VoxAdActa @ VoxAdActa @beehaw.org

Posts

4

Comments

69

Joined

2 yr. ago

when you keep banning things, those people crave it more.

Your lawyer called; he said you should stop posting your defense strategy for your upcoming CP trial to Lemmy.

What's wrong with me that I think some of these are really clever.

Her date was pleasant enough, but she knew that if her life was a movie this guy would be buried in the credits as something like “Second Tall Man.”

I mean, that's actually kind of brilliant.

Are there ghosts? Because I'll pay a premium if there are for sure ghosts.

you honestly believe EVERY SINGLE RELIGIOUS PERSON EVER has no critical thinking skills?

I honestly believe the ones that matter certainly don't. The ones who are paying the church's bills and showing up to their pep rallies every week are very clearly not spending any time thinking about it.

The LGBTQIA+ pastors that started a socialist christian church in Kentucky?

Who? Let me know when they start affecting actual government policy, or even just going on TV and saying "We condemn those other Christians who say gay people should be shot in the back of the head." That's what we've been demanding from Muslims since 2001, why are you special?

MLK? Malcom X? Johann Bernoulli, Blaise Pascal, and Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz,

Blah blah blah, fallacious appeal to authority, blah blah blah. Name-dropping is not "critical thinking", and you really shouldn't have included a literal, straight-up alchemist in that list if you were trying to use it to make a point.

all of whom are some of the most important mathematicians in history and were religious, all couldn’t think for themselves?

MLK and Malcom X were mathematicians? TIL.

Immanuel Kant, famous influential philosopher, no critical thinking.

So what I'm hearing you say here is: "If smart people believe in magic sky fairy, magic sky fairy must be logical to believe in," which is about the level of discourse I'd expect from someone unfamiliar with the concept of critical thinking. Thanks for being an object lesson.

Can we please move beyond this 2010 New Atheism view that every religious leader/person is stupid and unable to critically think?

Why? They clearly choose not to apply that ability to a big part of their lives. In this specific case under discussion, their entire career requires not applying any critical thinking. Their paycheck depends on their ability to convince other people of things that are not and can never be supported by any actual evidence.

It's the reason that crowd is so susceptible, as a trend, to con men, malicious misinformation, and developing entire belief systems off a Facebook meme that pairs one politician's face with a fake quote or a quote from a totally different politician. They're trained, often from birth, that evidence is not necessary in the process of deciding what you want to believe; in fact, that evidence is often the bad guy (in that it opposes "faith").

So, no. We'll drop the characterization if and only if it stops being relevant to our day-to-day lives in America. It's not the atheists who are saying they think I should get the death penalty (DeSantis's preacher), that I should be shot in the back of the head (Texas Baptist Church), that God should kill me slowly (Pure Words Baptist Church), and that I should be hunted with dogs (governor of SC).

Tell me why you don’t like it!

This is fine while we're still small, and the number of intentional bad actors is limited. If our user sign-up vibe check filter ever fails, though, and we get inundated with a thousand alt-right trolls, the inability to downvote is going to majorly suck. Having to sit down and compose a well-worded, sourced comment every time they brain-dump a load of reality-distorting rubbish onto my feed is a huge time- and energy-sink, which is exactly what they're going for. It takes them 3 minutes to type some pile of complete nonsense, and it takes me half an hour or more to debunk it. By the time I'm finished with my "this is why you're wrong" comment, they've gone on to copy/paste their own fuckery 30 different times over 10 different comment threads and 6 different Lemmy posts.

Eventually, nobody will have the energy for these chuds any longer, and their screeds will stay up unopposed or only marginally opposed, which is their intended goal.

Downvotes make it simple, quick, and easy to fight this bullshit-shotgun tactic, because clicking one time is faster than the fastest-typing sealion. While they outpace my ability to sit and debunk their "arguments", each one of their posts can accumulate double-digit downvotes before they even finish posting it on the next thread, hiding them from everyone who's not sorting the comment section by "dumbfuckery".

We'll see how it goes, though. I tend to be cynical and doomy, and maybe the things I worry about will never happen, or will shape up differently than I predict. But the fact that none of the "Yay, no downvotes!" people ever address this concern is something that reduces my level of confidence in the scheme.

Depending on the style guide, some prepositions are capitalized. For example, AMA says to capitalize prepositions that are 4 or more letters long (then, after, etc).

I can’t grasp the whole concept of Discord servers even though I was moderating one. They’re bad as a knowledge base, they’re bad as a discussion platform, so why do people keep creating them?

I mean, as a chat room, it's fantastic. It's a massively upgraded IRC (except in terms of the ease of discovering new servers), with QOL features I didn't even know how badly I wanted back in the old Yahoo! Chat days (such as the ability to spin up a temporary thread to take an in-depth conversation out of the main channel without going to DMs). It's for discussions that happen right now and are not meant to be conserved forever because, generally speaking, they're not expected to be that important. I love discord for that, because I miss chat rooms.

But it's absolutely garbage for being a repository of static knowledge. Releasing patch notes only in discord is ridiculous.

I wish people would stop trying to use Discord as an information repository/hub. It's a chat program. It's designed for people to engage in transient, real-time back-and-forth communication, not to store discussions or information for long-term use. I get so cranky at people who insist that Discord can be used like a web forum when it so obviously sucks nuts at it.

A forum has content that can stay up indefinitely, where the message history on narrowly defined subjects is packaged into a convenient container and is visible as far back in time as one cares to go. It's easily searchable, and old discussions for which a user has new questions can be brought back up to the top of the list, in full. Trying to recreate that kind of functionality on Discord is not only stupid, but also generally futile. It's the exact opposite of what Discord is intended to be.