After deleting the original statement, we promptly asked about submitting the post for approval through the proper channels so that it could be reposted. At this point, ODP staff informed us that a meeting with Acton was on the table. After thorough discussion, caucus leadership determined this offer aligned with our goal to bring our message directly to her.
They got tricked into attending a meeting without Acton. And some of them weren’t allowed into the meeting.
I do not have a facebook account to see the group page for myself. According to the article, the criticism was not reposted. It was banned there, as reflected by the headline.
No. Remember? They tried that:
They got tricked into attending a meeting without Acton. And some of them weren’t allowed into the meeting.
You keep using this quote – have you actually read it?
They asked about submitting the post for approval and they were offered a meeting with Acton.
That’s what it says.
You’re making the positive claim that they were told they cannot resubmit the post for approval. That quote does not demonstrate that to be the case.
Do you understand that yet? Or do we have to loop around again?
…which was ignored. Instead:
…which turned out to be a lie.
Where do you get the idea that they were allowed to resubmit the post?
It was banned.
Does not appear in the quote. If you have another source for that claim, it’s weird that you haven’t shared it by now.
Fair, I’ll rephrase: you cannot demonstrate that they were not allowed to resubmit the post.
I do not have a facebook account to see the group page for myself. According to the article, the criticism was not reposted. It was banned there, as reflected by the headline.
So you don’t know.
Like I’ve said on every loop.
I know what the article and the headline say. Your initial criticism is still invalid.
Can you find a source that says they were allowed to resubmit the post?
Congratulations?
It’s not.
Why would I do that when it’s not my claim? The onus is on you to show that they were disallowed.
If you can disprove the contents of the article you chose to criticize, please do.