No. The instance being killed by the taliban is the opposite of that is happening here.
The taliban has done nothing, in this case. The admins of the instance have chosen not to keep the instance due to not wanting to fund the taliban in anyway.
This phrasing fucks up which way the action flows, which is important for a headline to get right to remain accurate to the story. Does that make sense?
As long as you’re not being a douchebag, or, if you were, you immediately stop being a douchebag, I don’t think anyone has basis to eat you alive.
That’s fair. In that case, with that reasoning, it seems less like you’re being pessimistic and more like you’re trying to be realistic. I would caution though, reality isn’t ALL negative, though the neutrality and negativity inside of it can always be improved. Heck, even most positives in reality can often be improved.
Personally, I think the Olympics game tends to start when focus becomes too great on one specific aspect, which leads to what is essentially a one upmanship of situational comparison, but that’s all I really wanted to poke at.
Thanks for the even response! Sometimes me phrasing stuff like that starts fights even though I only want to poke a little bit. In any case, I hope your day goes well!
There’s an old proverb I like about this: a person is smart but people are dumb.
People en masse tend to be dumber than they are apart. I think you’re comparing yourself to the faceless masses. It’s much more humbling to try comparing yourself to someone you respect (but don’t do it as a “I’m not as good as them” thing, only do it as a “goals to maybe achieve one day” thing to avoid accidentally trashing your self esteem)
Side note: old proverb here means I think my dad said it once but I have no idea where it actually came from
“Stop complaining, pissant, it could be worse” - most abusive situations
The “it could be worse” Olympics is the game of the complacent. You may be complacent. Are you?
I got a reason! It’s because people are afraid meta is doing what Microsoft did to a much earlier project. The crux of that whole story is that Microsoft adopted the new tech, became the biggest player thus dominating the area, then, when they had full control of the tech they ended up shutting it down. Some people are convinced meta is going to do that to the fediverse.
This is vague and handwavy, I’m hoping someone actually knows the name of the project. It was early 90s I believe or maybe into the early 00s but it was before my time in the tech sphere of the internet.
No, not just Tumblr, they thrive on Twitter as well. That was where my friend got the death threats primarily. They did sprout from the Tumblr younglings though. I’m convinced antis are what happen when you’re catered to too much lol
Fair enough, that was supposed to be a meme opener just so I could comment, but I deleted the /s right before the opening parentheses, and now I’m worried I came off like a complete asshole to you! My apologies! I meant that in a joking meme tone, not in a tell you what to do way! Sorry about that!
I had a friend who irritated this part of the internet with fanfiction and got death threats because of it! It’s really stupid lol they’re called “antis” because they’re anti everything.
They’re so insane that they have called characters who knew other characters (all fictional characters, treated as seriously as though this was real life, mind you) when they were underage but ended up dating when both characters were canonically both above 18, they call the older character in that scenario a groomer. With their full chest. When no grooming activity has taken place. It’s very black and white. Also very “you should have known you would have offended me with that idea”-y which is very not good for creative work areas.
This is the side of the internet that infantilizes full grown adults, thus making a 20 to 23 year old age gap “problematic” (in heavy sarcasm quotes because I pretty vehemently believe there is nothing wrong with 2 consenting adults being in a relationship together. Problematic is a useful word still, but this just is not what problematic looks like)
Say /s right now
(i had to look at it twice but I’m pretty sure it’s supposed to be their, not they’re lol)
you don’t have to understand it, you just shouldn’t be a legislative genocidal asshole about it (not that that’s what you’re doing, but that’s what republicans seem to do to anything they think isn’t their slim sliver of a definition of “normal”)
if you’re talking about furries, to my layman’s understanding of the subculture, that’s not how the vast majority of furries relate to themselves. From what I’ve seen, it’s not that they are the animal itself, they are the aspects of the animal, and those things are just little icons that they’re like boosting because they resonate with it. That said, there are at least a few people who DO feel that way, but I’m pretty sure they have a special category name (ferals? I think that’s what they’re called but I could be wrong, this is some deep lore I picked up years ago). If they do have that special name and I’m not just making that part up, then that implies that most furries do not feel that way about themselves.
But, acknowledging the existence of people like that at all does validate your question in my mind. I don’t really understand that extreme either. My only point is that most furries are what you would likely consider “normal”, they just have a particular hobby. It’s no more nefarious or odd than being into gender bending cosplay. You’re just taking something (yourself rather than an anime/video game character) and twisting it into something artistically different (a fursona instead of a cosplay outfit).
…no I did not intend to write that much defending furries but here we are lmao
deleted by creator
…there is a joke here that I could make about incel forums. I’m not going to try to because it’s in poor taste, but my point is that I’m pretty sure that does exist…
Also, what’s your actual position if that’s your devil’s advocate position? I’m a bit unsure if the implication there is intentional or not
That blue color on the map? Believe it or not, liquid meth
The way I (layman) read it, they seemed to be saying that it would be phased out by newer companies finding different alternatives, not that everyone is phasing it out as we speak.
Does this seem more realistic? Or just completely non-factual?
Ah I get that, like the frustration of a sociological paper pointing out a societal issue but offering no steps on how to solve it due to fixes being out of scope (utterly infuriating lol).
I still think the criticism is valid, but I do think I agree in that the criticism could be more constructive… But I still think laying the foundation of the argument, so to speak, is still constructive even though it may not go as far as one may need for it to cross the threshold back into polite…
I am still convinced this is a knee jerk feeling issue more than anything truly being amiss, but I have been wrong before. What do you think?
I agree it probably is a definitions thing, I’m very pedantic sometimes and it feels like my definition of constructive is much more optimistic/wider/encompassing than yours. That doesn’t mean that my definition is right or that your position is wrong though, that’s just what I think is going on here.
The first step to correction is understanding there is a problem in the first place. This is quite constructive, it may just not feel like it is because it’s framed combatively.
You’re doing it wrong is the phrase that lets teachers teach at one of the most basic levels.
The public is essentially a self teaching teacher, so this is just the process of public correction happening. It may look/feel like public shaming, and it may be if they’re going too far, but that is the mechanism that I think is playing out here.
Does that framing make it any more palatable to you or does it still seem unnecessarily disrespectful?
Interesting, I personally wouldn’t actually accuse the UN of being tankie… Maybe capitalist but not tankie… I think if someone makes a convincing argument about the price of oil, it might result in the US or the UN (most likely UN I would wager though) stepping in…
I don’t think the UN will actually do anything though, this is more just me harvesting some hope/cope
Hah! I see the logic, but I think that happened only because the big powers backing each Korea couldn’t push the proxy war to overwhelm each other either way… But then again, I could be wrong, and that could be a viable option here, I really don’t know… The less buried mines on earth, the better, but when you’ve got 1/4 of the population of your enemy, you don’t exactly have the privilege of fighting traditionally either…
Your scientists were so preoccupied with whether or not they could, they didn’t stop to think if they should!