AlDente @ AlDente @sh.itjust.works

Posts

0

Comments

316

Joined

2 yr. ago

For real. Even Bernie Sanders has praised Trump on a single issue before. Are we going to turn against him too?

Donald Trump Gets Unexpected Praise from Bernie Sanders: 'Good Idea'

Their exact words are still there, so there would be no point in lying about it. The exchange reads:

Maybe you should add "no dissent allowed" to the rules... -Diva

We already have a no authoritarian rule in the sidebar, so that won't be necessary -WSYU

It's may just be a joke, but it is clearly equating authoritarianism and dissent. That is all I was commenting on. I don't care about the fate of Diva or the banning of tankies. I just thought this back and forth was funny and ironic. I hope you get the chance to relax this weekend.

Not tolerating tankies and not tolerating any dissent are two completely different things. I'm specifically calling out the later. When suggested to add a "no dissent rule", the mod respond that they already had that covered. It sounds like reddit-admin kind of behavior.

Even outside of this specific instance, they're saying any dissenting opinion can result in a ban. If you think it's normal, you can enjoy your echo chambers.

Absolutely, I don't disagree at all. But by claiming to not tolerate any dissenting opinion, you are not "banning authoritarians"; instead, you are becoming the very thing you declared hatred for. I havent seen any evidence that Diva is authoritarian.

Instead, I've seen a mod openly claim that any dissenting opinions would result in a ban; and this would only result in the further developement of an echochamber.

Sure, it's your community, so you ban who you like. You don't need to justify it to me.

I tried steering the conversation back to my actual point, but it seems like all that was ignored. I thought your rule exchange was funny and incredibly ironic. You might enjoy banning any dissenting opinions, but don't be surprised when that earns you an "authoritarian" label.

From your other responses to this post, it seems like your primary beef with Diva was their anti-war stances in their post history. You can't play the paradox-of-tolerance card in response to that. To make your other strawmen relatable, are you saying Diva's comments are in any way fascist or transphobic? I haven't seen any intolerance in Diva's posts.

What I'm directly responding to is the exchange with the "no dissent allowed" rule suggestion, and you basically saying you already got that covered. Squashing all dissent is authoritarian, and you referenced your "no authoritarian" rule when responding with this. I don't believed I ever joined in one of these PTB discussions before, but this was just too much. Can you not see the irony?

If you're openly saying that you don't tolerate any dissent in your community, then it sounds like you're acting as an authoritarian. Perhaps it's time to ban yourself 🤔

Ah, you are right regarding the full dataset. Thank you.

It's strange that they start off with, and seem to focus on, the under-45 respondents unless they were trying to push a positive-viewpoint message. For that age group, it was 31% positive and 41% negative. However, this group seems like a better fit for the Lemmy/Reddit audience. Furthermore, left-leaning voters appear to be more positive in this poll than their right-leaning counterparts.

With all that in mind, I still think this meme works well and wouldn't have been improved with Bernie.

Yeah, that link shows 31%, not 18% for the under-45 respondents. Nearly a third of those have a positive approval of Luigi.

Edit: corrected to under-45 group.

In your link below, 18% only includes "strong positive". Why exclude "somewhat positive"?

Edit (correcting numbers as pointed out): 31% positive, 41% negative for the under-45 respondents. 19% positive, 61% negative overall.

They're 100% BlueMAGA in my opinion.

A lot more than six people were holding signs. Nearly the entire Democrat side was last night. The post implies an earlier event.

Yeah boiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii!

Those are both great questions. Of course, I can't predict how all that will shake out. However, to bring it back to my original point, I think either hypothetical will increase the legitimatecy of Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies.

You make some interesting parallels. While Bitcoin is not mined from the Earth like oil, it is similarly mined all-around the world and not just in US jurisdictions. If another country tried manipulating Bitcoin to crash or pump-and-dump after the US becomes a major stakeholder it would be interesting to see how the US responds.

Again, I'm not speaking in favor or against Trump, just exploring the facts.

Sure, in regards to Trump, you can criticize that all you want, but it doesn't detract from cryptocurrencies becoming more legitimate per your own criteria.

Bitcoin is climbing again today because Trump reaffirmed his intention to create a US cryptocurrency reserve. If state currencies have value because they are backed by the military, wouldn't this give the same source of value to these currencies? I don't think the US isn't going to be happy with outside entities messing with the value of their assets.

I'm convinced Prusa and Bambu pricing is very simular; their printers just aren't always an apples-to-apples comparison. When considering enclosed, metal framed, coreXY printers, the Prusa Core One can be purchased as a kit for $950, but the Bambu X1C is $1150. (I highly recommend the Prusa kit options for new owners so they can get familiar with maintaining their machine.) At the mini end, you have the same $200 difference, but in the other direction. The Prusa Mini+ kit is $430 while the Bambu A1 Mini is $220. However, these Bambu prices are currently shown as discounted and I'm not sure if they ever go up to their higher MSRPs. Therefore, I don't like how Prusa is the only printer brand in this guide with an "expensive" warning.

Edit: Perhaps it would add more clarity to instead include the MSRP in parentheses beside the individual printers listed below.

Yes, it makes for a nice buying opportunity.