Yeah but that wasn't my point.

My point is that "this isn't about catching criminals" is the wrong wording.

You don't start a debate by twisting the words of the other party. No matter how right you are. Otherwise you will be seen as a pariah.

▲

varispeed 4 days ago | parent [-]

But this isn't about catching criminals.

▲

amelius 4 days ago | parent [-]

For _you_ it isn't.

If you want to be heard in a heated debate, choose your words wisely.

▲

varispeed 3 days ago | parent [-]

That’s a common derail - shifting from the substance to “watch your wording.” It’s a form of concern-trolling: pretending the problem is rhetoric while sidestepping the actual flaw.

The numbers don’t change based on phrasing. Mass scanning at EU scale inevitably flags orders of magnitude more innocents than offenders. Saying “this isn’t about catching criminals” isn’t twisting words, it’s highlighting that the stated goal is statistically self-defeating.

The “catching criminals” line is deliberate gaslighting. It’s crafted to reassure people who don’t understand how these systems work, while the real function is mass surveillance of everyone.

▲

amelius 3 days ago | parent [-]

> That’s a common derail - shifting from the substance to “watch your wording.”

You're acting like I'm trying to derail the argument. That is not the case.

You are putting a lot of assumptions in your wording. This will not help you.

▲

varispeed 3 days ago | parent [-]

Classic gaslight: accuse me of twisting and ‘acting’ while you’re the one twisting. The wording isn’t the issue - the substance is. And you’ve avoided it entirely.

	▲	amelius 3 days ago \| parent [-]
		That's because literally everybody here agrees with the substance. There is no discussion here other than how to best bring the point across to those who do not agree.