161–170 of 185 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The Royal Fam still screen every bill before it is proposed.
The Queen rubber stamps everything that comes from parliament - no screening happens, ever. Unfortunately.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/feb/08/royals-vette...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
And thus your disingenuous Socratic method is revealed as not genuine curiosity but rather a veiled method of (in your own words) "luring people."
I don't owe you (nor anyone) genuine Socratic methodology. This is the internet after all. :) I will happily guide people into earnestly saying terrible things and then point it out. No one is being forced to say anything they don't believe.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Quoted post unavailable.
> Your right to watch a husband wearing a chastity cage while his wife pulls a creampie gangbang of race-exploited BBCs will be preserved man. You just gotta show ID. You misunderstand. I'm saying that such material is by far not the only thing that will be, or is, censored. See for example anti-drug-war sites getting swept under the "porn filter", while pro-drug-war sites are exempt [1]. Torrentfreak and linuxtracke…
I'd require any US site, including search engines, to provide their own age verification system.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm on the fence on whether luring people like this out with "tell me more(about your incredibly naive and bigoted takes)" is worth it. On one hand they are clearly bursting at the seams with garbage and cannot hold back at the opportunity to implicate themselves. Never stop an opponent from making an error. On the other hand, it has the potential for readers to mistake their drivel for substantive discourse.
And thus your disingenuous Socratic method is revealed as not genuine curiosity but rather a veiled method of (in your own words) "luring people."
The only person who can display "genuine curiosity" over the nth dimwit making the same set of already thoroughly debunked claims for the hundredth time - claims that get repeated, only infinitesimally changed, over timeframes measured in years to decades - is someone who suffers from heavy memory problems.
Engaging with them is frankly pointless: even if they are willing and able to learn - which is a big if - there's always another person around the corner ready to take their place, and argue the inarguable. Oh, sure, there are probably a lot of people, at any point of time, who are willing to engage with them in good faith, but bullshit is fundamentally asymmetric: they do get tired of it.
At that point, the only real solution is to either stop engaging - and let them appear unopposed, while other people burn themselves out in an effort to bring them the light - try to shut them down, or - in loosely moderated places - deploy mockery and use them as a teaching tool: people who think themselves rational do not, as a rule, want to be associated - even in their own minds - with people who are absolutely foaming at the mouth to spew easily-debunked bullshit, and who get ridiculed as a result. Most of these bad actors do not possess a lot of self-control, and are easily riled up, or otherwise convinced to go mask off in a way that makes them unpalatable to the general population - say, by simply asking them to discuss their beliefs further - which makes this method very effective in limiting the spread of their memes.
TL;DR: "revealed"? I'm sorry?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Increasing acceptance hasn't done anything positive for their depression rates, drug use rates, suicide rates, either. Bold assertion. What are you basing it on, the PIDOOMA institute report? > Trans culture, at least in part and mostly why it's slanted so far MtF is because autism affects men more than women and they internalized the porn differently in that they'd just tther be the women seen in the porn. > Trans…
I'm on the fence on whether luring people like this out with "tell me more(about your incredibly naive and bigoted takes)" is worth it. On one hand they are clearly bursting at the seams with garbage and cannot hold back at the opportunity to implicate themselves. Never stop an opponent from making an error. On the other hand, it has the potential for readers to mistake their drivel for substantive discourse.
The thing is, not engaging with them - in non-moderated communities - also has the potential for readers to mistake their drivel for substantive discourse, both by way of familiarizing them with it - mere exposure effect - and by making it appear like their assertions are not being challenged because they cannot be challenged.
That's why the engagement really needs to happen on two fronts: both on their own level - assertions met with demands for proof, unrelated or misunderstood papers pointed out as such, counter-assertions backed with proof - and on a meta level. If you only do the former you will run afoul of Brandolini's bullshit asymmetry principle, while letting them choose the field of engagement: there is a literally infinite number of bullshit claims they are able to make - be that "trans people are just incels, really" or "transsexualism [sic] is a sexual addiction, which is why epileptics never transition" - and attempting to disprove them will perforce require much more effort than it takes them to shit them out.
Helping them can be very satisfying, also. I still fondly remember that time when I decided to engage with a Nazi who was denying the existence of the gas chambers, asking them for proof, only to receive a link to a report, hosted on Nikzor, which went about debunking their own claim.
This needs to be seen in the context of the political situation in the UK. Boris Johnson, the current PM, is currently on this 9th and last political live. During the strictest period of lockdown, when UK citizens where not able to say goodbye to loved ones dying in hospitals, several parties were organised at his residence . It is alleged he attended two of them himself and was photographed drinking beer. In attempt…
I honestly don't care if my politicians have parties during covid. that seems like a really weird thing to complain about.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I fail to see how that's substantively different/worse than the cat-calling, profanities and other verbal abuse that women and girls have unfortunately suffered throughout history; often out of sight, and hence less amenable to third-party anecdotes. Just because you perceive a problem as being less worse than another problem, doesn't mean its not a problem. I think it should be normalized to not give children pers…
> I think it should be normalized to not give children personal devices capable of accessing the web until they are 16 But do you think the government should step in and enforce such a limitation? As a counter example, I grew up in a repressive, abusive environment. My access to the Internet at that age was a lifeline. It helped me understand the real world, form deep and lasting friendships with people from diverse…
No, it should be a social norm.
I'm not suggesting teenagers shouldn't use the internet at all, but it should be in a family environment. e.g. what used to be the desktop in the family lounge.
I think things like unrestricted access to Reddit, tiktok, Tumblr, Facebook, Instagram have proved toxic for young teenagers.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
And thus your disingenuous Socratic method is revealed as not genuine curiosity but rather a veiled method of (in your own words) "luring people."
"Revealed"? I'm sorry? The only person who can display "genuine curiosity" over the nth dimwit making the same set of already thoroughly debunked claims for the hundredth time - claims that get repeated, only infinitesimally changed, over timeframes measured in years to decades - is someone who suffers from heavy memory problems. Engaging with them is frankly pointless: even if they are willing and able to learn - wh…
Ignoring the debate about whether our methodologies should be applied uniformly, even to trans disparagers or even people like Nazis, this turns out to be a false assumption. Kelseyfrog repeatedly engages in this ("luring" Socratic methodology) behavior on a variety of topics, including ideas that don't involve disparaging trans population such as on property and the state.
Usually they are not so straight forward about their intentions, but as you have proven in a crystal clear fashion, this topic has provided perfect cover for 'frog to reveal their true intentions. After all -- anyone questioning them can be accused of interfering with some sort of process meant to limit "spread of memes" about trans persons. A convenient way to offload blame from the self and onto an unsavory other.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> having credit cards on file is conveniently closer to making more money It will be a drastic change to pivot the company from one where the customer is the product to the customer. Credit card input also introduces friction and bounce rate of user signup. This would hurt Facebook's user growth and MAU KPIs
Facebook's customers are advertisers, not users.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What does your first point have to do with the second? Boris did a bad thing, so now everyone has to give Facebook their credit card? I don't get it.
Seems pretty clear to me. Boris did something that offended a certain segment, so he makes amends by creating the perception he is going to do something that segment approves of. At least that seems to be what is implied. The noted point here is it likely won't happen, but the underlying goal of creating such perception may be achieved.
Gets people on both sides engaged and takes over the headlines and the hope is that it wipes partygate off the headlines and short term memory loss sets in and everyone forgets about partygate by election time.
Trump would just say something completely insane every other day to keep the headlines thrashing on nonsense to distract away from whatever else was going on.
Also think this is similar to the way that Klopp whines about the length of the grass after losses to keep media attention on what nonsense he's saying in pressers and off the performance of his players on the pitch.