
And yet another sketchy source.Blackvegetable » 27 Oct 2025, 6:28 pm » wrote: ↑ So **** g'ddammned stupid...
John LyonJohn Lyon • 3rd+Verified • 3rd+ GM/Co-Owner, Wilkins Harley-DavidsonGM/Co-Owner, Wilkins Harley-Davidson 2d •
Researchers found that 32% to 37% of the online criticism toward Cracker Barrel came from fake bot accounts. Bots amplified outrage, reposted attacks, and shaped public opinion. A good reminder what looks like mass anger online often isn’t real. It will be interesting at some point to find out who stages these accounts.
Stumpy wears a lab coat too. It's the kind where the sleeves wrap around to the back.Cannonpointer » 27 Oct 2025, 7:18 pm » wrote: ↑ Oh, my goodness. "Researchers found."
Well ya can't argue with that. I mean, that's conclusive!! I suppose you think it's "science," yeah?
Betcha a shiny new dollar them there "researchers" were wearing lab coats. If that ain't science, WTF is?
Blackvegetable » 27 Oct 2025, 6:28 pm » wrote: ↑ So **** g'ddammned stupid...
John LyonJohn Lyon • 3rd+Verified • 3rd+ GM/Co-Owner, Wilkins Harley-DavidsonGM/Co-Owner, Wilkins Harley-Davidson 2d •
Researchers found that 32% to 37% of the online criticism toward Cracker Barrel came from fake bot accounts. Bots amplified outrage, reposted attacks, and shaped public opinion. A good reminder what looks like mass anger online often isn’t real. It will be interesting at some point to find out who stages these accounts.
what's to meme, carrion?
JuCo 5 percenter...72
“Show me the man and I’ll find you the crime” ~ LAVRENTIY BERIA
"Try to get past your passionate ignorance and learn to accept what actually happened." ~ brown's unheeded words of wisdom What difference does that make, Cuspidor?
Blackvegetable » 27 Oct 2025, 6:28 pm » wrote: ↑ So **** g'ddammned stupid...
John LyonJohn Lyon • 3rd+Verified • 3rd+ GM/Co-Owner, Wilkins Harley-DavidsonGM/Co-Owner, Wilkins Harley-Davidson 2d •
Researchers found that 32% to 37% of the online criticism toward Cracker Barrel came from fake bot accounts. Bots amplified outrage, reposted attacks, and shaped public opinion. A good reminder what looks like mass anger online often isn’t real. It will be interesting at some point to find out who stages these accounts.
Deal:Let me prove how predictable you narcissists are. Watch this:
1. Phase 1: You will say that you answered it.
Phase 2: I will remind you of :"are these your words?" from yesterday and if "will" is future tense.
Phase 3: You will deny that I showed you, because of your meltdown with my link provided...and then you will say "I didn't ask for a link."
Repeat
2. Your next move will be to claim that you answered it by giving your definition, to which I replied that isn't the question...etc...etc...blah...blah...blah..
3. You will also say that you answered through your non-answers.
Moron.
Deal: If Veghead can prove that he answered the survivorship multiple choice question, as the question is written and asked, along with his defense of his answer, then I will agree to never come back for as long as I live. If he cannot, then he is out of here for a month. Additionally, his defense cannot be "Because it fits my definition." That is a claim, not a defense. He is to defend why.
Exception: I will allow for an exception. If he loses, then I will allow him to stay if he answers it the way it is asked, along with his defense. However, he must do it immediately after the deal has been decided. Not 100 posts later. The very next post of his must be his answer/defense.
Who told you my narratives are spam-fueled, fruitcake?Blackvegetable » 28 Oct 2025, 6:58 am » wrote: ↑Go polish another of your spam fueled narratives, Ruby...Cannonpointer » 27 Oct 2025, 7:18 pm » wrote: ↑ Oh, my goodness. "Researchers found."
Well ya can't argue with that. I mean, that's conclusive!! I suppose you think it's "science," yeah?
Betcha a shiny new dollar them there "researchers" were wearing lab coats. If that ain't science, WTF is?
But enough about you and you little buddy ratzo rizzo, fruitcake.
I never give woke *** a second chance. One toe over the line and you're all in.SouthernFried » 28 Oct 2025, 7:05 am » wrote: ↑ Yep. They saw it as a white conservative place and tried to erase that. Changed the decor, changed the logo, etc... They even started introducing the *** rainbow in some of their online advertising. I'll never step foot in one again. Just another chain restaurant that has gone to ****. They tried to reverse course before the damage was done. Too late!
Lol. Little Feet is vurspeshl.roadkill » 28 Oct 2025, 8:05 am » wrote: ↑ Stumpy wears a lab coat too. It's the kind where the sleeves wrap around to the back.
No, you are....Cannonpointer » 28 Oct 2025, 10:42 am » wrote: ↑ But enough about you and you little buddy ratzo rizzo, fruitcake.
Who the **** do you think you're kidding?Cannonpointer » 28 Oct 2025, 10:41 am » wrote: ↑ Who told you my narratives are spam-fueled, fruitcake?
"Researchers"?![]()
![]()
And for the record? My decision never to dine there again - clearly signalling that I give a **** - is in the face of never eating their world famous hashbrown casserole again. It hurts me just to think of it. They should never have **** with a man's taters.Mrkelly » 27 Oct 2025, 6:37 pm » wrote: ↑ I was wondering who gave a ****
I was pissed that they quit having liver and onions
Who cares what the sign looks like
just another squirrel
No. Hover view.