tomenzgg @ tomenzgg @midwest.social

Posts

0

Comments

225

Joined

6 mo. ago

No one's said it, yet, but this is the best comment on this entire post.

A very easy way to square all this (and what I assumed everyone understood to be going on before I ever heard of this discourse) is that people are just using exaggeration for emphasis (a very common rhetorical tactic).

Of course people aren't saying it's literally thing-they're-referring-to but that it has so much in common that it's "practically" almost exactly that thing.

I feel like people overcomplicate what needn't be complicated, sometimes (like people hallucinating a "fourth-person" pronoun to explain a convention perfectly already provided by current linguistical constructs).

Ah; you have a fair point, there. I've never used a 5.24". I actually didn't know it was released on those.

I recently played a Floppotron video for my 7 year old and he was skeptical that computers sounded like that when games loaded.

Haha; I know I'm biased since, as a developer and someone interested in computers, I'm also more aware (even if I've never used) of older tech. but it is incredible just how much things have changed.

(only barely tangential to your point but) I mean, I also played the Oregon Trail and I'm definitely a younger millennial.

The first one, in terms of cinematic story telling, is actually incredibly good (I don't know how much that contributed to things); if you're interesting, this video essay points out a bunch of stuff I hadn't noticed, the first time: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zhdBNVY55oM.

Also, entirely agreed about the first two.

Treasure Planet is a well-written

Ehhh…; don't get me wrong: I still absolutely love it. But I absolutely get why it flopped, too.

Last year, I saw an article written by a recruiter about how recruiters are sort of biased against you if you use a non-GMail account because it "feels" like you're on old tech and out of touch and, therefore, will be hard to place and, Void, did it make be so mad.

had wheels

a bicycle

I suspect that your qualifications for what constitutes a bicycle are a tad short…

https://youtube.com/watch?v=OopyNOc7IXc

Damn it, I was just about to post it!

So good.

In a properly functioning world, this could easily be coupled with particular education on power dynamics and a lesson on consent, giving proper attention to why this might be more harmful to get than to him.

Of course, – so long as we're in this hypothetical world – you'd just have that kind of education be a part of sex ed. or the like for all students, to begin with, but, as we're in this world and that's Louisiana…

I don't think he'd won his election; I also think it was a local election, rather than a federal one? But, I'll admit, I hadn't been following his race very closely.

Besides your point but this is the aspect about Gorsuch that I can't seem to make internally consistent. He almost always rules in terms of native rights – even when, I think, it stretches his supposed originalist guiding principle – yet is more than happy to rule as a conservative on all other times and support "industry" and big business (even when it stretches his supposed originalist guiding principle).

I know that nothing necessitates a person to act logically and most act from emotion, more than anything, but most people, I find, have a relative reason they think they're being logically consistent but I can't seem to suss even that out, with regards to him.

I can't speak for how viable it is for success or whether it's just a grift (as I haven't had the time to really research into it) but feels like as good a time as any to mention that, out in Australia, The Pack Music Cooperative is fundraising for a cooperative music streaming service: https://www.thepackaustralia.com.au/

They haven't raised a lot towards their goal, yet, and could probably use an the help they can get. As a cooperative, they'll side step a lot of the probably problems a corporation like Spotify or Tidal will have and they already are dedicated to prioritizing artists and their rights.

Yeah…; I absolutely get that (and share the sentiment). I don't want to speak too quickly (though, from everything I've seen, his odds look good‽) but I will definitely relish their reactions when he wins. It's about time NYC gets a decent mayor.

O. K. I'm genuinely not (I tend to vote for the Greens in my local elections and I feel like one wouldn't've wanted Mamdani to win if coming up with this was solely because the candidate is progressive) but, like, I'm just a stranger to you so I can understand the hesitation to take at face value.

Regardless (as I believe this is the point we are both of the same opinion), the great news is still that he won. I think it was sometime last year I remember discussing with my partner how so many people have this idea of NYC as a liberal city yet their mayors have all been neoliberal centrists, at best; I know he hasn't won the main election, yet, but I'm definitely feeling hopeful about the odds.

Some people on Twitter (not saying it's a good or reliable source of news or political analysis, of course) were saying it's more likely to peel votes off of Adams; desperately hoping so…

I’m not mad or upset with you or anything I promise

O. K. That's fair enough; "talking out of your ass" and "kiss copirate dems asses" felt more angry than anything but maybe that's just because "ass" was being used.

I feel like the points I've mentioned I've gotten the reasoning for more from political scientists (as I don't really care about the positions of the media or the corporate Dem.s) but it was never my intent to convince anyone of them; I was trying to explain why, if the Dem.s did back Cuomo, it wouldn't address the reasoning of someone who believes not voting third party in a presidential election (an attempt to understand the building blocks of that person's PoV, even if one thinks that PoV is garbage). It may just be how my brain works but understanding the mechanics of someone's reasoning, even if one would never agree with the conclusion, I find beneficial. Potentially because it helps to break apart their argument in a way they'd understand (though, of course, it can be hard to convince some people to change their minds).

But it's definitely not the most important thing here, in the end. The progressive (and exceedingly) better candidate won the nomination; (since I think that's something we both agree on wanting to have happened) I'm entirely much more enthusiastic about that outcome than anything else discussed in the thread.

I genuinely don't believe I've moved the goalposts, especially as I didn't argue anyone new in my last post.

Would you be able to explain to me how I moved them so I can better understand what you're seeing?

justify random decisions you’ve made to kiss copirate dems asses

Damn; that's…really impressive to've gleaned all of this insight about my past decisions on a comment that has mentioned none of my past decisions. You've got nothing on Miss Cleo.

Would you care to explain what corporate media talking points I'm reiterating?

Also, I've not been remotely as aggressive or attacking to anyone here; you're acting like I'm encouraging people to vote for Cuomo or Adams. I have not given this level of hostility or assumption of poor character out the gate like this, remotely.