zlacker

I think people are misinterpreting your comment? Or I am.

What I think you are saying is:

The police are arguing both sides (in typical fashion). On one side, the police say that GrapheneOS is for criminals because of its privacy, etc. However the police are also trying to convince people that GrapheneOS is not private or secure, in an attempt to sway people from using it.

>>qualee+(OP)
Yes, the police are arguing both sides, according to what I have read[1], and that they are not doing it in English but in other languages, e.g. Swedish. I am not sure why I am getting down-voted though.

[1] https://grapheneos.social/@GrapheneOS/114784488424006190 and so forth.

>>johnis+m7
>I am not sure why I am getting down-voted though.

My guess is the ambiguous use of "they", interpreting "they" as GrapheneOS instead of the police.

That makes it seem like you are criticizing GrapheneOS rather than the police.

>>qualee+k8
I edited my comment. I thought it was obvious because it was the police claiming the former, and connected the two with an "AND". I was not criticizing GrapheneOS. Thanks!

>>johnis+T8
It was obvious, people just have terrible reading comprehension, and they also don't read to the end of a comment if something near the beginning triggers them.

>>antonv+JB
I came to the same conclusion based on some of the comments addressed to me. It is like they did not even bother reading the comment to which I replied, or the last 2 comments.