Where did I denounce it? I attempted to make sense of your accusation in an otherwise asynchronous communication platform. If my assumption was wrong, go ahead and correct it.

You don't get to make baseless accusations against people and require them to entertain you with a response. They are not guilty of everything you can make up until they prove themselves innocent of each one. If you are going to accuse someone, you need to prove it - it's up to you. Otherwise, don't say it.

An far better approach is, ask; be curious. People have wildly different ideas than you. Here you cut all that off and reduce the world to the narrow range of what you can think of, and the even narrower range your expectations. The great advantage of talking to others is they have different ideas totally outside and independent of yours.

Baseless accusations are not ok, even if they are commonplace on social media. They are morally wrong. Bearing false witness is a sin. I don't want to be accused, to have this put on me; nobody does.

> require them to entertain you with a response

It's hard to take you seriously when you're doing the same thing that you're labeling as morally wrong. It's the internet, and we're anonymous for the most part, I have absolutely zero expectations of you.

But yeah, that's how a conversation goes. You made a claim (that was wrong), I have told you it's wrong now, and thus the conversation goes. Trying to assert your form of communication is morally superior is quite an interesting take, but to each their own.

Anyways, as I predicted, we'll be at an impasse here, because apparently my communication method is far too immoral for your tastes.

I didn't make that claim, you made it up. I have no problem saying that is morally inferior, a lie, and factually wrong.

> I have absolutely zero expectations of you.

You wrote: "I'm sure you disagree with the premise that American media spins American militias to be far worse than they actually are." That's an expectation.