What do you like to play?
While I definitely agree that routine checkups like that should be happening (and especially for people who just got their licenses or are 60+) at least for a car dominant culture like the US I can see that being a huge burden both on safety organizations/DMVs and on the drivers themselves. :/
That’s why I hate it when conservatives trot out that fake Voltaire quote about the ones who you can’t criticize are who rules you.
Bullshit. Kings and emperors have been satirized and mocked for millennia. It’s not that they can’t be criticized, it’s that after their nakedness is on display, the accusations fade into the dirt; nothing sticks, nothing matters.
“No but you see they’re protected by the complacency and ignorance of the hordes of people they’ve hoodwinked!” “Are they now.”
Everything you’ve written here is accurate, with the exception of ethnic superiority. The current regime has been arguing that the Ukrainian race doesn’t even exist, that they’re just “little” or wayward Russians, which is why one of their genocidal moves is to steal children to try to prevent their demographic decline.
The Nazis would never have stolen Jewish children to make into German citizens after they enacted their Final Solution. Putin intends to swallow Ukraine AND her people, not just clear the land for Russians to move in. The “reeducation” of the stolen children shows that the point is to deny Ukrainians their own culture and heritage and simply claim it all for Russia.
A bit nitpicky, but someone is going to argue that because the actions of the Kremlin isn’t 1:1 with the Nazis that they simply can’t be compared. This is an understandable consideration under the view that the Holocaust was a uniquely systemic and thorough genocide of unprecedented proportions that the Russian attack hasn’t reached, but since the person you’re responding to is implying that the Ukrainians are the real Nazis then I imagine that that is not their viewpoint…
It is definitely tough to shed that sense. Growing up knowing I was “weird” and therefore bad (no, it was just undiagnosed autism, but I was an adult before I knew that and that element of myself had long since been solidified) meant that if I wanted people to like me then I had to give more than they did in order to just break even, which is exhausting and unfair, especially since I have a tendency to read neutral expressions as negative ones.
One thing that has helped me is the realization that that happy feeling I get when someone came to me for help and I helped them? Goes both ways for good people. And it sucks for them, too, if you’re suffering and they could help but you were afraid to ask. Having standards is both a defense of yourself and a means of determining which people should stay prominent in your life.
Did anyone check if the “Contact Us” page included the login details beneath each person listed?
There are millions of people that would move on AOCs command.
I’m sorry what? Agreeing with her, voting for her, campaigning for her: none of that is anything like the coordinated, multi-pronged and likely months long harassment campaign you’re talking about.
“When I was young, I admired clever people. Now that I am old, I admire kind people.”
“The brutally honest care more about the brutality than the honesty.”
“Reasonable people can disagree reasonably.”
I can’t live up to those ideals but it would be cruel to myself and others to stop trying to.
Wasn’t there one of these where he kept a steak in the danger zone for like a week or so?
What a system is capable of doing initially for a lucky fraction of the populace and where its inevitable and terrible end leads for the vast majority are two entirely different things.
Those are all good points! Certainly some of it is growing pains, but it would make for a better entry point to have a walkthrough upon signup. That could be true of apps, as well.
It’s all a balancing act, isn’t it? Between managing reputation and the increased trust/context it brings, allowing for a broader range of opinions (and more contentious ones) versus encouraging consensus within a community, and managing user expectations. How do you keep out trolls and chan-culture without encouraging fearful bean counting and a smoothening of the many bumpy opinions into what is widely perceived as acceptable?
What works for a suddenly engorged, amorphous and non-profit driven organization like Lemmy is going to be different from what Reddit can do from a top-down perspective. I’ve always held paid actors to a higher standard than unpaid ones, so I’m willing to rely more on my own internal sorting of value. Everyone has experienced a time where they or someone else made a good point that was ignored in favor of the popular person’s more mundane one, and I think that that’s just a part of humanity that you can’t kick out without establishing some sort of external arbiter.
I don’t know the answer to it, just that a simpler system that one disagrees with is easier to navigate than one that’s more complex.
If I could live in a triplex with one of my siblings and our friend, so each of us knows we have quiet neighbors who don’t use excessive amounts of utilities while still having privacy, that would be absolutely phenomenal.
I don’t NEED a huge place, and a lot of things bigger than an apartment feel wasteful for just 1 or 2 people, but if I’m stuck with shit roomies/neighbors again I WILL begin killing and eating people.
Besides sorting by age or number of replies, how else would you sort comments, and is that any better than using user generated scores?
I’ve become aware, as I get older, how my initial emotional reaction to conflict isn’t always fair and is usually pointed backward, defensive and angry. I also know that I do better if I have time alone to process how I’m feeling, and often by the time I’m done things have moved on.
What I’ve been working on is to stop using excuses - the moment has passed, I’d just be dredging up the same argument, I’ve had this conversation in my head a bunch but they never turn out exactly right - and just go back to the people involved and tell them how I feel because they deserve that effort. There have been disagreements I’ve had where I wasn’t in the wrong but the other party did something I can admire and appreciate, and it doesn’t hurt me any to say that.
And it never ends with what I imagine is “argument perfection”: a point by point discussion of intent and action and history. Which is silly because life is messy but it gets better and I and others grow more patient and willing to move forward if I’m not always bracing for a blow.
That’s…probably a bit confusing, but it’s been something I’ve been mulling over, so…what personality traits of yours are you working on?
Question inspired by a Charley horse that hit in the middle of the night.
