SugarCone

You are obviously a smart man, and should be able to acknowledge that any 'context' you think you're adding by wrapping them in tweets from 'RNC Research' is not context at all and at best commentary - at worst lies. I think it is disingenuous to make people look through your keyhole at the news you cite. It is all of our responsibilities to do our best to make the truth as easy as possible to see. I find your obsession with truth to be in conflict with the manner in which you share your resources. I just hope it is not intentional.

I think its funny that you can't answer the question. Why wrap everything in tweets?

Then why wrap the link in the tweet if it has nothing to do with the clip?

See example #2, Why not just link to the article?

Examples like this represent a confusing trend, a link to a tweet from someone like "RNC Research" (I can't imagine why anyone would suspect them of bias), that links to a YouTube video from NBC... but is not actually on NBC's channel, but on a different channel called "GOP War Room"? Are you oblivious to how this appears to anyone who is interested in hearing your message at face value? You say you are citing the source material but you're three levels deep here.

I appreciate the idea of being exposed to contrarian ideas, as I agree that sometimes we live in our own echo chambers. I think its a mature state of mind to be open to having your mind changed. Everyone needs an alternative point of view - but I think we can do better than posting propaganda from either side. I would be just as frustrated if there was someone in here drowning out dissent spamming links from CNN's twitter.

I'd be happy to hop on discord or something if you're interested. I don't know why your first inclination is I am the same person as someone else? Or - I'll DM you my phone number and we can chat.

I just think this might not be the place for the "end game", you might choose a medium that suits your style of screaming into the void - like twitter. https://twitter.com/derangedrhino

Anyone can post links to external sources, they are a dime a dozen and can be chosen to support any view point. The value of the discussion is people spending time crafting thoughtful responses with the intent to gain genuine understanding. I do not think I am alone in the view that these threads can be more of a source of discussion than a place to see regurgitated content.

I don't think its unfair to request the OP's original intent for the thread that he created. I happened to agree with the sentiment that a more fruitful discussion can be had if the thread is not bombarded by commentary at a rate that seems to discourage continuity of ideas and thoughts.

Long time lurker, first time poster - it seems painfully obvious that the collective cannot honor @BillsFanNC's request to avoid link spamming, and to provide some original analysis or commentary of the document. I appreciate that other folks have insights - but if people wanted to put their mouths on the Twitter fire hose they could go directly to Twitter.