How do you think we should deal with this? I’ve been posting MSN links, since they’re readable without a paywall but the people still get paid, which sounds like a good compromise. I added the text indicating the original source since someone said something about it yesterday.
I’m happy with posting the MSN links along with a link to the real article, if you want, but I’m also open to any way you want me to do it.
.Thanks for asking, I wasn’t trying to be shitty about it. I think we should post the original since most people on Lemmy are familiar with archive.is if they really want to read it. It has the bonus of making it easier if things are being double posted as well since you’re great at posting. I’ve had to catch myself double posting a few times, lol.
Sounds good to me. I’ll start to just post the original source at all times.
A good compromise might be to list the MSN link in the comments (*if you want to). That way, we won’t double post and as you said, they get paid.
Something changed in how MSN works for me, just now. It used to give me the option to get the app, or click a less obtrusive button and expand the rest of the text. Now I can only get the app.
I don’t want to be pointing people to MSN if it’s going to limit the text to try to get them to install an app. Is that something it does after you’ve read a certain number of articles by just expanding the text? Or do you even know?
I have no idea. Do whatever you feel comfortable doing. As I said, people are pretty savvy if they really want to read an article from the main source. I think it’s cool that you still want them to be paid though. All in your court.
I think I’ll just post original sources and, as you pointed out, people can figure it out.
That sounds even better. Everyone wins.
In New Berlin, Wisconsin, a woman named Kim Teschan, 64, told a canvasser accompanied by a Post reporter that she was fired up to vote after learning about how “corrupt” the 2020 election was from videos on Facebook.
~sigh
A Postal Service spokesperson confirmed to The Post that the man in the video is an employee who had appropriately delivered the ballots. When The Post told Matlack that the man was a verified employee carrying a post office basket, Matlack responded, “Anybody can obtain those baskets.” Later, he added, “So working for the post office means you’re incapable of committing any sort of election fraud?”
And that’s a strawman. The argument was not that no postal service workers are capable of committing fraud, but that this particular postal service worker was simply delivering the mail, which happens to include mail-in ballots.
When The Post told Matlack that the man was a verified employee carrying a post office basket, Matlack responded, “Anybody can obtain those baskets.” Later, he added, “So working for the post office means you’re incapable of committing any sort of election fraud?"
This person has a bright future as a Lemmy commenter.
