(Similarly, "anyone condemning this comment or defending @rulesObeyer must just be @rulesObeyer in disguise, no matter the evidence to the contrary.")
Talking to a real human this way is not reasonable. Nor is it an argument.
>how much are you compensated per tweet like this
This is like the question "Have you stopped beating your wife?" When the assumption of malintent/guilt is there from the start, you're setting yourself up for a very unreasonable conversation.
>so they’re paying you to tweet that you like your job, which is tweeting about liking your job...lol yes!! you are paid to say that you like your job. it’s your job!
This is very likely false, and she is actively ignoring people who are saying it is false.
I have to agree with GP. While I found the ambassador tweets to be, well, weird, her tweets are the ones that stood out to me as very unreasonable. She does not seem at all interested in anything that contradicts her world view.
Which is not the allegation being made.
The part about saying they like their job is true. The guidelines for them is everything has to be positive.
>This is very likely false, and she is actively ignoring people who are saying it is false.
She's technically correct in the same way that it's technically correct to say that if I take a restroom break while on the clock that I'm getting paid to use the restroom.
If, during the course of doing my job, someone asks me if I like doing my job and I say, "yes", it would technically be correct to say that I was paid for saying that I like my job (since I'm being paid for doing all the things that I do while on the clock it's also technically correct to say that I was paid for tying my shoes or talking to a coworker about some movie if I did those things during a shift). That does not necessarily mean that one of my job duties is telling people how much I like my job.
Even if @rulesObeyer is also a paid shill, all they're doing is drawing attention to the obvious.
Yes, if the situation was different, than my judgement of it would be different. This is not a novel observation.
The context matters - you cannot decouple[0] this interaction from the economic and social structures it arose from.
[0] https://everythingstudies.com/2018/05/25/decoupling-revisite...
Does she have an agenda? Yes clearly. She isn't hiding it. She has a long history of laying it right out in the open.
Does Amazon have an agenda too? Yes and they are ham-handedly trying to pretend they don't.
And yes, the Amazon people talk like politicians. There are actually many people that think politician-talking inspires confidence.
I don’t actually believe that’s what’s happening but it’d be tough to prove one way or the other, if you’re dealing with a sufficiently motivated actor. One of many good reasons not to take social media seriously.
Yes, all of that "evidence" from paid "Amazon FC ambassadors".