Do you have anything to prove that? I’m serious, This feels like it shouldn’t be binding but I can find no legal reasons or information that it wouldn’t be, and I would really like to find that.
Seems ludicrous that a company can be like “OK STARTING IN 30 DAYS NO SUING US ALLOWED. IF YOU DON’T SPECIFICALLY TELL US WITHIN THOSE 30 DAYS THAT YOU MIGHT SOMEDAY NEED TO SUE US THEN YOU NEVER CAN FOREVER.” But then a lot of stuff here is ludicrous.
You and people who hold beliefs like yours should just pick a new name for yourselves, I’ve tried to convince family members of this for years. Let the jerks have the name they tainted, pick a better name for your beliefs, and get out of the way for people to condemn the institution of Christianity for it’s actions.
You shouldn’t feel responsible for them. You should just let them suffer the consequences of their actions and get outta the way.
Well if there is no practical point in our communicating, with our senses of morality being so alien to each other, could you at least avoid doing it anyways for the sake of being so insulting to me?
I don’t need that condescension, thanks, I’m all topped up.
Even if you are technically right, you are morally wrong. They should be allowed to register in that league, and if they weren’t then the coach lying about their gender was the correct and moral thing to do.
Crazy to watch people twist themselves in knots bending over backwards to try and excuse sexism.
But I don’t even think you are technically right. All those quotes stink like excuses and BS.
Not to be rude but this is an oversimplified and incorrect view of voting and is the exact kind of mindset I am against.
If you try to insist non-voting is somehow support for a specific candidate, what does that say about people who can’t vote for personal/health reasons? If someone working poverty wages, unable to get the day off to vote, can’t get their vote counted, are they somehow a bad person?
Additionally, although less significant, I can’t consider it morally wrong, ever, to vote third party. Strategically wrong, sure, it often is, but the point of a vote is to choose, and I can’t blame someone for using their right to choose to be an idealist rather than a strategist. And honestly, in an election like this with so much frustration towards the major parties, 3rd party has a better chance of winning than usual… although I’m sure that is a stressful and unpleasant thing to hear if you dislike third parties.
That’s the basis of what the spoiler effect is and why it’s a problem to consider, yeah.
I just think it is better to be clear about how it works and what it means. Non-voting and third party votes being described as explicit support for trump has some troubling implications.
I just want to point out a thing said in this, that I have seen said hundreds of other times, which is not correct.
Due to the spoiler effect, a leftist vote for a third party candidate is essentially a vote for trump
This is incorrect, most charitably interpreted as an exaggeration, but it is said so often I think people are misunderstanding the spoiler effect.
The spoiler effect is real and it can suppress a victory of not-as-bad candidates if they have a popular opposition, but it is never as bad as “essentially voting for trump”. It is equivalent to not voting at all, at worst.
And it is also a simplification of the situation to imply that the spoiler effect only affects democrats. There is a similar thing going on with conservative third parties.
I feel like if it really mapped so cleanly onto the trolley problem, there wouldn’t need to be 4 paragraphs of text included throughout the meme in an attempt to head off any arguments…
Spez explicitly promised they wouldn’t get rid of old reddit.
Which I took to mean they intend to ruin it by cramming all the shitty new features into it and taking away the things it does better.
Edit: I don’t trust spez lmao I just think what he said might be a hint for how they will fuck reddit up going forward
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
Ok
It reads to me as a response to ones self doubt. So while the phrase “I’m not good enough” might not literally have been said, it is the basic sentiment of self doubt and this post is a rejection of that thought.
I agree quotes for emphasis are bad and occasionally outright terrible, but this doesn’t seem quite like that.
It is. I didn’t misunderstand it, I just wanted to comment on it.
This is probably the grossest “um, actually” I’ve said ever, but I think technically rotting is what eventually gets rid of the covid in your body. A recently deceased person would still “have” covid in them.
You wanted to say “You can be on lemmy without bringing reddit here.” And phrased it as a bad question so you could post it here. You just want to soapbox.
Managing the content of your own feed is your responsibility. If people post off topic in communities, handle it with a report, not another post.
You are creating what you are complaining about. This thread is the most discussion about reddit I’ve seen in a week or more.
Lmao you don’t really even know what you are talking about.
“Free speech” means the government itself cannot infringe your speech. It doesn’t mean SHIT to anyone who isn’t the government. “The court of public opinion” is not a literal court! And it is a group expression of the free speech you love!
You are just bitching about people being deplatformed off of privately owned websites (which isn’t what happened to this asshole because he is on fuckin netflix) and you want to be dramatic and make it seem like they are all victims and need to be protected based on your misunderstanding of law
You are just trying to get people to rage watch it.
The transphobia is obviously, clearly there. It won’t stop being fucked up and shitty because he giggled after he said it.
Ah ok I misunderstood your comment.
I had just read the thing and had that it only applied to US fresh in my head. Then I read your comment and assumed “here” referred to US also. My bad.