CynAq

I can’t believe in this day and age marijuana is still an object of political influence.

Just legalize the shit, period. What’s with all the conditionals attached to it? You just have to marginalize users one way or the other because god forbid we have fewer things “those people” do to point fingers at.

I want to play that so bad right now. The cat like movement with wall-climb, plus the alien vision is easily one of my top 5 unique gaming experiences.

Hua long dong 6 is a hell of a name tho

What in the actual fuck?

This is like a physical embodiment of Poe’s law.

I, too, agree with the scientists that we’re all well and truly fucked.

Yes. That’s why who said what, and in what context, matters.

You’re misunderstanding NYT’s position and intention on this when they call it “strict new ethics rules”. They are a neoliberal organization who’ll side with republicans more often than they do with progressives. They are trying to paint it in a bad, big government kinda sentiment when they call it “strict”.

Who told you western teenagers were too dumb to understand this fact and would fail to include the remedies to their ideology when they rile up against capitalism?

TIL I didn’t know the meaning of normies.

It’s not a word I use but when I saw it first, I thought it meant neurotypical, then after a while I saw it in a more political context and thought it meant centrist. Turns out, it just means mainstream. I think.

What exactly does this word mean?

Or conversely, a Christian apologist coming to an atheist community and saying “if god isn’t real why do good things” as if declaring you are a poorly educated sociopath is a good way to challenge people’s well formed ideas.

I’ve spent quite a bit of time trying to explain to some people why “woke leftists” are so quick to shut them up that they feel like they aren’t given a right to speak their minds. “Woke” ideas are generally more developed and complex than “common sense” ideas, which requires some thought being put into them while they evolve from basic to their current level, so when you challenge a person’s developed idea with a superficial, usually knee jerk level question or critique, you’re most likely engaging in a line of thinking they were done with quite early in their evolution of the idea you’re trying to challenge.

Right? It’s just that good!

I somehow skipped over Hollow Knight until now. I’m playing that this week, and maybe forever.
The game is dope.

<insert yo mama joke here>

We want to discuss topics. This is a place to do that.

Simple need, simple solution.

You don’t need an extra incentive to make people talk about things if people talking about things is the thing you want. You don’t want to incentivize people who don’t want to talk about things to be active somewhere you want people to talk about things because then those people will start doing the thing your’e incentivizing them for instead of talk about things.

I personally only want people who want to talk about things here, and don’t want people who don’t want to talk about things.

I’d say it’s exactly as productive as saying “It’s no big deal if Meta joins the fediverse, It’ll be fiiiiiine”.

We should watch everything very carefully.

Maybe they’re trying to make this urban legend hoax a reality.

Read this. You’ll understand the issue a little better.

I’m not in for the giveaway, I’m just supporting the random select suggestion since you mentioned the inherent problem with upvotes.

You can use something to randomly match users with a game. Maybe you can devise a way to use a random sample generator used to group people for randomized studies.

The problem here isn’t talking to Meta or Meta making a federated platform.

Nobody can prevent Meta from doing that anyway.

The problem is the need to push against the insistence of Meta to keep these meetings off the record. It’s against the entire philosophy of something like not only fediverse but FOSS in general.

If Meta wants good faith, they have to show it first.

Notice that in the email, Kev gives his guidance as to the matter. Do whatever the fuck you want as long as you put people first and make a product for the purpose of serving them.

This should be the attitude everyone should have first.

We will accept you as long as you’re bringing value to us, not the other way round, got that Meta?

As long as any dev is taking this approach, Meta included, I’m supporting them. If someone is secretive about their intentions about a public service which is not a for profit endeavor inherently, I’ll have a hard pass too.

I don’t know how many sinks I have to let in at this point.