{
  "block": 40769183,
  "op": [
    "comment",
    {
      "author": "steemitboard",
      "body": "Congratulations @armchair! You received a personal award!\n\n<table><tr><td>https://steemitimages.com/70x70/http://steemitboard.com/@armchair/birthday3.png</td><td>Happy Birthday! - You are on the Steem blockchain for 3 years!</td></tr></table>\n\n<sub>_You can view [your badges on your Steem Board](https://steemitboard.com/@armchair) and compare to others on the [Steem Ranking](https://steemitboard.com/ranking/index.php?name=armchair)_</sub>\n\n\n###### [Vote for @Steemitboard as a witness](https://v2.steemconnect.com/sign/account-witness-vote?witness=steemitboard&approve=1) to get one more award and increased upvotes!",
      "json_metadata": "{\"image\":[\"https://steemitboard.com/img/notify.png\"]}",
      "parent_author": "armchair",
      "parent_permlink": "for-which-there-is-not-yet",
      "permlink": "steemitboard-notify-armchair-20200213t004715000z",
      "title": ""
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2020-02-13T00:47:15",
  "trx_id": "cfdd3a277ff46dcfa093326bf65b01c6283ae5dd",
  "trx_in_block": 1,
  "virtual_op": 0
}

{
  "block": 30296912,
  "op": [
    "comment",
    {
      "author": "steemitboard",
      "body": "Congratulations @armchair! You received a personal award!\n\n<table><tr><td>https://steemitimages.com/70x70/http://steemitboard.com/@armchair/birthday2.png</td><td>Happy Birthday! - You are on the Steem blockchain for 2 years!</td></tr></table>\n\n<sub>_[Click here to view your Board](https://steemitboard.com/@armchair)_</sub>\n\n\n> Support [SteemitBoard's project](https://steemit.com/@steemitboard)! **[Vote for its witness](https://v2.steemconnect.com/sign/account-witness-vote?witness=steemitboard&approve=1)** and **get one more award**!",
      "json_metadata": "{\"image\":[\"https://steemitboard.com/img/notify.png\"]}",
      "parent_author": "armchair",
      "parent_permlink": "for-which-there-is-not-yet",
      "permlink": "steemitboard-notify-armchair-20190213t002506000z",
      "title": ""
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2019-02-13T00:25:06",
  "trx_id": "64a424d92ec8e66740e6cd036ce94ae434c79ca4",
  "trx_in_block": 12,
  "virtual_op": 0
}

{
  "block": 15480740,
  "op": [
    "author_reward",
    {
      "author": "armchair",
      "permlink": "for-which-there-is-not-yet",
      "sbd_payout": "0.032 SBD",
      "steem_payout": "0.000 STEEM",
      "vesting_payout": "59.754505 VESTS"
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2017-09-15T06:26:24",
  "trx_id": "0000000000000000000000000000000000000000",
  "trx_in_block": 4294967295,
  "virtual_op": 2
}

{
  "block": 15279342,
  "op": [
    "comment",
    {
      "author": "armchair",
      "body": "Word.",
      "json_metadata": "{\"tags\":[\"philosophy\"],\"app\":\"steemit/0.1\"}",
      "parent_author": "k-rapper",
      "parent_permlink": "re-armchair-for-which-there-is-not-yet-20170908t062700956z",
      "permlink": "re-k-rapper-re-armchair-for-which-there-is-not-yet-20170908t063113211z",
      "title": ""
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2017-09-08T06:31:12",
  "trx_id": "cfbb47e959f8baf007a2488f6441ce9697c3e590",
  "trx_in_block": 16,
  "virtual_op": 0
}

{
  "block": 15279258,
  "op": [
    "comment",
    {
      "author": "k-rapper",
      "body": "Hi! I am a human. I just upvoted you! I did not bother to find similar content that I might be interested in because I'm human and I can't search a database in seconds but I can fart and burp",
      "json_metadata": "{\"tags\":[\"philosophy\"],\"app\":\"steemit/0.1\"}",
      "parent_author": "armchair",
      "parent_permlink": "for-which-there-is-not-yet",
      "permlink": "re-armchair-for-which-there-is-not-yet-20170908t062700956z",
      "title": ""
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2017-09-08T06:27:00",
  "trx_id": "d9f2892c15853c4c9cc2a42f33afb2803fc59317",
  "trx_in_block": 11,
  "virtual_op": 0
}

{
  "block": 15279255,
  "op": [
    "vote",
    {
      "author": "armchair",
      "permlink": "for-which-there-is-not-yet",
      "voter": "k-rapper",
      "weight": 10000
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2017-09-08T06:26:51",
  "trx_id": "17465fdc3c2a4604bb24c0751e9cdea9178eac45",
  "trx_in_block": 13,
  "virtual_op": 0
}

{
  "block": 15279246,
  "op": [
    "comment",
    {
      "author": "armchair",
      "body": ">Vietnam and hypnotic Americanism, like divorce, abortion, and gender, may have been the opening battle cries of our new engagement with morality as a strand of religion, but they were as nothing compared to the questions that lie ahead. In particular, as science, medicine, theology, and philosophy probe ever more skillfully into the nature of human mentation and subjective and/or spiritual structure, including into the evolution of human consciousness, this culture will be faced with issues of human responsibility and training and social management, even of human manipulation, for which no prior intellectual guidelines exist and for which there is not yet a fully realized shared imagination.\n>\n>Most Americans realize that this tsunami is visible on the horizon, whether we think about it every day with intention or not; and most of us have held the questions attendant to it consciously, if *sotto voce*, in our heads for at least two decades. We have acknowledged their impending arrival enough even to begin some of the initial work that will be required for our survival as a civilization.\n\n**Phyllis A. Tickle, *Greed : the seven deadly sins* (2004)**\n\nRead this today and it reminded me of this place for some reason.",
      "json_metadata": "{\"tags\":[\"philosophy\",\"life\",\"blog\"],\"app\":\"steemit/0.1\",\"format\":\"markdown\"}",
      "parent_author": "",
      "parent_permlink": "philosophy",
      "permlink": "for-which-there-is-not-yet",
      "title": "For Which There Is Not Yet"
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2017-09-08T06:26:24",
  "trx_id": "5a53442a9791b74ef75c9d3eea827cee08af20ed",
  "trx_in_block": 12,
  "virtual_op": 0
}

{
  "block": 9656487,
  "op": [
    "vote",
    {
      "author": "armchair",
      "permlink": "torn",
      "voter": "nik69",
      "weight": 10000
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2017-02-24T19:06:51",
  "trx_id": "e45b34271384f713db480a19c22455154dc87b3a",
  "trx_in_block": 6,
  "virtual_op": 0
}

{
  "block": 9434399,
  "op": [
    "vote",
    {
      "author": "screenname",
      "permlink": "the-daily-tribune-most-undervalued-posts-of-feb-16---part-ii",
      "voter": "armchair",
      "weight": 10000
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2017-02-17T01:53:42",
  "trx_id": "5db51a9b2e039d0c4d2cb9dee79a85e160a94ec9",
  "trx_in_block": 0,
  "virtual_op": 0
}

{
  "block": 9417826,
  "op": [
    "vote",
    {
      "author": "armchair",
      "permlink": "re-lukestokes-problem-alternative-facts-or-poor-epistemology-20170216t060740374z",
      "voter": "the-ego-is-you",
      "weight": 10000
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2017-02-16T12:05:03",
  "trx_id": "e14a639e8703a73252380862320d398a978300d8",
  "trx_in_block": 1,
  "virtual_op": 0
}

{
  "block": 9414858,
  "op": [
    "vote",
    {
      "author": "armchair",
      "permlink": "epistemological-af",
      "voter": "yadamaniart",
      "weight": 100
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2017-02-16T09:36:39",
  "trx_id": "31915793804adbe2a6d8f3b20403d6d721e4d678",
  "trx_in_block": 1,
  "virtual_op": 0
}

{
  "block": 9414827,
  "op": [
    "vote",
    {
      "author": "armchair",
      "permlink": "epistemological-af",
      "voter": "darthnava",
      "weight": 100
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2017-02-16T09:35:06",
  "trx_id": "482f57b65deadbe408596d2f2254b31dfd6a26ae",
  "trx_in_block": 1,
  "virtual_op": 0
}

{
  "block": 9414824,
  "op": [
    "vote",
    {
      "author": "armchair",
      "permlink": "epistemological-af",
      "voter": "forrestwillie",
      "weight": 100
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2017-02-16T09:34:57",
  "trx_id": "5107554ea7c26e74dc4d0d0956238611fac2c39d",
  "trx_in_block": 0,
  "virtual_op": 0
}

{
  "block": 9414815,
  "op": [
    "vote",
    {
      "author": "armchair",
      "permlink": "epistemological-af",
      "voter": "whatageek",
      "weight": 100
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2017-02-16T09:34:30",
  "trx_id": "91ca51f2b8a07a6b0b329ef976a7e8f3cd5c78b8",
  "trx_in_block": 1,
  "virtual_op": 0
}

{
  "block": 9414771,
  "op": [
    "vote",
    {
      "author": "armchair",
      "permlink": "epistemological-af",
      "voter": "pairmike",
      "weight": 100
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2017-02-16T09:32:18",
  "trx_id": "e000a0cd441bc15f0958ea51ed7282f7d24f2eb3",
  "trx_in_block": 4,
  "virtual_op": 0
}

{
  "block": 9414767,
  "op": [
    "vote",
    {
      "author": "armchair",
      "permlink": "epistemological-af",
      "voter": "stray",
      "weight": 100
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2017-02-16T09:32:06",
  "trx_id": "9b5a590befdd891f65e18bf75220b748f91bfb3f",
  "trx_in_block": 1,
  "virtual_op": 0
}

{
  "block": 9414723,
  "op": [
    "vote",
    {
      "author": "armchair",
      "permlink": "epistemological-af",
      "voter": "steemitguide",
      "weight": 100
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2017-02-16T09:29:54",
  "trx_id": "76262819c1a2990681c0e0171860e6da1ca931d6",
  "trx_in_block": 4,
  "virtual_op": 0
}

{
  "block": 9414711,
  "op": [
    "vote",
    {
      "author": "armchair",
      "permlink": "epistemological-af",
      "voter": "toxichan",
      "weight": 100
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2017-02-16T09:29:18",
  "trx_id": "355595bf4392ebfa6b94ead29d8e786784724ce1",
  "trx_in_block": 0,
  "virtual_op": 0
}

{
  "block": 9414708,
  "op": [
    "vote",
    {
      "author": "armchair",
      "permlink": "epistemological-af",
      "voter": "revostrike",
      "weight": 100
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2017-02-16T09:29:09",
  "trx_id": "1248f1296d86c04da555c81244e7b58fcd4e33ad",
  "trx_in_block": 1,
  "virtual_op": 0
}

{
  "block": 9414699,
  "op": [
    "vote",
    {
      "author": "armchair",
      "permlink": "epistemological-af",
      "voter": "giantbear",
      "weight": 100
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2017-02-16T09:28:42",
  "trx_id": "cc673b23fab54618ad12e99273589ad0194529d0",
  "trx_in_block": 1,
  "virtual_op": 0
}

{
  "block": 9414693,
  "op": [
    "vote",
    {
      "author": "armchair",
      "permlink": "epistemological-af",
      "voter": "driptorchpress",
      "weight": 100
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2017-02-16T09:28:24",
  "trx_id": "ae07cbe074bd64b902391665390b0d5bab17528f",
  "trx_in_block": 1,
  "virtual_op": 0
}

{
  "block": 9414686,
  "op": [
    "vote",
    {
      "author": "armchair",
      "permlink": "epistemological-af",
      "voter": "jacobts",
      "weight": 100
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2017-02-16T09:28:03",
  "trx_id": "cb3581ce0445b81bac6e3598e3c7999ab99df24e",
  "trx_in_block": 2,
  "virtual_op": 0
}

{
  "block": 9414653,
  "op": [
    "vote",
    {
      "author": "armchair",
      "permlink": "epistemological-af",
      "voter": "konelectric",
      "weight": 100
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2017-02-16T09:26:24",
  "trx_id": "7f0b17228d0c7f21d018d159c6d5a34141c81cbf",
  "trx_in_block": 0,
  "virtual_op": 0
}

{
  "block": 9414609,
  "op": [
    "vote",
    {
      "author": "armchair",
      "permlink": "epistemological-af",
      "voter": "daisyd",
      "weight": 100
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2017-02-16T09:24:12",
  "trx_id": "e9af31c65d2d4b7970e85badaddda04d94f2b234",
  "trx_in_block": 1,
  "virtual_op": 0
}

{
  "block": 9414569,
  "op": [
    "vote",
    {
      "author": "armchair",
      "permlink": "epistemological-af",
      "voter": "barrydutton",
      "weight": 100
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2017-02-16T09:22:12",
  "trx_id": "6dc0903370e2e024f77786e0590edc7481342336",
  "trx_in_block": 4,
  "virtual_op": 0
}

{
  "block": 9414553,
  "op": [
    "vote",
    {
      "author": "armchair",
      "permlink": "epistemological-af",
      "voter": "steemspeak",
      "weight": 100
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2017-02-16T09:21:24",
  "trx_id": "c3e23138b013cae67ea40f34a38623f0fb57902a",
  "trx_in_block": 3,
  "virtual_op": 0
}

{
  "block": 9414529,
  "op": [
    "vote",
    {
      "author": "armchair",
      "permlink": "epistemological-af",
      "voter": "gamer00",
      "weight": 100
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2017-02-16T09:20:12",
  "trx_id": "b2be3943647a8362b0e44295e049ddebf4a237c7",
  "trx_in_block": 4,
  "virtual_op": 0
}

{
  "block": 9414523,
  "op": [
    "vote",
    {
      "author": "armchair",
      "permlink": "epistemological-af",
      "voter": "andrei",
      "weight": 100
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2017-02-16T09:19:54",
  "trx_id": "f6c87cb981ddb05c368af44919abf312fe525eb6",
  "trx_in_block": 3,
  "virtual_op": 0
}

{
  "block": 9414516,
  "op": [
    "vote",
    {
      "author": "armchair",
      "permlink": "epistemological-af",
      "voter": "karenmckersie",
      "weight": 100
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2017-02-16T09:19:33",
  "trx_id": "673e2c08c27ade6aadbda3f24767840901005fea",
  "trx_in_block": 2,
  "virtual_op": 0
}

{
  "block": 9414415,
  "op": [
    "vote",
    {
      "author": "armchair",
      "permlink": "epistemological-af",
      "voter": "meysam",
      "weight": 100
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2017-02-16T09:14:27",
  "trx_id": "5a85da049be6ffff53669289c61af5af9edf7412",
  "trx_in_block": 2,
  "virtual_op": 0
}

{
  "block": 9414415,
  "op": [
    "vote",
    {
      "author": "armchair",
      "permlink": "epistemological-af",
      "voter": "proctologic",
      "weight": 100
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2017-02-16T09:14:27",
  "trx_id": "569dfccd471ba1ece40f20151a06d34b3ea6e86d",
  "trx_in_block": 1,
  "virtual_op": 0
}

{
  "block": 9414412,
  "op": [
    "vote",
    {
      "author": "armchair",
      "permlink": "epistemological-af",
      "voter": "denmarkguy",
      "weight": 100
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2017-02-16T09:14:18",
  "trx_id": "061dfae4c981a1d8fe259c69d7ae8f8fd8b3540a",
  "trx_in_block": 2,
  "virtual_op": 0
}

{
  "block": 9414408,
  "op": [
    "vote",
    {
      "author": "armchair",
      "permlink": "epistemological-af",
      "voter": "thedeplorable1",
      "weight": 100
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2017-02-16T09:14:06",
  "trx_id": "6cc8352ee34bd8e05688c0b4114040b5e18dac45",
  "trx_in_block": 1,
  "virtual_op": 0
}

{
  "block": 9414396,
  "op": [
    "vote",
    {
      "author": "armchair",
      "permlink": "epistemological-af",
      "voter": "richardcrill",
      "weight": 100
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2017-02-16T09:13:30",
  "trx_id": "3f28d4d77ceb80ea1ea16f371077da7d3052e258",
  "trx_in_block": 1,
  "virtual_op": 0
}

{
  "block": 9414363,
  "op": [
    "vote",
    {
      "author": "armchair",
      "permlink": "epistemological-af",
      "voter": "cryptos",
      "weight": 6000
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2017-02-16T09:11:51",
  "trx_id": "a61bb1f9300c5a71f57f7973a09127aa35c0b458",
  "trx_in_block": 0,
  "virtual_op": 0
}

{
  "block": 9414360,
  "op": [
    "vote",
    {
      "author": "armchair",
      "permlink": "epistemological-af",
      "voter": "patelincho",
      "weight": 100
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2017-02-16T09:11:42",
  "trx_id": "19d4ee958b6c9d265693c7fe65b90b06dc4f925d",
  "trx_in_block": 4,
  "virtual_op": 0
}

{
  "block": 9414330,
  "op": [
    "vote",
    {
      "author": "armchair",
      "permlink": "epistemological-af",
      "voter": "shadowspub",
      "weight": 100
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2017-02-16T09:10:12",
  "trx_id": "8c81ad01b686062cf87e3c3d5207acaddc4960dd",
  "trx_in_block": 0,
  "virtual_op": 0
}

{
  "block": 9414321,
  "op": [
    "vote",
    {
      "author": "armchair",
      "permlink": "epistemological-af",
      "voter": "elyaque",
      "weight": 100
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2017-02-16T09:09:45",
  "trx_id": "12281856999fd06dd6dd589eab591121166be444",
  "trx_in_block": 2,
  "virtual_op": 0
}

{
  "block": 9414308,
  "op": [
    "vote",
    {
      "author": "armchair",
      "permlink": "epistemological-af",
      "voter": "timelapse",
      "weight": 100
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2017-02-16T09:09:06",
  "trx_id": "2964b1b24487386c3e3c5c85acd2433fbdc45bac",
  "trx_in_block": 3,
  "virtual_op": 0
}

{
  "block": 9414307,
  "op": [
    "vote",
    {
      "author": "armchair",
      "permlink": "epistemological-af",
      "voter": "tannukas6",
      "weight": 100
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2017-02-16T09:09:03",
  "trx_id": "15876bbf73ac89969647147591c6d796a1ac93a7",
  "trx_in_block": 0,
  "virtual_op": 0
}

{
  "block": 9414306,
  "op": [
    "vote",
    {
      "author": "armchair",
      "permlink": "epistemological-af",
      "voter": "ubg",
      "weight": 100
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2017-02-16T09:09:00",
  "trx_id": "f1c7c10f2cc399c5502191f413354ce2bd40bf34",
  "trx_in_block": 1,
  "virtual_op": 0
}

{
  "block": 9414182,
  "op": [
    "vote",
    {
      "author": "armchair",
      "permlink": "epistemological-af",
      "voter": "fyrst-witness",
      "weight": 100
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2017-02-16T09:02:48",
  "trx_id": "dcbdd65a7c7dc39a8103da19741ba1b8c12df515",
  "trx_in_block": 1,
  "virtual_op": 0
}

{
  "block": 9414164,
  "op": [
    "vote",
    {
      "author": "armchair",
      "permlink": "epistemological-af",
      "voter": "fyrstikken",
      "weight": 100
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2017-02-16T09:01:54",
  "trx_id": "657252e9d7e344c9eb6a38132e8fbd509b35db17",
  "trx_in_block": 1,
  "virtual_op": 0
}

{
  "block": 9414019,
  "op": [
    "vote",
    {
      "author": "armchair",
      "permlink": "epistemological-af",
      "voter": "sqube",
      "weight": 100
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2017-02-16T08:54:36",
  "trx_id": "34fb8138d505b057f47b89053052c5db5b2d962a",
  "trx_in_block": 0,
  "virtual_op": 0
}

{
  "block": 9413993,
  "op": [
    "vote",
    {
      "author": "armchair",
      "permlink": "epistemological-af",
      "voter": "grey580",
      "weight": 100
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2017-02-16T08:53:18",
  "trx_id": "48911fcd33026e86c20f23ff10c13ef978f7104b",
  "trx_in_block": 2,
  "virtual_op": 0
}

{
  "block": 9413898,
  "op": [
    "vote",
    {
      "author": "armchair",
      "permlink": "epistemological-af",
      "voter": "thebatchman1",
      "weight": 300
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2017-02-16T08:48:33",
  "trx_id": "9283d04e64b1a079e69cf6814e4440adf37942b2",
  "trx_in_block": 3,
  "virtual_op": 0
}

{
  "block": 9413898,
  "op": [
    "vote",
    {
      "author": "armchair",
      "permlink": "torn",
      "voter": "armchair",
      "weight": 10000
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2017-02-16T08:48:33",
  "trx_id": "8702998b253029e72ab8cebe6ae54b279563c5de",
  "trx_in_block": 2,
  "virtual_op": 0
}

{
  "block": 9413897,
  "op": [
    "vote",
    {
      "author": "armchair",
      "permlink": "epistemological-af",
      "voter": "thebatchman",
      "weight": 300
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2017-02-16T08:48:30",
  "trx_id": "6a19645a259e728e8b4d3561223c80b7fd199b57",
  "trx_in_block": 1,
  "virtual_op": 0
}

{
  "block": 9413877,
  "op": [
    "vote",
    {
      "author": "armchair",
      "permlink": "epistemological-af",
      "voter": "seablue",
      "weight": 100
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2017-02-16T08:47:30",
  "trx_id": "2d26fd88b53428ff71e62035636a9cc37d6c3811",
  "trx_in_block": 1,
  "virtual_op": 0
}

{
  "block": 9413814,
  "op": [
    "comment",
    {
      "author": "armchair",
      "body": "@@ -1421,23 +1421,18 @@\n /Spicer \n-because\n+as\n  most of\n",
      "json_metadata": "{\"tags\":[\"philsophy\",\"philosophy\",\"politics\",\"fakenews\"],\"users\":[\"lukestokes\",\"armchair\"],\"links\":[\"http://www.dictionary.com/browse/armchair\",\"https://steemit.com/philosophy/@lukestokes/problem-alternative-facts-or-poor-epistemology\",\"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alternative_facts\",\"https://steemit.com/welcome\",\"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FKQD_cKEICk\",\"https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/831830548565852160\",\"https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/upshot/presidential-polls-forecast.html\",\"https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/796222841612042240?lang=en\",\"http://money.cnn.com/2016/10/31/media/donna-brazile-cnn-resignation/\",\"http://www.npr.org/2016/12/14/505547295/fake-news-expert-on-how-false-stories-spread-and-why-people-believe-them\"],\"app\":\"steemit/0.1\",\"format\":\"markdown\"}",
      "parent_author": "",
      "parent_permlink": "philsophy",
      "permlink": "epistemological-af",
      "title": "Epistemological AF."
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2017-02-16T08:44:21",
  "trx_id": "da4ab6986d87478cde0be0d2cf0852f3a882c009",
  "trx_in_block": 6,
  "virtual_op": 0
}

{
  "block": 9413785,
  "op": [
    "vote",
    {
      "author": "armchair",
      "permlink": "epistemological-af",
      "voter": "love-you",
      "weight": 10000
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2017-02-16T08:42:54",
  "trx_id": "4739fb83688f25f181803633ab1a43a23e6aa418",
  "trx_in_block": 0,
  "virtual_op": 0
}

{
  "block": 9413766,
  "op": [
    "comment",
    {
      "author": "armchair",
      "body": "(Disclaimer: my argument is largely comprised of personal anecdote and incomplete reasoning. See [username](http://www.dictionary.com/browse/armchair).) \n\nDespite all the reasonable backlash to the Spicer/Conway comments, I remain wary of how the term *alternative facts* is being subsumed into other narratives, especially those of mainstream media outlets surrounding the claimed prevalence of *fake news*. The extent to which it implies that dominant news outlets have some kind of corner on what is factual via a more refined, reliable, or authoritative epistemology is as disconcerting as the very comments made by Trump's team.\n\n(Like @lukestokes raised in a recent post, I agree that [*the mechanisms many use for justified belief are not as sound as they could be*](https://steemit.com/philosophy/@lukestokes/problem-alternative-facts-or-poor-epistemology). However, I do believe a plurality of well-reasoned epistemologies is possible; I don't believe in a singularity of reason or logic any more than I believe that people share perfectly identical experiences. This of course doesn't mean that people with differing epistemologies have nothing to say to each other; it's just a matter of doing the awkward and difficult work of finding the things we agree to be facts.)\n\n[Under these specific circumstances](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alternative_facts), it's easy to write-off the \"epistemology\" of Conway/Spicer because most of us are accustomed to and take for granted the falsifiability of numbers and the role photographs play in shaping what we consider to be real. (From [The Steemit Welcome Guide](https://steemit.com/welcome): \"a lot of users will take a picture of themselves holding up a piece of paper that says \"Steemit\" with the current date, so we know you are a **real** person.\"). And also because it's easy to dismiss the rationale of people accustomed to covering their asses in the face of resistance and ridicule, moreso when it's their job to do so on behalf of people of power.\n\nBut let's not forget that mainstream media consist of powerful people who too have been covering their asses recently. Despite his [initial](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FKQD_cKEICk) and [ongoing use](https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/831830548565852160) of the phrase, Donald J. Trump did not instigate the narrative of *fake news*. A concern for the persuasive power of *fake news* arose in the wake of an election that delegitimized many influential news outlets (i.e. [The New York Times](https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/upshot/presidential-polls-forecast.html)) and the Democratic Party, whose very strategy [included bolstering Trump in the press](https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/796222841612042240?lang=en) and [being in cahoots](http://money.cnn.com/2016/10/31/media/donna-brazile-cnn-resignation/) with those same, soon-to-be-shamed outlets.  I personally first heard the term during a [post-election discussion](http://www.npr.org/2016/12/14/505547295/fake-news-expert-on-how-false-stories-spread-and-why-people-believe-them) that strongly suggested, rather than outright claimed, that pro-Trump/anti-Clinton fake news sites swayed the election in Trump's favor. I find this explanation too convenient, as it rids both the media and politicians of any blame regarding their recent failures.\n\nThis is why I'm skeptical of the response to the Spicer/Conway comments, and even the labeling of such a term as *alternative facts* as \"Orwellian.\" I enthusiastically admit that uncanniness levels are skyrocketing with its resemblance to the rhetorical strategies present in *1984*, and I am totally glad that Orwell is cool again. But, frankly, if we find ourselves putting more trust in mainstream outlets and their proclaimed ability to siphon fact from fiction in reaction to something said by Trump or his team, we may be missing the point. \n\nThere is a reason Trump was able to quickly co-opt  the rhetoric of *fake news* to his own ends; it was already being used in a similar fashion by and to the advantage of his opponents: the Democratic party and mainstream media.  Both usages require us to put our trust in their epistemological reasoning rather than our own. Neither of these authorities, I ascertain, are advocating for us to truly think for ourselves, or for that matter, to be critical of them. \n\nLet us not pass on an opportunity to hold not only our politicians accountable, but the people who report on them as well. Granted, I probably don't need to make a case for exploring indepedent news outlets here, or for using online resources for sharpening our own epistemologies. This is Steemit, afterall!\n\n@armchair\n\n*Will edit for clarity.*\n\nEdit: Aw crap. *Philsophy*. Really? Damn. The blockchain is forever.",
      "json_metadata": "{\"tags\":[\"philosophy\",\"politics\",\"fakenews\",\"philsophy\"],\"users\":[\"lukestokes\",\"armchair\"],\"links\":[\"http://www.dictionary.com/browse/armchair\",\"https://steemit.com/philosophy/@lukestokes/problem-alternative-facts-or-poor-epistemology\",\"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alternative_facts\",\"https://steemit.com/welcome\",\"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FKQD_cKEICk\",\"https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/831830548565852160\",\"https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/upshot/presidential-polls-forecast.html\",\"https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/796222841612042240?lang=en\",\"http://money.cnn.com/2016/10/31/media/donna-brazile-cnn-resignation/\",\"http://www.npr.org/2016/12/14/505547295/fake-news-expert-on-how-false-stories-spread-and-why-people-believe-them\"],\"app\":\"steemit/0.1\",\"format\":\"markdown\"}",
      "parent_author": "",
      "parent_permlink": "philsophy",
      "permlink": "epistemological-af",
      "title": "Epistemological AF."
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2017-02-16T08:41:57",
  "trx_id": "5286f7a6037e04fca90d0cabfa7f9761a8a3b9ce",
  "trx_in_block": 4,
  "virtual_op": 0
}

{
  "block": 9413756,
  "op": [
    "comment",
    {
      "author": "armchair",
      "body": "@@ -4709,17 +4709,17 @@\n dit: Aw \n-C\n+c\n rap. *Ph\n",
      "json_metadata": "{\"tags\":[\"philosophy\",\"politics\",\"fakenews\",\"philsophy\"],\"users\":[\"lukestokes\",\"armchair\"],\"links\":[\"http://www.dictionary.com/browse/armchair\",\"https://steemit.com/philosophy/@lukestokes/problem-alternative-facts-or-poor-epistemology\",\"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alternative_facts\",\"https://steemit.com/welcome\",\"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FKQD_cKEICk\",\"https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/831830548565852160\",\"https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/upshot/presidential-polls-forecast.html\",\"https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/796222841612042240?lang=en\",\"http://money.cnn.com/2016/10/31/media/donna-brazile-cnn-resignation/\",\"http://www.npr.org/2016/12/14/505547295/fake-news-expert-on-how-false-stories-spread-and-why-people-believe-them\"],\"app\":\"steemit/0.1\",\"format\":\"markdown\"}",
      "parent_author": "",
      "parent_permlink": "philsophy",
      "permlink": "epistemological-af",
      "title": "Epistemological AF."
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2017-02-16T08:41:27",
  "trx_id": "3ecb049b1130b7519bf240382f53e2440b2f7664",
  "trx_in_block": 5,
  "virtual_op": 0
}

{
  "block": 9413744,
  "op": [
    "comment",
    {
      "author": "armchair",
      "body": "@@ -4698,8 +4698,78 @@\n larity.*\n+%0A%0AEdit: Aw Crap. *Philsophy*. Really? Damn. The blockchain is forever.\n",
      "json_metadata": "{\"tags\":[\"philsophy\",\"philosophy\",\"politics\",\"fakenews\"],\"users\":[\"lukestokes\",\"armchair\"],\"links\":[\"http://www.dictionary.com/browse/armchair\",\"https://steemit.com/philosophy/@lukestokes/problem-alternative-facts-or-poor-epistemology\",\"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alternative_facts\",\"https://steemit.com/welcome\",\"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FKQD_cKEICk\",\"https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/831830548565852160\",\"https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/upshot/presidential-polls-forecast.html\",\"https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/796222841612042240?lang=en\",\"http://money.cnn.com/2016/10/31/media/donna-brazile-cnn-resignation/\",\"http://www.npr.org/2016/12/14/505547295/fake-news-expert-on-how-false-stories-spread-and-why-people-believe-them\"],\"app\":\"steemit/0.1\",\"format\":\"markdown\"}",
      "parent_author": "",
      "parent_permlink": "philsophy",
      "permlink": "epistemological-af",
      "title": "Epistemological AF."
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2017-02-16T08:40:51",
  "trx_id": "724262b315ac46c75ccb143cb7effea8bf89a3c4",
  "trx_in_block": 0,
  "virtual_op": 0
}

{
  "block": 9413719,
  "op": [
    "comment",
    {
      "author": "armchair",
      "body": "(Disclaimer: my argument is largely comprised of personal anecdote and incomplete reasoning. See [username](http://www.dictionary.com/browse/armchair).) \n\nDespite all the reasonable backlash to the Spicer/Conway comments, I remain wary of how the term *alternative facts* is being subsumed into other narratives, especially those of mainstream media outlets surrounding the claimed prevalence of *fake news*. The extent to which it implies that dominant news outlets have some kind of corner on what is factual via a more refined, reliable, or authoritative epistemology is as disconcerting as the very comments made by Trump's team.\n\n(Like @lukestokes raised in a recent post, I agree that [*the mechanisms many use for justified belief are not as sound as they could be*](https://steemit.com/philosophy/@lukestokes/problem-alternative-facts-or-poor-epistemology). However, I do believe a plurality of well-reasoned epistemologies is possible; I don't believe in a singularity of reason or logic any more than I believe that people share perfectly identical experiences. This of course doesn't mean that people with differing epistemologies have nothing to say to each other; it's just a matter of doing the awkward and difficult work of finding the things we agree to be facts.)\n\n[Under these specific circumstances](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alternative_facts), it's easy to write-off the \"epistemology\" of Conway/Spicer because most of us are accustomed to and take for granted the falsifiability of numbers and the role photographs play in shaping what we consider to be real. (From [The Steemit Welcome Guide](https://steemit.com/welcome): \"a lot of users will take a picture of themselves holding up a piece of paper that says \"Steemit\" with the current date, so we know you are a **real** person.\"). And also because it's easy to dismiss the rationale of people accustomed to covering their asses in the face of resistance and ridicule, moreso when it's their job to do so on behalf of people of power.\n\nBut let's not forget that mainstream media consist of powerful people who too have been covering their asses recently. Despite his [initial](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FKQD_cKEICk) and [ongoing use](https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/831830548565852160) of the phrase, Donald J. Trump did not instigate the narrative of *fake news*. A concern for the persuasive power of *fake news* arose in the wake of an election that delegitimized many influential news outlets (i.e. [The New York Times](https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/upshot/presidential-polls-forecast.html)) and the Democratic Party, whose very strategy [included bolstering Trump in the press](https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/796222841612042240?lang=en) and [being in cahoots](http://money.cnn.com/2016/10/31/media/donna-brazile-cnn-resignation/) with those same, soon-to-be-shamed outlets.  I personally first heard the term during a [post-election discussion](http://www.npr.org/2016/12/14/505547295/fake-news-expert-on-how-false-stories-spread-and-why-people-believe-them) that strongly suggested, rather than outright claimed, that pro-Trump/anti-Clinton fake news sites swayed the election in Trump's favor. I find this explanation too convenient, as it rids both the media and politicians of any blame regarding their recent failures.\n\nThis is why I'm skeptical of the response to the Spicer/Conway comments, and even the labeling of such a term as *alternative facts* as \"Orwellian.\" I enthusiastically admit that uncanniness levels are skyrocketing with its resemblance to the rhetorical strategies present in *1984*, and I am totally glad that Orwell is cool again. But, frankly, if we find ourselves putting more trust in mainstream outlets and their proclaimed ability to siphon fact from fiction in reaction to something said by Trump or his team, we may be missing the point. \n\nThere is a reason Trump was able to quickly co-opt  the rhetoric of *fake news* to his own ends; it was already being used in a similar fashion by and to the advantage of his opponents: the Democratic party and mainstream media.  Both usages require us to put our trust in their epistemological reasoning rather than our own. Neither of these authorities, I ascertain, are advocating for us to truly think for ourselves, or for that matter, to be critical of them. \n\nLet us not pass on an opportunity to hold not only our politicians accountable, but the people who report on them as well. Granted, I probably don't need to make a case for exploring indepedent news outlets here, or for using online resources for sharpening our own epistemologies. This is Steemit, afterall!\n\n@armchair\n\n*Will edit for clarity.*",
      "json_metadata": "{\"tags\":[\"philosophy\",\"politics\",\"fakenews\",\"philsophy\"],\"users\":[\"lukestokes\",\"armchair\"],\"links\":[\"http://www.dictionary.com/browse/armchair\",\"https://steemit.com/philosophy/@lukestokes/problem-alternative-facts-or-poor-epistemology\",\"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alternative_facts\",\"https://steemit.com/welcome\",\"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FKQD_cKEICk\",\"https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/831830548565852160\",\"https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/upshot/presidential-polls-forecast.html\",\"https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/796222841612042240?lang=en\",\"http://money.cnn.com/2016/10/31/media/donna-brazile-cnn-resignation/\",\"http://www.npr.org/2016/12/14/505547295/fake-news-expert-on-how-false-stories-spread-and-why-people-believe-them\"],\"app\":\"steemit/0.1\",\"format\":\"markdown\"}",
      "parent_author": "",
      "parent_permlink": "philsophy",
      "permlink": "epistemological-af",
      "title": "Epistemological AF."
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2017-02-16T08:39:36",
  "trx_id": "e6de7a788022e636c0f09a53ed3b6c7e271c443c",
  "trx_in_block": 4,
  "virtual_op": 0
}

{
  "block": 9413714,
  "op": [
    "comment",
    {
      "author": "armchair",
      "body": "(Disclaimer: my argument is largely comprised of personal anecdote and incomplete reasoning. See [username](http://www.dictionary.com/browse/armchair).) \n\nDespite all the reasonable backlash to the Spicer/Conway comments, I remain wary of how the term *alternative facts* is being subsumed into other narratives, especially those of mainstream media outlets surrounding the claimed prevalence of *fake news*. The extent to which it implies that dominant news outlets have some kind of corner on what is factual via a more refined, reliable, or authoritative epistemology is as disconcerting as the very comments made by Trump's team.\n\n(Like @lukestokes raised in a recent post, I agree that [*the mechanisms many use for justified belief are not as sound as they could be*](https://steemit.com/philosophy/@lukestokes/problem-alternative-facts-or-poor-epistemology). However, I do believe a plurality of well-reasoned epistemologies is possible; I don't believe in a singularity of reason or logic any more than I believe that people share perfectly identical experiences. This of course doesn't mean that people with differing epistemologies have nothing to say to each other; it's just a matter of doing the awkward and difficult work of finding the things we agree to be facts.)\n\n[Under these specific circumstances](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alternative_facts), it's easy to write-off the \"epistemology\" of Conway/Spicer because most of us are accustomed to and take for granted the falsifiability of numbers and the role photographs play in shaping what we consider to be real. (From [The Steemit Welcome Guide](https://steemit.com/welcome): \"a lot of users will take a picture of themselves holding up a piece of paper that says \"Steemit\" with the current date, so we know you are a **real** person.\"). And also because it's easy to dismiss the rationale of people accustomed to covering their asses in the face of resistance and ridicule, moreso when it's their job to do so on behalf of people of power.\n\nBut let's not forget that mainstream media consist of powerful people who too have been covering their asses recently. Despite his [initial](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FKQD_cKEICk) and [ongoing use](https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/831830548565852160) of the phrase, Donald J. Trump did not instigate the narrative of *fake news*. A concern for the persuasive power of *fake news* arose in the wake of an election that delegitimized many influential news outlets (i.e. [The New York Times](https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/upshot/presidential-polls-forecast.html)) and the Democratic Party, whose very strategy [included bolstering Trump in the press](https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/796222841612042240?lang=en) and [being in cahoots](http://money.cnn.com/2016/10/31/media/donna-brazile-cnn-resignation/) with those same, soon-to-be-shamed outlets.  I personally first heard the term during a [post-election discussion](http://www.npr.org/2016/12/14/505547295/fake-news-expert-on-how-false-stories-spread-and-why-people-believe-them) that strongly suggested, rather than outright claimed, that pro-Trump/anti-Clinton fake news sites swayed the election in Trump's favor. I find this explanation too convenient, as it rids both the media and politicians of any blame regarding their recent failures.\n\nThis is why I'm skeptical of the response to the Spicer/Conway comments, and even the labeling of such a term as *alternative facts* as \"Orwellian.\" I enthusiastically admit that uncanniness levels are skyrocketing with its resemblance to the rhetorical strategies present in *1984*, and I am totally glad that Orwell is cool again. But, frankly, if we find ourselves putting more trust in mainstream outlets and their proclaimed ability to siphon fact from fiction in reaction to something said by Trump or his team, we may be missing the point. \n\nThere is a reason Trump was able to quickly co-opt  the rhetoric of *fake news* to his own ends; it was already being used in a similar fashion by and to the advantage of his opponents: the Democratic party and mainstream media.  Both usages require us to put our trust in their epistemological reasoning rather than our own. Neither of these authorities, I ascertain, are advocating for us to truly think for ourselves, or for that matter, to be critical of them. \n\nLet us not pass on an opportunity to hold not only our politicians accountable, but the people who report on them as well. Granted, I probably don't need to make a case for exploring indepedent news outlets here, or for using online resources for sharpening our own epistemologies. This is Steemit, afterall!\n\n@armchair\n\n*Will edit for clarity.*",
      "json_metadata": "{\"tags\":[\"philosophy\",\"politics\",\"fakenews\",\"philsophy\"],\"users\":[\"lukestokes\",\"armchair\"],\"links\":[\"http://www.dictionary.com/browse/armchair\",\"https://steemit.com/philosophy/@lukestokes/problem-alternative-facts-or-poor-epistemology\",\"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alternative_facts\",\"https://steemit.com/welcome\",\"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FKQD_cKEICk\",\"https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/831830548565852160\",\"https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/upshot/presidential-polls-forecast.html\",\"https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/796222841612042240?lang=en\",\"http://money.cnn.com/2016/10/31/media/donna-brazile-cnn-resignation/\",\"http://www.npr.org/2016/12/14/505547295/fake-news-expert-on-how-false-stories-spread-and-why-people-believe-them\"],\"app\":\"steemit/0.1\",\"format\":\"markdown\"}",
      "parent_author": "",
      "parent_permlink": "philsophy",
      "permlink": "epistemological-af",
      "title": "Epistemological AF."
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2017-02-16T08:39:21",
  "trx_id": "8a92857d907cd5cd2fe6031d1b6903ac2e297896",
  "trx_in_block": 1,
  "virtual_op": 0
}

{
  "block": 9413709,
  "op": [
    "comment",
    {
      "author": "armchair",
      "body": "(Disclaimer: my argument is largely comprised of personal anecdote and incomplete reasoning. See [username](http://www.dictionary.com/browse/armchair).) \n\nDespite all the reasonable backlash to the Spicer/Conway comments, I remain wary of how the term *alternative facts* is being subsumed into other narratives, especially those of mainstream media outlets surrounding the claimed prevalence of *fake news*. The extent to which it implies that dominant news outlets have some kind of corner on what is factual via a more refined, reliable, or authoritative epistemology is as disconcerting as the very comments made by Trump's team.\n\n(Like @lukestokes raised in a recent post, I agree that [*the mechanisms many use for justified belief are not as sound as they could be*](https://steemit.com/philosophy/@lukestokes/problem-alternative-facts-or-poor-epistemology). However, I do believe a plurality of well-reasoned epistemologies is possible; I don't believe in a singularity of reason or logic any more than I believe that people share perfectly identical experiences. This of course doesn't mean that people with differing epistemologies have nothing to say to each other; it's just a matter of doing the awkward and difficult work of finding the things we agree to be facts.)\n\n[Under these specific circumstances](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alternative_facts), it's easy to write-off the \"epistemology\" of Conway/Spicer because most of us are accustomed to and take for granted the falsifiability of numbers and the role photographs play in shaping what we consider to be real. (From [The Steemit Welcome Guide](https://steemit.com/welcome): \"a lot of users will take a picture of themselves holding up a piece of paper that says \"Steemit\" with the current date, so we know you are a **real** person.\"). And also because it's easy to dismiss the rationale of people accustomed to covering their asses in the face of resistance and ridicule, moreso when it's their job to do so on behalf of people of power.\n\nBut let's not forget that mainstream media consist of powerful people who too have been covering their asses recently. Despite his [initial](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FKQD_cKEICk) and [ongoing use](https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/831830548565852160) of the phrase, Donald J. Trump did not instigate the narrative of *fake news*. A concern for the persuasive power of *fake news* arose in the wake of an election that delegitimized many influential news outlets (i.e. [The New York Times](https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/upshot/presidential-polls-forecast.html)) and the Democratic Party, whose very strategy [included bolstering Trump in the press](https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/796222841612042240?lang=en) and [being in cahoots](http://money.cnn.com/2016/10/31/media/donna-brazile-cnn-resignation/) with those same, soon-to-be-shamed outlets.  I personally first heard the term during a [post-election discussion](http://www.npr.org/2016/12/14/505547295/fake-news-expert-on-how-false-stories-spread-and-why-people-believe-them) that strongly suggested, rather than outright claimed, that pro-Trump/anti-Clinton fake news sites swayed the election in Trump's favor. I find this explanation too convenient, as it rids both the media and politicians of any blame regarding their recent failures.\n\nThis is why I'm skeptical of the response to the Spicer/Conway comments, and even the labeling of such a term as *alternative facts* as \"Orwellian.\" I enthusiastically admit that uncanniness levels are skyrocketing with its resemblance to the rhetorical strategies present in *1984*, and I am totally glad that Orwell is cool again. But, frankly, if we find ourselves putting more trust in mainstream outlets and their proclaimed ability to siphon fact from fiction in reaction to something said by Trump or his team, we may be missing the point. \n\nThere is a reason Trump was able to quickly co-opt  the rhetoric of *fake news* to his own ends; it was already being used in a similar fashion by and to the advantage of his opponents: the Democratic party and mainstream media.  Both usages require us to put our trust in their epistemological reasoning rather than our own. Neither of these authorities, I ascertain, are advocating for us to truly think for ourselves, or for that matter, to be critical of them. \n\nLet us not pass on an opportunity to hold not only our politicians accountable, but the people who report on them as well. Granted, I probably don't need to make a case for exploring indepedent news outlets here, or for using online resources for sharpening our own epistemologies. This is Steemit, afterall!\n\n@armchair\n\n*Will edit for clarity.*",
      "json_metadata": "{\"tags\":[\"philosophy\",\"politics\",\"fakenews\",\"philsophy\"],\"users\":[\"lukestokes\",\"armchair\"],\"links\":[\"http://www.dictionary.com/browse/armchair\",\"https://steemit.com/philosophy/@lukestokes/problem-alternative-facts-or-poor-epistemology\",\"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alternative_facts\",\"https://steemit.com/welcome\",\"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FKQD_cKEICk\",\"https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/831830548565852160\",\"https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/upshot/presidential-polls-forecast.html\",\"https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/796222841612042240?lang=en\",\"http://money.cnn.com/2016/10/31/media/donna-brazile-cnn-resignation/\",\"http://www.npr.org/2016/12/14/505547295/fake-news-expert-on-how-false-stories-spread-and-why-people-believe-them\"],\"app\":\"steemit/0.1\",\"format\":\"markdown\"}",
      "parent_author": "",
      "parent_permlink": "philsophy",
      "permlink": "epistemological-af",
      "title": "Epistemological AF."
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2017-02-16T08:39:06",
  "trx_id": "e199ac57c153de0c4291132c3ce7e042c339a465",
  "trx_in_block": 3,
  "virtual_op": 0
}

{
  "block": 9413705,
  "op": [
    "comment",
    {
      "author": "armchair",
      "body": "(Disclaimer: my argument is largely comprised of personal anecdote and incomplete reasoning. See [username](http://www.dictionary.com/browse/armchair).) \n\nDespite all the reasonable backlash to the Spicer/Conway comments, I remain wary of how the term *alternative facts* is being subsumed into other narratives, especially those of mainstream media outlets surrounding the claimed prevalence of *fake news*. The extent to which it implies that dominant news outlets have some kind of corner on what is factual via a more refined, reliable, or authoritative epistemology is as disconcerting as the very comments made by Trump's team.\n\n(Like @lukestokes raised in a recent post, I agree that [*the mechanisms many use for justified belief are not as sound as they could be*](https://steemit.com/philosophy/@lukestokes/problem-alternative-facts-or-poor-epistemology). However, I do believe a plurality of well-reasoned epistemologies is possible; I don't believe in a singularity of reason or logic any more than I believe that people share perfectly identical experiences. This of course doesn't mean that people with differing epistemologies have nothing to say to each other; it's just a matter of doing the awkward and difficult work of finding the things we agree to be facts.)\n\n[Under these specific circumstances](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alternative_facts), it's easy to write-off the \"epistemology\" of Conway/Spicer because most of us are accustomed to and take for granted the falsifiability of numbers and the role photographs play in shaping what we consider to be real. (From [The Steemit Welcome Guide](https://steemit.com/welcome): \"a lot of users will take a picture of themselves holding up a piece of paper that says \"Steemit\" with the current date, so we know you are a **real** person.\"). And also because it's easy to dismiss the rationale of people accustomed to covering their asses in the face of resistance and ridicule, moreso when it's their job to do so on behalf of people of power.\n\nBut let's not forget that mainstream media consist of powerful people who too have been covering their asses recently. Despite his [initial](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FKQD_cKEICk) and [ongoing use](https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/831830548565852160) of the phrase, Donald J. Trump did not instigate the narrative of *fake news*. A concern for the persuasive power of *fake news* arose in the wake of an election that delegitimized many influential news outlets (i.e. [The New York Times](https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/upshot/presidential-polls-forecast.html)) and the Democratic Party, whose very strategy [included bolstering Trump in the press](https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/796222841612042240?lang=en) and [being in cahoots](http://money.cnn.com/2016/10/31/media/donna-brazile-cnn-resignation/) with those same, soon-to-be-shamed outlets.  I personally first heard the term during a [post-election discussion](http://www.npr.org/2016/12/14/505547295/fake-news-expert-on-how-false-stories-spread-and-why-people-believe-them) that strongly suggested, rather than outright claimed, that pro-Trump/anti-Clinton fake news sites swayed the election in Trump's favor. I find this explanation too convenient, as it rids both the media and politicians of any blame regarding their recent failures.\n\nThis is why I'm skeptical of the response to the Spicer/Conway comments, and even the labeling of such a term as *alternative facts* as \"Orwellian.\" I enthusiastically admit that uncanniness levels are skyrocketing with its resemblance to the rhetorical strategies present in *1984*, and I am totally glad that Orwell is cool again. But, frankly, if we find ourselves putting more trust in mainstream outlets and their proclaimed ability to siphon fact from fiction in reaction to something said by Trump or his team, we may be missing the point. \n\nThere is a reason Trump was able to quickly co-opt  the rhetoric of *fake news* to his own ends; it was already being used in a similar fashion by and to the advantage of his opponents: the Democratic party and mainstream media.  Both usages require us to put our trust in their epistemological reasoning rather than our own. Neither of these authorities, I ascertain, are advocating for us to truly think for ourselves, or for that matter, to be critical of them. \n\nLet us not pass on an opportunity to hold not only our politicians accountable, but the people who report on them as well. Granted, I probably don't need to make a case for exploring indepedent news outlets here, or for using online resources for sharpening our own epistemologies. This is Steemit, afterall!\n\n@armchair\n\n*Will edit for clarity.*",
      "json_metadata": "{\"tags\":[\"philosophy\",\"politics\",\"fakenews\",\"philsophy\"],\"users\":[\"lukestokes\",\"armchair\"],\"links\":[\"http://www.dictionary.com/browse/armchair\",\"https://steemit.com/philosophy/@lukestokes/problem-alternative-facts-or-poor-epistemology\",\"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alternative_facts\",\"https://steemit.com/welcome\",\"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FKQD_cKEICk\",\"https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/831830548565852160\",\"https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/upshot/presidential-polls-forecast.html\",\"https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/796222841612042240?lang=en\",\"http://money.cnn.com/2016/10/31/media/donna-brazile-cnn-resignation/\",\"http://www.npr.org/2016/12/14/505547295/fake-news-expert-on-how-false-stories-spread-and-why-people-believe-them\"],\"app\":\"steemit/0.1\",\"format\":\"markdown\"}",
      "parent_author": "",
      "parent_permlink": "philsophy",
      "permlink": "epistemological-af",
      "title": "Epistemological AF."
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2017-02-16T08:38:51",
  "trx_id": "5bfa160e3b1fcb6433347b1c3cb3bd78484940c2",
  "trx_in_block": 6,
  "virtual_op": 0
}

{
  "block": 9413696,
  "op": [
    "comment",
    {
      "author": "armchair",
      "body": "(Disclaimer: my argument is largely comprised of personal anecdote and incomplete reasoning. See [username](http://www.dictionary.com/browse/armchair).) \n\nDespite all the reasonable backlash to the Spicer/Conway comments, I remain wary of how the term *alternative facts* is being subsumed into other narratives, especially those of mainstream media outlets surrounding the claimed prevalence of *fake news*. The extent to which it implies that dominant news outlets have some kind of corner on what is factual via a more refined, reliable, or authoritative epistemology is as disconcerting as the very comments made by Trump's team.\n\n(Like @lukestokes raised in a recent post, I agree that [*the mechanisms many use for justified belief are not as sound as they could be*](https://steemit.com/philosophy/@lukestokes/problem-alternative-facts-or-poor-epistemology). However, I do believe a plurality of well-reasoned epistemologies is possible; I don't believe in a singularity of reason or logic any more than I believe that people share perfectly identical experiences. This of course doesn't mean that people with differing epistemologies have nothing to say to each other; it's just a matter of doing the awkward and difficult work of finding the things we agree to be facts.)\n\n[Under these specific circumstances](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alternative_facts), it's easy to write-off the \"epistemology\" of Conway/Spicer because most of us are accustomed to and take for granted the falsifiability of numbers and the role photographs play in shaping what we consider to be real. (From [The Steemit Welcome Guide](https://steemit.com/welcome): \"a lot of users will take a picture of themselves holding up a piece of paper that says \"Steemit\" with the current date, so we know you are a **real** person.\"). And also because it's easy to dismiss the rationale of people accustomed to covering their asses in the face of resistance and ridicule, moreso when it's their job to do so on behalf of people of power.\n\nBut let's not forget that mainstream media consist of powerful people who too have been covering their asses recently. Despite his [initial](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FKQD_cKEICk) and [ongoing use](https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/831830548565852160) of the phrase, Donald J. Trump did not instigate the narrative of *fake news*. A concern for the persuasive power of *fake news* arose in the wake of an election that delegitimized many influential news outlets (i.e. [The New York Times](https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/upshot/presidential-polls-forecast.html)) and the Democratic Party, whose very strategy [included bolstering Trump in the press](https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/796222841612042240?lang=en) and [being in cahoots](http://money.cnn.com/2016/10/31/media/donna-brazile-cnn-resignation/) with those same, soon-to-be-shamed outlets.  I personally first heard the term during a [post-election discussion](http://www.npr.org/2016/12/14/505547295/fake-news-expert-on-how-false-stories-spread-and-why-people-believe-them) that strongly suggested, rather than outright claimed, that pro-Trump/anti-Clinton fake news sites swayed the election in Trump's favor. I find this explanation too convenient, as it rids both the media and politicians of any blame regarding their recent failures.\n\nThis is why I'm skeptical of the response to the Spicer/Conway comments, and even the labeling of such a term as *alternative facts* as \"Orwellian.\" I enthusiastically admit that uncanniness levels are skyrocketing with its resemblance to the rhetorical strategies present in *1984*, and I am totally glad that Orwell is cool again. But, frankly, if we find ourselves putting more trust in mainstream outlets and their proclaimed ability to siphon fact from fiction in reaction to something said by Trump or his team, we may be missing the point. \n\nThere is a reason Trump was able to quickly co-opt  the rhetoric of *fake news* to his own ends; it was already being used in a similar fashion by and to the advantage of his opponents: the Democratic party and mainstream media.  Both usages require us to put our trust in their epistemological reasoning rather than our own. Neither of these authorities, I ascertain, are advocating for us to truly think for ourselves, or for that matter, to be critical of them. \n\nLet us not pass on an opportunity to hold not only our politicians accountable, but the people who report on them as well. Granted, I probably don't need to make a case for exploring indepedent news outlets here, or for using online resources for sharpening our own epistemologies. This is Steemit, afterall!\n\n@armchair\n\n*Will edit for clarity.*",
      "json_metadata": "{\"tags\":[\"philosophy\",\"politics\",\"fakenews\",\"philsophy\"],\"users\":[\"lukestokes\",\"armchair\"],\"links\":[\"http://www.dictionary.com/browse/armchair\",\"https://steemit.com/philosophy/@lukestokes/problem-alternative-facts-or-poor-epistemology\",\"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alternative_facts\",\"https://steemit.com/welcome\",\"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FKQD_cKEICk\",\"https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/831830548565852160\",\"https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/upshot/presidential-polls-forecast.html\",\"https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/796222841612042240?lang=en\",\"http://money.cnn.com/2016/10/31/media/donna-brazile-cnn-resignation/\",\"http://www.npr.org/2016/12/14/505547295/fake-news-expert-on-how-false-stories-spread-and-why-people-believe-them\"],\"app\":\"steemit/0.1\",\"format\":\"markdown\"}",
      "parent_author": "",
      "parent_permlink": "philsophy",
      "permlink": "epistemological-af",
      "title": "Epistemological AF."
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2017-02-16T08:38:24",
  "trx_id": "319e281f2f53f62b8786a45a8699aea75cfd669a",
  "trx_in_block": 3,
  "virtual_op": 0
}

{
  "block": 9413691,
  "op": [
    "vote",
    {
      "author": "armchair",
      "permlink": "epistemological-af",
      "voter": "armchair",
      "weight": 10000
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2017-02-16T08:38:09",
  "trx_id": "bd2c77da41d079f43dec934101154679276dc5cb",
  "trx_in_block": 0,
  "virtual_op": 0
}

{
  "block": 9413691,
  "op": [
    "comment",
    {
      "author": "armchair",
      "body": "(Disclaimer: my argument is largely comprised of personal anecdote and incomplete reasoning. See [username](http://www.dictionary.com/browse/armchair).) \n\nDespite all the reasonable backlash to the Spicer/Conway comments, I remain wary of how the term *alternative facts* is being subsumed into other narratives, especially those of mainstream media outlets surrounding the claimed prevalence of *fake news*. The extent to which it implies that dominant news outlets have some kind of corner on what is factual via a more refined, reliable, or authoritative epistemology is as disconcerting as the very comments made by Trump's team.\n\n(Like @lukestokes raised in a recent post, I agree that [*the mechanisms many use for justified belief are not as sound as they could be*](https://steemit.com/philosophy/@lukestokes/problem-alternative-facts-or-poor-epistemology). However, I do believe a plurality of well-reasoned epistemologies is possible; I don't believe in a singularity of reason or logic any more than I believe that people share perfectly identical experiences. This of course doesn't mean that people with differing epistemologies have nothing to say to each other; it's just a matter of doing the awkward and difficult work of finding the things we agree to be facts.)\n\n[Under these specific circumstances](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alternative_facts), it's easy to write-off the \"epistemology\" of Conway/Spicer because most of us are accustomed to and take for granted the falsifiability of numbers and the role photographs play in shaping what we consider to be real. (From [The Steemit Welcome Guide](https://steemit.com/welcome): \"a lot of users will take a picture of themselves holding up a piece of paper that says \"Steemit\" with the current date, so we know you are a **real** person.\"). And also because it's easy to dismiss the rationale of people accustomed to covering their asses in the face of resistance and ridicule, moreso when it's their job to do so on behalf of people of power.\n\nBut let's not forget that mainstream media consist of powerful people who too have been covering their asses recently. Despite his [initial](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FKQD_cKEICk) and [ongoing use](https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/831830548565852160) of the phrase, Donald J. Trump did not instigate the narrative of *fake news*. A concern for the persuasive power of *fake news* arose in the wake of an election that delegitimized many influential news outlets (i.e. [The New York Times](https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/upshot/presidential-polls-forecast.html)) and the Democratic Party, whose very strategy [included bolstering Trump in the press](https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/796222841612042240?lang=en) and [being in cahoots](http://money.cnn.com/2016/10/31/media/donna-brazile-cnn-resignation/) with those same, soon-to-be-shamed outlets.  I personally first heard the term during a [post-election discussion](http://www.npr.org/2016/12/14/505547295/fake-news-expert-on-how-false-stories-spread-and-why-people-believe-them) that strongly suggested, rather than outright claimed, that pro-Trump/anti-Clinton fake news sites swayed the election in Trump's favor. I find this explanation too convenient, as it rids both the media and politicians of any blame regarding their recent failures.\n\nThis is why I'm skeptical of the response to the Spicer/Conway comments, and even the labeling of such a term as *alternative facts* as \"Orwellian.\" I enthusiastically admit that uncanniness levels are skyrocketing with its resemblance to the rhetorical strategies present in *1984*, and I am totally glad that Orwell is cool again. But, frankly, if we find ourselves putting more trust in mainstream outlets and their proclaimed ability to siphon fact from fiction in reaction to something said by Trump or his team, we may be missing the point. \n\nThere is a reason Trump was able to quickly co-opt  the rhetoric of *fake news* to his own ends; it was already being used in a similar fashion by and to the advantage of his opponents: the Democratic party and mainstream media.  Both usages require us to put our trust in their epistemological reasoning rather than our own. Neither of these authorities, I ascertain, are advocating for us to truly think for ourselves, or for that matter, to be critical of them. \n\nLet us not pass on an opportunity to hold not only our politicians accountable, but the people who report on them as well. Granted, I probably don't need to make a case for exploring indepedent news outlets here, or for using online resources for sharpening our own epistemologies. This is Steemit, afterall!\n\n@armchair\n\n*Will edit for clarity.*",
      "json_metadata": "{\"tags\":[\"philsophy\",\"politics\",\"fakenews\"],\"users\":[\"lukestokes\",\"armchair\"],\"links\":[\"http://www.dictionary.com/browse/armchair\",\"https://steemit.com/philosophy/@lukestokes/problem-alternative-facts-or-poor-epistemology\",\"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alternative_facts\",\"https://steemit.com/welcome\",\"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FKQD_cKEICk\",\"https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/831830548565852160\",\"https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/upshot/presidential-polls-forecast.html\",\"https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/796222841612042240?lang=en\",\"http://money.cnn.com/2016/10/31/media/donna-brazile-cnn-resignation/\",\"http://www.npr.org/2016/12/14/505547295/fake-news-expert-on-how-false-stories-spread-and-why-people-believe-them\"],\"app\":\"steemit/0.1\",\"format\":\"markdown\"}",
      "parent_author": "",
      "parent_permlink": "philsophy",
      "permlink": "epistemological-af",
      "title": "Epistemological AF."
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2017-02-16T08:38:09",
  "trx_id": "bd2c77da41d079f43dec934101154679276dc5cb",
  "trx_in_block": 0,
  "virtual_op": 0
}

{
  "block": 9410694,
  "op": [
    "comment",
    {
      "author": "armchair",
      "body": "I appreciate you raising this topic!",
      "json_metadata": "{\"tags\":[\"philosophy\"],\"app\":\"steemit/0.1\"}",
      "parent_author": "lukestokes",
      "parent_permlink": "problem-alternative-facts-or-poor-epistemology",
      "permlink": "re-lukestokes-problem-alternative-facts-or-poor-epistemology-20170216t060740374z",
      "title": ""
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2017-02-16T06:07:42",
  "trx_id": "d921d4c9caa62555485aba2d5e627cf79aeac246",
  "trx_in_block": 0,
  "virtual_op": 0
}

{
  "block": 9409544,
  "op": [
    "vote",
    {
      "author": "lukestokes",
      "permlink": "problem-alternative-facts-or-poor-epistemology",
      "voter": "armchair",
      "weight": 10000
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2017-02-16T05:10:12",
  "trx_id": "fb6ddf1ffa1884989f046ef3ea3cbcc202db98d5",
  "trx_in_block": 5,
  "virtual_op": 0
}

{
  "block": 9409512,
  "op": [
    "vote",
    {
      "author": "tarazkp",
      "permlink": "why-are-rules-made-to-be-broken",
      "voter": "armchair",
      "weight": 10000
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2017-02-16T05:08:36",
  "trx_id": "c51c2e930fc923ee0e5f77cf8b8f09b4454a4058",
  "trx_in_block": 0,
  "virtual_op": 0
}

{
  "block": 9409379,
  "op": [
    "vote",
    {
      "author": "dean-mno",
      "permlink": "painting-a-seascape-painting",
      "voter": "armchair",
      "weight": 10000
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2017-02-16T05:01:57",
  "trx_id": "05a1a93f86c89f92c272a189c346e7ab343ac876",
  "trx_in_block": 0,
  "virtual_op": 0
}

{
  "block": 9353588,
  "op": [
    "author_reward",
    {
      "author": "armchair",
      "permlink": "torn",
      "sbd_payout": "0.024 SBD",
      "steem_payout": "0.104 STEEM",
      "vesting_payout": "570.880272 VESTS"
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2017-02-14T06:29:39",
  "trx_id": "0000000000000000000000000000000000000000",
  "trx_in_block": 4294967295,
  "virtual_op": 10
}

{
  "block": 9348248,
  "op": [
    "vote",
    {
      "author": "klye",
      "permlink": "introducing-steem-steem-backed-dollar-price-display-plugin-and-woocommerce-currencies-version-0-0-1",
      "voter": "armchair",
      "weight": 10000
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2017-02-14T02:02:06",
  "trx_id": "b26a2532351ec91e9df50f0ced0a4339459cc46d",
  "trx_in_block": 2,
  "virtual_op": 0
}

{
  "block": 9332989,
  "op": [
    "comment",
    {
      "author": "armchair",
      "body": "[Where We Stand](http://www.internationalsocialist.org/pdfs/WhereWeStandPamphlet.pdf)\n\nhttps://i.imgur.com/itbFEHV.jpg",
      "json_metadata": "{\"tags\":[\"anarchism\"],\"image\":[\"https://i.imgur.com/itbFEHV.jpg\"],\"links\":[\"http://www.internationalsocialist.org/pdfs/WhereWeStandPamphlet.pdf\"],\"app\":\"steemit/0.1\"}",
      "parent_author": "mikemorris",
      "parent_permlink": "do-socialists-even-have-real-arguments",
      "permlink": "re-mikemorris-do-socialists-even-have-real-arguments-20170213t131438210z",
      "title": ""
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2017-02-13T13:17:24",
  "trx_id": "28e871791109d5fc3f34ca165ea8b7d97f932a7a",
  "trx_in_block": 8,
  "virtual_op": 0
}

{
  "block": 9332934,
  "op": [
    "comment",
    {
      "author": "armchair",
      "body": "https://i.imgur.com/itbFEHV.jpg\n\n[Where We Stand](http://www.internationalsocialist.org/pdfs/WhereWeStandPamphlet.pdf)",
      "json_metadata": "{\"tags\":[\"anarchism\"],\"image\":[\"https://i.imgur.com/itbFEHV.jpg\"],\"links\":[\"http://www.internationalsocialist.org/pdfs/WhereWeStandPamphlet.pdf\"],\"app\":\"steemit/0.1\"}",
      "parent_author": "mikemorris",
      "parent_permlink": "do-socialists-even-have-real-arguments",
      "permlink": "re-mikemorris-do-socialists-even-have-real-arguments-20170213t131438210z",
      "title": ""
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2017-02-13T13:14:39",
  "trx_id": "b3d2abf19a3b79e2da4e62d022e5d01fede5564c",
  "trx_in_block": 11,
  "virtual_op": 0
}

{
  "block": 9332842,
  "op": [
    "vote",
    {
      "author": "armchair",
      "permlink": "torn",
      "voter": "gtg",
      "weight": 10000
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2017-02-13T13:10:03",
  "trx_id": "bb222d8b1cdca202f14698ee001b4933896993db",
  "trx_in_block": 3,
  "virtual_op": 0
}

{
  "block": 9332835,
  "op": [
    "comment",
    {
      "author": "gtg",
      "body": "Hello @armchair, welcome to Steem! :-)",
      "json_metadata": "{\"tags\":[\"introduceyourself\"],\"users\":[\"armchair\"],\"app\":\"steemit/0.1\"}",
      "parent_author": "armchair",
      "parent_permlink": "torn",
      "permlink": "re-armchair-torn-20170213t130943431z",
      "title": ""
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2017-02-13T13:09:42",
  "trx_id": "a40f0166d2efdff15c6601b63207e09054b47312",
  "trx_in_block": 8,
  "virtual_op": 0
}

{
  "block": 9332701,
  "op": [
    "vote",
    {
      "author": "riverhead",
      "permlink": "re-mikemorris-do-socialists-even-have-real-arguments-20170213t061528097z",
      "voter": "armchair",
      "weight": 10000
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2017-02-13T13:03:00",
  "trx_id": "16b2d796053eef83101f379f3cdb999ebdce67a8",
  "trx_in_block": 1,
  "virtual_op": 0
}

{
  "block": 9331563,
  "op": [
    "comment",
    {
      "author": "always1success",
      "body": "Thanks for your rating!",
      "json_metadata": "{\"tags\":[\"photography\"],\"app\":\"steemit/0.1\"}",
      "parent_author": "armchair",
      "parent_permlink": "re-always1success-winter-birds-20170213t002913174z",
      "permlink": "re-armchair-re-always1success-winter-birds-20170213t120607299z",
      "title": ""
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2017-02-13T12:06:06",
  "trx_id": "dee712c773aba9fa4c16572e5eb0486ca6574a2b",
  "trx_in_block": 5,
  "virtual_op": 0
}

{
  "block": 9322509,
  "op": [
    "vote",
    {
      "author": "armchair",
      "permlink": "torn",
      "voter": "ancap47",
      "weight": 10000
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2017-02-13T04:33:03",
  "trx_id": "f3de9ac779a5a5c50afced920154f681b4a319a1",
  "trx_in_block": 5,
  "virtual_op": 0
}

{
  "block": 9318791,
  "op": [
    "vote",
    {
      "author": "armchair",
      "permlink": "torn",
      "voter": "justtryme90",
      "weight": 2400
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2017-02-13T01:26:51",
  "trx_id": "b0cfbc004aa1a5d92e8cc9a2ae4a2830a4594ac3",
  "trx_in_block": 4,
  "virtual_op": 0
}