The subjects that you can’t even bring up without getting downvoted, banned, fired, expelled, cancelled etc.
Marxism, depending on the audience.
With women, bathroom talk. With the boys we always talk about shit and piss and crack each other up. But mention anything related to that around a girl, she’ll look at you as if you killed her dog.
You first!
Israel
Men’s rights
Boys being left behind in school
Men’s rights to do what?
Report being raped without being laughed at.
Family court. Prison time. Homeless assistance. Failing education rates for boys. And on and on.
There’s a huge amount of topics in “men’s rights”
Anything veganism (positive)
Or negative, depending on the crowd. It’s just a polarising topic.
Vegetarianism seems to be creeping towards acceptance, though.
Kernel contributions
I feel like I’m not good with words, so when I criticize popular things like Baldur’s gate 3 or Witcher 3 I usually get downvoted
That’s how I feel with nearly any online conversation. I’m on the spectrum and have social anxiety. Not a fun combo for trying to be understood when being critical about anything really. Let alone someone’s favourite game.
People put BG3 on a massive pedestal and any sort of valid complaint around launch was heavily downvoted. It’s not quite as bad now, thank god. I got gaslit so much. Everything was my fault supposedly, not their perfect, polished game.
I don’t remember the exact complain, but I think I said something about battles taking too long and someone ratio’d me with a comment “skill issue”
Try talking about Return to Office around the workplace and watch everyone get quiet real quick
gun rights
Removed by mod
Eugenics is the single stupidest idea in human history. To advocate for it now is to deny biology and history.
It relies on the same misunderstanding of evolution that underpins ‘great replacement theory’.
The only place with eugenics in human history is agriculture. There were many genocides done using eugenics as an excuse with no clue of genetics, and you blame eugenics instead of the murderers.
We have gene editing now, so it’s only a matter of cost when parents start customising their babies, which is a good thing because human variability will increase, making us as a species more resistant to unknown threats.
The funny thing is that a lot of those problems are better attributed to society/culture/education than genetics or biology, since it’s people that vote/support other people. Unless you can somehow breed out psychopaths, and whatever makes people willing to sacrifice the collective for personal gain, from the human species, eugenics won’t do shit.
Eugenicists are the only people who should be barred from reproduction tbh
Eugenics isn’t a stupid idea on the face of it, but then you look at where our dog breeding has gone…
The good news is that humans are pretty adaptable already. The only things that really definitely could sink us are our inability to react to very abstract, gradual problems and our tribalism.
Without dog breeding, dogs would be still be wolves.
It’s pretty unclear how much of the breeding 30000BC-1500AD was deliberate, and how much was just a kind of selection as people decided to eat their naughtiest dog when famine came. I’m talking about the highly-targeted breeding that brought us the pug unable to breath and German shepherds with back legs that stick out wrong because it looks cool.
Also, wolves are pretty good at what they do, I’m not sure it’s fair to say they’re worse than dogs somehow.
Breeding unhealthy dogs could be called dysgenics. It’s like breeding better slaves instead of better humans.
Wolves are good, evolution worked. Pet dogs are extra lives producing added value to themselves and their owners.
Yeah, well what I’m saying is we’d do that to ourselves too; we’re not to be trusted with our own biology. Not yet, at least.
I agree with you but only on Eugenics being automatically downvoted. Look, I did it!
The assignment was to state a topic. Not advocate for it.
The left lane, and how no, it’s not for going as fast as you want to drive.
It is also the fast lane so move TF over if you are moving slower than the other lanes
Speed limit is the speed limit. End of.
If someone wants to go above the speed limit in the fast lane, then they’re contravening road rules.
No matter what social norm people believe there to be, it doesn’t have precedence over the speed limits.
In a case where the the car in front is going slower than the speed limit, it would be good etiquette though to move over.
Not in America.
In the UK it goes lanes 1, 2, 3. You stay in lane 1. Lane 2 and 3 are for passing only.
You will often see members of the lane 2 owners club just cruising along in lane 2 but this effectively closes lane 1 (undertaking is illegal and very unsafe).
Sitting in lane 3 closes the entire motorway.
I agree there is a speed limit. But the law says you cannot just sit in lane 2 or 3 if you are not overtaking someone. They even updated the law recently. If you hog lane 2 or 3 the police can report you and the penalty is 3 points and £100 fine
People who sit in lane 3 at 69mph are breaking the law and likely to cause an accident by forcing people to pass on the wrong side out of frustration (yes illegal but they will do it) and this is why they are over taking lanes, not just cruising lanes.
Never be the reason someone else does something stupid on the road. Always do the safest thing.
Interesting to see how different that is from Australia. In your example only lane 3 is a passing lane, and “undertaking” isn’t a thing, it’s completely legal to overtake in any lane.
-
Often people use those lanes to speed. If a car ahead is overtaking at or within a reasonable range of the speed limit, but not at the speed the speeder wants to travel. The speeder must be patient, they don’t get to dictate what manoeuvres are happening ahead.
-
The argument you present at the end isn’t logical,
… Always do the safest thing.
I can largely agree with this sentiment, but you say before,
People who sit in lane 3 at 69mph are breaking the law and likely to cause an accident by forcing people to pass on the wrong side out of frustration (yes illegal but they will do it)…
If undercutting is the most unsafe thing for the person behind to do in the situation, then as your sentiment captures, the frustrated party undercutting are still in the wrong.
They are in the wrong because, they have failed to ‘always do the safest thing’ in the given situation.
-
Never be the reason someone else does something stupid on the road.
Nice sentiment again, but it implicitly assigns a rigid cause and effect regime to a situation where the ‘frustrated party’ behind has their own agency and likely as much training. There is no necessity that they undercut, it is a choice the party behind makes. The cause does not necessitate that effect, at best it could contribute.
In essence the sentiment shifts the blame from the person causing a potential accident (the undercutter), to the person ahead who, at worst, is causing poor traffic conditions.
Like I said undertaking is bad. No excuse for doing it, except where it is legal. If someone goes under speed limit in lane 3 you can undertake I believe, though I would still be super cautious.
Obviously speeding is illegal, and I’m not suggesting anyone should support do so. But we should let the police deal with it.
Just to clarify, you don’t think it is ok to sit in lane 2 or 3 at the speed limit if there is room to move over ? Not doing so is also illegal in the UK.
While the majority of people stay within the law (+/- 10%) there are enough people behaving badly on the roads that you should always take that into consideration.
This is a great example of the is/ought problem. You can try your best to make the “ought” true, but don’t neglect what reality “is”. On the road that means; assume there is an idiot nearby, and drive in a way that keeps you safe from their shit.
You are correct. If the flow of traffic in lane 1 or 2 is faster than the flow of traffic in lane 2 or 3 then it is okay to pass. Intentionally changing lane temporarily to pass a car on the inside is illegal.
The other poster confused your point.
If someone in lane 3 is going 69 and overtaking someone then there’s no reason to pass them, and probably isn’t safe or legal given there is, by definition, a car on the inside lane already.
-
Worked about well as you’d think
A roadway allowed multiple speeds across the lanes could be how to get around this.
If the citizens of a transport zone don’t like the rules as they stand, ie, one single speed for all lanes, they should lobby to vary them.
Apart from cases where multiple speeds happen, the speed limit is the speed limit, the person behind contravenes rules if they speed, use the shoulder, etc. They’re in the wrong, they have agency, and decide to cause the unsafe situation.
The person ahead, as that video showed to the tune of straight funktown, may cause worsened traffic conditions, but they’re not the people being dangerous on the road. (Assuming they are going within the range of the expected limit)
See, that’s the thing: It’s the passing lane, not the fast lane. A lot of semis are speed governed to 65MPH, so if I’m doing the 70MPH speed limit, I need to use it to pass them.
Apparently asking what people are going to do to relax after voting must be taboo, because my post got deleted without me being told why.
Did you look at the modlog? They’re open here.
The moderators have the power therefor when they do something rude it actually isn’t rude. In fact you are rude for suggesting that they are being rude, and deserve punishment.
It’s funny how power works.
I’ve seen screenshots posted of lemmy logs on other instances. Some mods seem to be quite disconnected from reality.
Tho, to be fair, we only get to see the bad stuff there. I’m sure the majority of mods is great
Humanity deserves its face stomped by a boot forever. No easy escape with some farcical nuclear armageddon, you have to stay here and live out the horror.
- “Why doesn’t this site have more in common with reddit, which it’s more or less a clone of?”
- Can’t bring up Trans people existing (without a weirdo downvoting you, of course)
- Can’t be critical of… a certain religion without getting jumped by keyboard warriors and called a Genocide Supporter
- Don’t even get me started on whatever the heck is with the Hexbear folks…
- Lemmy is, at times, a bit of an echo chamber
The bit on Hexbear is that they are Marxists and Anarchists, which can draw ire from liberals.
Lemmy is full of people that I would never want to hang out with IRL. Even if I agree with most of what they’re saying, they manage to say it in the most neckbeardy way possible.
Yeah it seems the topic is irrelevant. They’ll eventually just start yammering about communism, Linux and ublock. It’s hard to have a conversation on here that doesn’t get sidelined by those things. I can’t imagine these people carrying on a normal conversation in the real world, and I don’t think they understand that the world exists outside of those narrow interests.
Like OP will say they hate MS Teams. Person will say stop using Microsoft. OP will say, I’d love to but my government employer is an MS shop. Person will say then quit your job. K…
It’s either very sheltered people who’ve not worked or interacted in ‘the mainstream’ or, really young naive people who think that your FOSS convictions will stand up against the need to earn a living.
I prefer it to Reddit still, but it gets a bit tedious.
Lemmy needs more spice…
Agree. I can find any !spice federated with my instance. That’s disappointed.
I’ve not yet heard any claims on or outside Lemmy that it is a Reddit clone. The model of hosting forums/communities was never unique to Reddit as far as I know.
I’m curious what you’re willing to generally apply to “Hexbear folks” (I don’t think I’ve talked to many).
And Lemmy is totally an echo chamber most of the time (based on my experience, obviously mileage may vary) but it wasn’t intended to be that way unlike almost every commercial social media platform. I would assume this distinction is why people would be less likely to be willing to admit it.
Re: Hexbear
The people who run into issues with Hexbear largely aren’t Hexbear’s target demographic, namely Marxists and Anarchists.
I hesitate to say
Close enough. Ban him.
Paedophilia as a sickness, especially non-offending paedos.
I chalk this up to not having a word to describe folks suffering from the condition as opposed to predators acting on their condition (or even predators just abusing children regardless of attraction). For a ton of people they use the word pedophile to mean someone who sexually abuses children. Because as soon as nuanced discussion about “pedophiles who don’t abuse kids” come up, people accuse you of “defending pedophiles” but they use it to mean “defending people who abuse children.”
I’d call it a cultural artifact. We used to get married very young. In some cultures the kids are introduced to sex by the grandparents. And of course in our own culture the ideal of sexy beauty is a supermodel who looks like a 13 year old boy. It’s a whirlwind wrapped in a psychosis for sure.
