I was talking about how we always have this type of discussion frequently with my therapist earlier today. It’s always nice to pause and remind ourselves and those outside of our philosophy. One thing that I’d like to add is we might not be(e) nice sometimes because of personal circumstances. We are having a bad day and a comment will trigger a reaction that would be uncommon or we might be aggressive without provocation.
In cases we feel the need to hit back, I’d advise postponing the response by at least one hour. Give yourself time to clear your mind and think things over. And if you are the target of users having a bad day, reminding them that they are not be(e)ing nice is the alternative. Asking questions is the best. “Did I offend you?”, “Did I say something wrong?”, “I don’t understand what the issue is.” Even if they keep the aggression, they will point to the specific issue that needs to be worked on, or prove they don’t want to discuss genuinely.
I read it. I was familiar with that form of activism, but I don't agree this is it. I saw all the examples presented as forms of reframing the situations to deflate their original meaning. The author says using weird is non violent, but it's an attack using a word. The advice is use it because it hurts, not because it makes their ideals less appealing.
I sometimes say to my best friend, among other generally inappropriate things, that something she does is gay, and she does the same to me. It is a private reclamation of the use of the word gay as a slur, but outside any context, to an outside observer, it’s just casual homophobia.
Let me go back to that child. I don’t think they will hear horrible people being called weird and see it as being bad weird. It’s just plain weird. If it’s not being different that’s the issue, but the specific bad behavior, why the focus is on weird? We know words help shape our perception, we fight for those changes. What bothers me is hearing the same harmful words I heard so many times towards me and around me being used by those who seemed to understand how they hurt. I guess it’s similar to the discussion of being okay to attack someone’s looks if they are on the other side.
I decided to give a chance to Super Virus Defense. It was made by the brother in law of my best friend, but it was described as tower defense so it sat ignored for over a year. I play on PC, but it's very mobile like. I'm addicted. There's a grind element to buy upgrades, but it's been so non mindless that it reminded me of how big companies just choose to make you suffer. Specifically, I can grind while completing higher difficulties in previous levels or by playing the endless mode.
Playing it made me want to create a post with all the Brazilian indie games that I really liked over the years.
Does it really work like that? I would say that they are not trying to fool any test, just getting harder to be detected. The goal being looking completely realistic.
Adaptive coping mechanisms empower you to change a stressful situation or adjust your emotional response to stress.
The point of my post was to say there is a difference between fantasy and plans, and not to judge or act as if fantasies will ever be more than that.
The problem here is fear, not hate. The person that harmed them lives in the same neighborhood and running into them while on the street is a great concern, but my friend could go out in part because of this fantasy. It's small, stupid and generic. Unhealthy is writing useless in your arm using nail clippers or trying to cut your own wrists.
From Brazil here. I always thought latinx was for the community inside the US. Latine follows what was decided here as neutral with the -e suffix. Honestly, initially I wouldn't imagine that x was pronounced and was used only in text.
There was a serious security vulnerability previous to Python 3.11 if I recall correctly. You can use pyenv to manage Python versions though: https://github.com/pyenv/pyenv
Isn't that a matter of behavior? The crack is doing something expected from a crack and the system warns you because most wouldn't use it without being aware. If you really trust the file, add it as an exception.
Or do you want a software that can vet good cracks from bad cracks?
I just now realized that your vote means nothing if the majority of the group you're assigned to voted differently, and it means little when with the majority. I'm not from the US and I thought I had understood the modular voting system and the issues with only two great parties, but their combination is horrifying.
The writer's complaints seem out of place. The restaurants hijacking the app for advertising would maybe affect the longevity of the experiment, but their issue is not being sure if they are really helping the environment. I imagine the greatest benefit is for those on a budget. And the worst outcome would be restaurants that previously donated the leftovers becoming greed.
I saw the same post and started writing something that went in a different direction, but that seems complementary. Basically, you don't have to respond.
I do believe you're responsible for what you write, but you're under no obligation to answer any and every kind of criticism that is thrown at you. You might have to read something that's hard or hurtful in the comments, which is fine if they are trying to follow the recommendations listed above, it's a process, but you don't have to accept an attack to your personhood or an attack to what you wrote without any explanation.
I understand the desire to make clarifications and being clearly comprehended, or defending oneself from attacks, but a direct response might be counterproductive. Say nothing, or go back and put amends to the original thoughts with an edit.
Also, and this is for all the parts involved, the discussion is not going anywhere. It will not get drown out in a sea of comments, you can take your time and come back later. More importantly, you'll likely see the same people around again. Take care of your community. Defend, understand, educate, be nice.
People don't seem to grasp how terrible doxxing can be. It's easy to distance yourself from the consequences when everything happens online and all is forgotten within a day or two. If you call the police to deal with a problem, you should expect violence. In a similar way, expecting to make people accountable when you sick an angry anonymous mob on them is foolish. Violence is the most likely result.
State Code defines obscene matter as anything an average person believes depicts or describes sexually explicit conduct, nudity, sex or certain bodily functions; or anything a reasonable person would find lacks serious literary, artistic, political or scientific value. According to State Code 61-8A-2, any adult who knowingly and intentionally displays obscene matter to a minor could be charged with a felony, fined up to $25,000 and face up to five years in prison if convicted.
You gotta love when they say "average" or "reasonable". Average people can judge their own lives, reasonable people can talk about subjects they are interested and have studied in some capacity, a random person who wouldn't be asked to decide if a work has any serious literary, artistic, political or scientific value in normal circumstances can't be an arbiter of the law.
I was talking about how we always have this type of discussion frequently with my therapist earlier today. It’s always nice to pause and remind ourselves and those outside of our philosophy. One thing that I’d like to add is we might not be(e) nice sometimes because of personal circumstances. We are having a bad day and a comment will trigger a reaction that would be uncommon or we might be aggressive without provocation.
In cases we feel the need to hit back, I’d advise postponing the response by at least one hour. Give yourself time to clear your mind and think things over. And if you are the target of users having a bad day, reminding them that they are not be(e)ing nice is the alternative. Asking questions is the best. “Did I offend you?”, “Did I say something wrong?”, “I don’t understand what the issue is.” Even if they keep the aggression, they will point to the specific issue that needs to be worked on, or prove they don’t want to discuss genuinely.