no clue if OP is involved with them or to what level if so. I just know OP commented on a 10 month old comment I made making the same critiques I am making here but seeming to defend USU and that behavior makes it seem like someone affiliated who is acting as their agent but that could be voluntary. It was weird to see a reply to something I said almost a year ago defending a micro cult, it definitely reads as "I'm a member of the micro cult" behavior to go looking for critique against them to attack

Edit:

OP also publicly said they share their account.

Sorry I missed this when I read your comment, yeah that reads even more like they are operating in sync with USU since that is how they operate with shared social accounts but really no way to know

[–] Maeve@lemmygrad.ml 0 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

Noted. Thanks.

Edit: although I'm still not convinced, but will proceed with caution.

[–] amemorablename@lemmygrad.ml 0 points 2 weeks ago

Sorry I missed this when I read your comment, yeah that reads even more like they are operating in sync with USU since that is how they operate with shared social accounts but really no way to know

I've been skeptical of how they've posted about PSL in the past (a fair amount of alluding to receipts and tenuous connections implied, then not tending to show up with them in an organized manner that others can work through), but tried to keep an open mind on it in good faith.

The implication here seems like it needs addressing by them. It is possible for someone with good intentions to be acting with poor judgment and that can still be a problem. In my view, criticizing orgs is of course something we should be able to do, but we should strive to do it in a way that is specific and detailed on principled ideological grounds, as opposed to scattershot allusions to poor organizing/behavior or tenuous connections to ideological wrongness, else it can come across as dishonest, wrecker behavior.