You seem to be confusing me with someone else, or your posting style attributes things to people and you're connecting the wrong people.

Nope, you're the listed submitter of this link to CNBC, see the part that says "by bsenftner 10 months ago?": https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28480214

Here's your original comment: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32076299

It says "let them all go bankrupt," but then you say you read news sites that you find on reddit and Twitter regularly. Wouldn't that be harder if they all went bankrupt?

Oh, you got me. 10 months ago I submitted a news link. Do you have an issue with secondary thinking? When I say "let them all go bankrupt" I and stating I'd like to see market forces stress them to stop their poor reporting practices or go bankrupt." does this need to be explained explicitly to you?

Agreed, "I've never submitted any CNBC anything anywhere" is not true, and you don't want to "let them all go bankrupt."

So why do you visit aggregators to find links to and read these news articles, when their reporting practices are so poor? I asked you for an alternative to them.

You are a market force, your engagement with CNBC and other mainstream media via reddit and Twitter encourages whatever reporting practices they use.

> So why do you visit aggregators to find links to and read these news articles, when their reporting practices are so poor?

I read the comments first, assess if the article is worth reading. And why read them at all? There is nothing else to learn what is happening outside my sphere without disrupting my life to find out.

So that's not an alternative. You're reading news from the places you claimed "abused that trust to a criminal, near civil war!"