Skip Navigation

InitialsDiceBearhttps://github.com/dicebear/dicebearhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/„Initials” (https://github.com/dicebear/dicebear) by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/)GH
GarbageShoot [he/him] @ GarbageShoot @hexbear.net
Posts
13
Comments
4,025
Joined
3 yr. ago

  • Yeah, I mean, I'm of course talking about an alt that I have on .ml, a lot of us have alts or such is my impression, but that's just because Hexbear is one of the most widely-defederated instances out there that isn't, like, an attempt to do 4chan or something. You can see a lot more with a .ml account, even though that unfortunately includes .world users, who are like 70% of who I am complaining about (some of them, I'm sure, are good people).

  • Thank you for demonstrating my point. Please pick another thread to go cry about the Capitol riot in, it's not like there's a lack of liberal and more-highly-federated (and thereby more liberal) instances to do that in.

  • The way people talk about the 3/5s compromise is weird to me. Slaves were still considered property and fully not citizens, it was just how they were counted on the census for the purpose of the House of Representatives (i.e. how many representatives slave states should get). The logical answer, considering slaves had no right to vote, is that the census should not count them as citizens for the purpose of a slave state's representative count, and it was slavers pushing for them to be counted as though they were full citizens in a political power grab that was the problem. It was the positive, rather than negative, side of 3/5, i.e. the present 3/5 and not the absent 2/5, that represented an injustice to slaves. The compromise never should have been made because, for this purpose, they never should have been counted as citizens at all until they were freed, and the compromise strictly gave power to the slavers.

    Incidentally, assuming Kamala lived in a free state (which her home state of California was), it wouldn't apply to her at all, she'd just be a normal citizen.

  • That your friends are critical of most other media lines is most likely due to the culture of US media criticism that CN is trying to contribute to. It sounds to me more like an indication that someone else should pick up the torch and handle those issues specifically.

    If they took on Russia, especially, they would most likely get banned from most platforms and have their patreon taken down before too long. You've seen that happen before with other programs. As the Cold War escalates, that will probably apply to China and NK too (actually it already sometimes happens with NK).

    Just yesterday or the day before on lemmy, I saw one of our comrades link a bunch of sources in a comment, including episode 8 of Citations Needed. The response? Their interlocutor ignored basically everything except that Greenwald was on the show and, because Greenwald correctly denies that Russia successfully "attacked" the US via hacking in 2016, which they took as evidence that everything involved was a waste of time.

  • The thing I don't see people saying enough is that there will be elections after Trump, and a vote for third parties that allows Trump to win is much less damaging in the long term than a vote that enables the rightward slide of the Democrats.

  • Because they have a perfectly fine position in the pipeline by promoting a framework for discrediting western media already; Dying in the hill of "China isn't doing genocide" or whatever is a rhetorical tact that would turn many people away. Let other people, especially those who actually have some familiarity with China and its media, handle defending China more competently.

    "What about Israel/Palestine, then?"

    There are definitely some rabid zionists, but generally among their audience Palestine is already strongly supported, which cannot be said of China (by which I mean that it's split, not negative). Virtually no one who is declaring them Hamas for their Israel coverage is that interested in what else they have to say anyway.

  • I agree, Felix is existentially terrifying. I'm not as irked by his speech patterns as some people are, but the rest of it, from spending all his time on game slop, to his attitude toward sex (e.g. bragging about being able to get groupies who are much more attractive than him via the show), to spending however many thousands of dollars on a replica of a sword from Dark Souls, he's like a rich version of what I'm personally terrified of ending up as, to the point that I earnestly would prefer being a corpse and being saved the trouble of looking back at my life and seeing that I really never did anything worthwhile. He's only tolerable to me because usually he focuses on jokes and his knowledge about various internet figures and Israel.

  • and Matt Christman who seems to be the only one moving forward with building a life and family.

    I'm glad Matt is able to do at least this much of what he wants, but I think that the way you're judging people here is extremely toxic in a patriarchal nuclear-family-worship kind of way. You don't need to have a partner, much less a child, to be an adult and a worthwhile person.

    If Felix had a wife and a child, it wouldn't make him the slightest bit less pathetic outside of the time and effort spent on childrearing, which I think he'd be shit at anyway and probably have the wife bear the brunt of indefinitely.

    So, uh, be nicer to Will, his affect annoys me but I think on a personal level he seems perfectly fine, plus he's the actual show runner while everyone else just riffs and rants.