Let’s take a look if a commenter on r/Napoleon on Reddit is operating in good faith? Does this person’s story make sense?

I posted a funny video with the title below. The video is here.


This commenter says he didn’t read what I posted. (It was a short video). He can’t spell Napoleon. Despite this, he expects me to supply personal information to him. Though this person can’t even spell Napoleon, he is implying that there is no indoctrination about Napoleon.

The entire premise of my project is that Napoleon was murdered and his name was trashed by his murderers and this project is what I’m doing about it.

How could this person possibly put himself in a position to judge my level of indoctrination regarding Napoleon if he can’t spell Napoleon’s name or even bother to click on the post to realize it’s a video?

To answer his question, it doesn’t matter where I lived. I was indoctrinated mostly by tv and movies. When I was in Europe, i found that they had been indoctrinated even harder against Napoleon than I had been. Comparisons to Hitler (of course!) would abound. The word “dictator” was also thrown around quite a bit. It was in France that I decided to never fall for the trap of another “debate” about Napoleon.

This project is what I think and feel about Napoleon - take it or leave it.

Let’s continue looking, shall we?


This commenter has a newish account with a random impersonal sounding name according to this data. A lot of shill accounts tend to look that way.


This person’s one and only post is telling r/tea something nonsensical about tea. Some might call that karma farming. Maybe this person is trying to get clicks so their shill account won’t look quite so fake and new. Maybe they just have a need to make posts about tea. The answer to his question is yes he can like tea. Like it or don’t like it. Drink it or don’t drink it. The commenter’s story again makes no sense.


This person leaves numerous comments though. Based on their comments they are . . . no one I would ever interact with voluntarily. I’m doing this to show exactly how I determine if someone is operating in good faith or not. This may be a shill or just a disagreeable - either way - I’d rather not engage this type.

I will say that shills usually have an above average ability to write as their job really is in communications. Still their stories will always make no sense. I have come across some though who have an astonishing lack of writing ability and knowledge though so I know it’s probably possible for poor communicators to be shills. Hard to say for sure obviously. If I had to guess about this commenter, I’d say this is probably a shill but I’m really not sure.

I just don’t see any honest reason to give me or this project a hard time. It’s not being forced on anyone. If someone doesn’t like it, they should stay away.

I hope we can all agree that I have the right to peaceably attempt to vindicate the name of someone that I sincerely view as a heroic martyr.