Since Election Day Over 100 of 243 Dominion Employees on LinkedIn Have Deleted Their Profiles

[(° ͡ ͜ ͡ʖ ͡ °) (ᵔᴥᵔʋ)]

Since Election Day Over 100 of 243 Dominion Employees on LinkedIn Have Deleted Their Profiles | The Spectator | Truth Conquers All

This is not a good sign for a company. Over 40% of Dominion’s employees with profiles on LinkedIn on Election Day in the US have eliminated their profiles from the social media giant. Rosie Memos @almostjingo reported this yesterday:...

 

[Pavel Mosko]

lol. Funny you say this. I was just looking at doing a thread on Dominion software and how their "glitches" tend to favor Democrats. The latest one, even Snopes recognizes in Georgia. Well I will go back to listening to Steven Crowder who is covering the topic today.

Were 2,600 Uncounted Votes Found in Floyd County, Georgia?

 

[(° ͡ ͜ ͡ʖ ͡ °) (ᵔᴥᵔʋ)]

lol. Funny you say this. I was just looking at doing a thread on Dominion software and how their "glitches" tend to favor Democrats. The latest one, even Snopes recognizes in Georgia. Well I will go back to listening to Steven Crowder who is covering the topic today.

Were 2,600 Uncounted Votes Found in Floyd County, Georgia?

At this point I don't ever want to hear anyone tell me that there is not enough evidence to investigate the results of the 2020 election when I could argue that there is exceptionally more evidence than the democrats needed to justify the Mueller investigation and Trump's impeachment.

 

[royal priest]

Then there's this...

Trump Lawyer Tweets Article Alleging Philly Mob Boss May Reveal How They Stole The Election In Exchange For Full Expungement Of His Criminal Record

 

[Sparagmos]

Since Election Day Over 100 of 243 Dominion Employees on LinkedIn Have Deleted Their Profiles | The Spectator | Truth Conquers All

Probably because QAnon cultists are obsessed with them and spamming their inboxes.

 

[(° ͡ ͜ ͡ʖ ͡ °) (ᵔᴥᵔʋ)]

Probably because QAnon cultists are obsessed with them and spamming their inboxes.

Do you have any "evidence" to support your statement?

 

[Sparagmos]

Do you have any "evidence" to support your statement?

What statement? I was pretty obviously making a guess.

 

[(° ͡ ͜ ͡ʖ ͡ °) (ᵔᴥᵔʋ)]

What statement? I was pretty obviously making a guess.

Considering you have only made one statement on this thread it seems pretty obvious you know what statement I am talking about. So please don't try to deflect. It appears as though your "guess" was merely you stating that you did not like the article because it does not fit with your ideology therefore it must be dismissed without justification. In other words, "I don't like it so it must be false." Unless, of course, you would like to share the evidence which justifies your statement/"guess"?

 

[Sparagmos]

Considering you have only made one statement on this thread it seems pretty obvious you know what statement I am talking about. So please don't try to deflect. It appears as though your "guess" was merely you stating that you did not like the article because it does not fit with your ideology therefore it must be dismissed without justification. In other words, "I don't like it so it must be false." Unless, of course, you would like to share the evidence which justifies your statement/"guess"?

Deflect? I stated outright that it was a guess. I didn’t say the article was false, to the contrary I gave a probable explanation for what the article presented! You sure did get heated over one comment. Chillax.

 

[civilwarbuff]

Probably because QAnon cultists are obsessed with them and spamming their inboxes.

Deflect? I stated outright that it was a guess. I didn’t say the article was false, to the contrary I gave a probable explanation for what the article presented! You sure did get heated over one comment. Chillax.

Nope, I don't see anywhere in there where you stated it was a guess. Wanna try again?

 

[(° ͡ ͜ ͡ʖ ͡ °) (ᵔᴥᵔʋ)]

Deflect? I stated outright that it was a guess. I didn’t say the article was false, to the contrary I gave a probable explanation for what the article presented! You sure did get heated over one comment. Chillax.

You said:

Probably because QAnon cultists are obsessed with them and spamming their inboxes.

So my question (that you refused to answer by deflection) was in regards to the justification of your probability. Due to your inability (or unwillingness) to provide any justification leads me to conclude that your "guess" is merely an unfounded and unjustified emotional outburst over a topic that threatened your ideology. Your ideology was threatened, therefore you felt personally threatened. I assert that your statement/"guess" was a defensive mechanism toward a perceived attack that contributed absolutely nothing of value to the thread.

I assure you that my intent is not to personally attack or insult you. I just ask that you respect the conversation by providing comments of value.

 

[grasping the after wind]

Probably because QAnon cultists are obsessed with them and spamming their inboxes.

My guess would be that perhaps those deleting their profiles may have thought that what they had posted on LinkedIn would be embarrassing in some way in reference to political ideology or their work or a combination of political ideology and what they do for a living? But that is just a guess.

 

[(° ͡ ͜ ͡ʖ ͡ °) (ᵔᴥᵔʋ)]

My guess would be that perhaps those deleting their profiles may have thought that what they had posted on LinkedIn would be embarrassing in some way in reference to political ideology or their work or a combination of political ideology and what they do for a living? But that is just a guess.

Although the article doesn't state the motive for so many people to delete their accounts, the perception is that they are trying to cut disassociate themselves from the company to preserve their personal social reputation. The only thing that doesn't make sense to me is why they would delete their entire account as opposed to merely editing their account to remove only the information attaching them to Dominion?

 

[Sparagmos]

Nope, I don't see anywhere in there where you stated it was a guess. Wanna try again?

You left out the comment where I stated outright it was a guess. Maybe you can “try again” LOL.

 

[Sparagmos]

My guess would be that perhaps those deleting their profiles may have thought that what they had posted on LinkedIn would be embarrassing in some way in reference to political ideology or their work or a combination of political ideology and what they do for a living? But that is just a guess.

Yes I think that’s quite possible as well. I do t know how LinkedIn works - if ypu only worked for a company temporarily would that also be a reason it’s not coming up? If so, that would be the likely answer.

 

[Sparagmos]

Although the article doesn't state the motive for so many people to delete their accounts, the perception is that they are trying to cut disassociate themselves from the company to preserve their personal social reputation. The only thing that doesn't make sense to me is why they would delete their entire account as opposed to merely editing their account to remove only the information attaching them to Dominion?

Did they delete their entire account though?

 

[Sparagmos]

You said:
So my question (that you refused to answer by deflection) was in regards to the justification of your probability. Due to your inability (or unwillingness) to provide any justification leads me to conclude that your "guess" is merely an unfounded and unjustified emotional outburst over a topic that threatened your ideology. Your ideology was threatened, therefore you felt personally threatened. I assert that your statement/"guess" was a defensive mechanism toward a perceived attack that contributed absolutely nothing of value to the thread.

I assure you that my intent is not to personally attack or insult you. I just ask that you respect the conversation by providing comments of value.

All those words just to say my comment had no value, eh? And calling me defensive when you’re the one going on and on about my one sentence comment.

 

[mmksparbud]

Considering you have only made one statement on this thread it seems pretty obvious you know what statement I am talking about. So please don't try to deflect. It appears as though your "guess" was merely you stating that you did not like the article because it does not fit with your ideology therefore it must be dismissed without justification. In other words, "I don't like it so it must be false." Unless, of course, you would like to share the evidence which justifies your statement/"guess"?

What do you think "probably" means

 

[(° ͡ ͜ ͡ʖ ͡ °) (ᵔᴥᵔʋ)]

What do you think "probably" means

It is defined by Miriam Webster as
"
Definition of probably


: insofar as seems reasonably true, factual, or to be expected : without much doubt.

 

[(° ͡ ͜ ͡ʖ ͡ °) (ᵔᴥᵔʋ)]

All those words just to say my comment had no value, eh? And calling me defensive when you’re the one going on and on about my one sentence comment.

You now concede that your "guess" is a comment. Now we are getting somewhere. But without any justification, it has no value to the topic of this thread.