valentinesmith

Thanks for sharing, it really did feel like a sketch out of the movie.

I guess I would also focus on the dog and the niece when they are more approachable and not as combative and so many people in your family are changing quite profoundly

I hope you have a lovely day without phone calls!

Okay, ich hab das Spiel nicht selber gespielt. Aber ich finde den Takeaway von dem Artikel ein bisschen flach.

Klar müssen wir koalieren, um eine Brandmauer gegen rechts zu haben. Aber ich finde die Formulierung impliziert mir etwas viel, dass man als linksorientierte Person mit der Koalition unglücklich sein würde, aber dass dann ja später vielleicht bessere Zeiten kommen.

Ja klar geht es immer langsamer als man es haben will, aber ich sehe auch nicht warum man nicht kritisch sein sollte? Ich kann auch mit Leuten koalieren, die ich kritisch betrachte, ich habe momentan aber eher das Gefühl dass sich CxU sehr darauf ausruht Migration als Thema zu haben und den Aufschwung nach der Ampel zu nutzen um einfach wieder ihr „übliches“ Programm abzuspielen.

In welchem Szenario kommt es also hier auf meine Koalition an? Das Spiel impliziert und der Artikel auch dass man noch Macht hat und Sachen bewegen kann. Ich finde die Demos zeigen total klar, dass der Weg der CxU sehr sehr negativ betrachtet wird. Die CxU kann trotzdem einfach mit der AfD anbändeln und es ist egal was meine Perspektive dazu ist. Natürlich hoffe ich, dass unsere laute Stimme gegen Rechts durch Merz‘s „Dickschädel“ geht, aber mit welchem Angebot von Koalition sollten wir hier denn locken?

Sorry für den etwas unsortierten Rant, irgendwie hat mir der Artikel echt nicht zugesagt, aber danke dir fürs Teilen.

Sure,

I guess Im sorry if my phrasing made that feel very combative, which is not how I intended it. I didn‘t know it was common courtesy to tell people you block them though, so have a good one.

It sounds horrifying to me still to be honest. I dunno how his wives being hot (is that what we are talking about?) really changes that.

I just don’t see how the „success“ alleviates the self-commodification and how regimenting your whole life based on some ideas around extracting highest value sounds like a pleasant life?

But sure, if you do relationships to extract value out of it, then maybe that is a reasonable way to go at it and maybe you even get together with pretty people that makes it worth it for you. if this was me I would still ask myself what the fuck am I doing this for, but maybe thats just my existentialism talking.

Agreed especially on the comment as a showcase of „mod differences“.

I think this just rather corroborates Ada‘s statement of how there were multiple reports the mods did not follow up on and how Ada had to eventually always do it.

So even with a good faith reading I do not see how this is a problematic ban and not just a common recurring topic which this instance has always protected us from, which is the whole reason I am on this instance.

While I understand that the „modding differences“ were the reason you aimed to migrate, I as a user do not remotely see the benefits of a move when it was Ada that stepped up to do moderation. Especially if as Ada mentioned our community had reported these instances, a move would just signify a deterioration of our experience.

I have to reiterate that I have always appreciated Ada‘s decisions. The stepping up and sheltering many of us on the Reddit exodus and providing me with one of the few places nowadays I can go to and expect a civil, homely and communal experience.

I for one repeatedly have enjoyed your community management and moderation style.

I am happy and glad to know that someone as experienced and resourceful has always been committed to create, foster and defend a safe space like blahaj.

The fact that moderation specifically is cited as a reason to switch instances is worrisome to me and feels like it will not be a place for me I want to frequent and I am sad that you are being painted in a bad light here.

I thank you for your continuous good work and hope that this move at least eventually will lead to fewer bad moments for you, because you do not deserve to be treated badly with the care you are giving this community.

He is flirting with the alt-right. And some movements „dabble“ in nazi memorabilia to mention the most flagrant connections to it or his failure to even outright criticize Hitler.

I know that the word Nazi is really triggering but its also true in this case. He is not said to be a Nazi himself but flirting with them. Which is factual and not really discrediting per se.

If the only argument here is: Nazis can only be German and its a historical term that cannot ever be applied to other nations I think that belies how everyone consistently uses language in a not strict academic sense and even then there are academic papers linking him to Nazism and right ideology in general.

And your other insinuation of saying that „anyone who isnt working for a more just and equal society“ would be applicable to Trump, his campaign and the things he platforms falls flat if you look at what his recurring talking points are. Sure let’s use the word Nazi less bit of course in association with Trump it gets used for very clear, explicit parallels. But I don’t think you really care about that if you try to frame everything as tiny transgressions by people who are just not „fighting for a more just and equal society“. If Nazi is too strong a word, what would you propose? And is the use of it logically a valid reason to discredit an opinion? On an open source platform talking about people who have English as a second or third language?

In what way? As far as I know they have spoken out against TERFs and the like and are themselves not identifying as cis.

Specifically I know they have always argued for a more open and inclusive perspective of womanhood so I‘m unfamiliar on how they would be problematic.

yes I really liked it. Even the analysis/hypothesis that it really is the moment of „not getting pandered to“ that enrages that demographic. Any moment they do not feel like the target audience they take grave offense.

That‘s honestly a terribly broad question.

What are the people you are allies to telling you they want or are missing? Are you helping them in achieving what they want?

What are you doing for them besides that and do you think it is the right thing to do?

And yeah I don’t know, coming up short is a pretty loaded phrase. Some struggles we might still lose and still we have to fight regardless and relentlessly. And if you „fall short“ just try to do more, as well as the fact that we cannot all provide the same kind of support so its gonna be very personally biased either way

I honestly think that it’s totally fine to ask for citations and I also would have loved to see them. Furthermore I also really think that it was much more reasonable to ask the second person for the citation than the first one so I am in total agreement with you.

And I do really want to clarify that I was honestly just commenting on the doomy comment of: „a reflection of our times“ Because this really just felt more like an anchor effect hypothesis moment to me of being biased by the first data input however outrageous it may seem.

Even if you had casted doubt (which I again don’t think you did) that would’ve been fine and healthy I would argue. I love it when people ask for citations and then even read through them and discuss the limitations of it, I think that’s fucking awesomesauce and I’m glad people like you can read it and share their insights on it.

Long story short I was sharing another - to me more plausible - explanation of the vote distribution. Hope you have a lovely day and this kerfuffle did not discourage you from exploring and sharing the interest details of the world.

(god I should really learn to write more concise)

Maybe, but they could’ve also posted the same request for citations on the first poster but did not.

I think that really does reflect how someone can just say whatever and when challenged we are biased to only assume the second opinion as doubtful.