock puppeting, extortionist, trust system abuser", including yourself.

Seems like you are trying awfully hard to stir up drama here. I did not say my rating was invalid to begin with -- stop putting words in my mouth. I didn't say you conceded anything -- I asked and answered a question I knew you were implying, and you still are implying.

Guess you should red tag me for it, perhaps Stanley as well.

None of this affects you whatsoever. Now man up and stop crying.

My negative trust for Stanley was based on him harassing DT members. This is one of the more flimsy things to base a red trust on (in my book), and I decided to be forgiving about it...

Not quite. The money goes to ActBlue Charities which gives solely to 501(c)(3) non-profits. ActBlue PAC is the PAC and does not receive donations from BLM.

https://www.influencewatch.org/non-profit/actblue-charities/

If the money collected by ActBlue Charities was found to be going to ActBlue PAC, then yes, that would be a violation of campaign finance laws.


That's the problem. Solutions need to be found in order to lessen the potential for things to go wrong so easily.

This is a prime example of what's wrong with society.  Half of our population forms their opinion based on a meme.

The real difference here is one person, under the influence of drugs, FOUGHT WITH the police. Police are allowed to use enough force to overcome the force used by the person resisting them. These cops failed to recognize positional asphyxiation while dealing with excited delirium.

The other person surrendered, offered no resistance, and did not fight with the 5 cops who had their guns drawn.

Do yourselves a favor and look up the term - excited delirium.
Then look up another one - positional asphyxiation.

Put the two together and you'll see what cops face every day.
  
Then find the Minneapolis PD policy on use of force.  You'll see that the neck restraint is still an approved tactic. It finally got pulled after this incident (20 years behind most other departments)

Now, with the three things above, you should be able to deduce that :
People in Floyd's condition can fight right up until they code. They have amazing strength while under the influence. Tasers are often ineffective in this scenario. Suggested procedure for excited delirium is contain and restrain until EMS arrives. The antiquated neck restraint policy suggests MPD officers have been using it for a long time without issue.  (Most other departments have removed that policy for the very reason it's in the spotlight today). The officers on scene failed to consider positional asphyxiation.  They kept Floyd face down. The inability to breath wasn't due to the officer at the neck, it was due to the officer on his back restricting the expansion of Floyd's chest.

This was the perfect storm of drugs, criminal, resisting arrest, bad Department policy, and oblivious cops.


Then, if you are ready for even more education, go to the Black Lives Matter website.  Click on the donate button.  You'll be redirected to ActBlue who will accept your donation. Then take a look at where ActBlue sends the money. ( a simple google search reveals everything).

This isn't about race guys. Police departments around the world deal with excited delirium every day. This one went wrong, as they can easily do.

It's all politics. There's an election to influence.

You haven't red-trusted StonerStanley yourself. Why is it an issue that nutildah removed the feedback? Or are you excusing the abuser too?

A great example of deflection   If you want to continue calling me a liar until the end, that's OK.  But if you want to settle your scam debts, better do it before we file our suit.  Many people have committed to recovering at least part of what you scammed them for.   You and the other DT scammers are going to have to add a lot more names to your "distrust list".  :/

Now you are acting like Techy and claiming you know what I am going to do?

Do the right thing, and email me if you were scammed by OG.  Get your coin back.

And how exactly does this affect you? It sounds quite silly even by your own standards to get upset about every action that involves somebody who doesn't like you.

Can someone please ELI5. Usually I'm pretty good at deciphering TECSHARE's conspiracy theories but I can't figure out how this (nutildah removing neg trust) is supposed to be harming him?

My negative trust for Stanley was based on him harassing DT members. This is one of the more flimsy things to base a red trust on (in my book), and I decided to be forgiving about it. He asked in a courteous way if I would remove the negative trust I left on his account (albeit in the wrong section of the forum), which was a big step up from his previous behavior, so I did. As a result, the situation has been de-escalated.

Q: But what about him promising to remove his negative trust on you? Doesn't that count toward some kind of extortion attempt, to which you willingly conceded?

A: We all know his feedback does not show up as default. If I cared so much about about it, I would have been bothered about it in April.

Can't you read? You lost the argument already. You have no arguments more intelligent to make than comparisons to Nazis, ergo you are done. And no, "bootlicker" isn't a Nazi thing.

https://www.dictionary.com/browse/bootlick?qsrc=2446

Now fuck off.


Okay Stanley, done.

Hello nutildah.... you gave me a negative feedback few months ago because i "harrassed" someone who disrespected me and who is the same person below that start disrespecting you because of your opinion (he his called "TECSHARE") ... Be serious and honest, maybe you could think about removing your negative feedback on my profil and i'll remove mine. This is just my vision of the common sense i'm not here to offense you and i totally agree with your comment here. I don't disrespect people if they don't do it with me, so i think you are wrong by giving me this feedback but i totally understand why you thought you were right.

Thank you.

I agree with this statement.  If you believe someone deserves negative feed back, and you remove it simply to get them to remove theirs, users in the future will be unaware and more likely to be scammed.