erin

Regardless of the stuff about Ada’s tone, it seems like your ultimate point was the classic “paradox of tolerance.” I certainly do not see enforcing a safe space as policing identity. Regardless of how respectfully done, deciding when it is okay to respect someone’s identity is against blahaj rules. The consistent moderation with no room for chipping away at the edges is what attracted me to the instance. This person broke blahaj rules. They may have broken it politely (I disagree. Tone does not excuse content), but they broke the rules. Banning them for repeated invalidation of others’ identities is not policing their identity. Your identity cannot be predicated on the invalidation of others. We have every prerogative to be intolerant of intolerance.

Again, regardless of Ada’s tone, the point stands. You keep dancing around that. The rules were broken. This user acted inappropriately for the space they were in. They are not forced to use blahaj communities, and chose to do so while violating the rules. They have no right to our safe space if they cannot ensure it is safe for others. I strongly dislike the “just asking questions” polite veneer of your comments while very intentionally dodging the elephant in the room, which is that the user did wrong for the space they were in, regardless if you agree or not.

I cannot see this as a valid and reasonable response to “we aren’t likely to see an AI powered socialist dystopia in our lifetime, if ever.” AI isn’t even profitable for the capitalists that run it, and needs to constantly feed off real humans to avoid decay. It’s definitely not doomsaying to see AI as a bubble and generally a grift as it’s presented now, when it’s likely to fit in a much more specific niche as a tool in the future. Art will stay uniquely human until AI can create without needing constant human training data.

High effort troll, though insulting people’s intelligence while sticking your head in the sand like an ostrich is certainly a strategy. Good luck with that and your fascinating approach to discourse.

Mission failed. Try responding to my longer message on its merits, instead of dismissing anything that causes cognitive dissonance.

Is this the one response you have to everything that challenges you? Imagine if you addressed the points being made instead of implying that the reason you’re incomprehensible is the reader’s competence, instead of your bizarrely antisocial comments.

What on earth are you on about? I have no interest in being your friend or influencing you. I’m having a good time making fun of a troll acting ridiculous.

You seem like an insane person. Imagine a hypothetical community that has a bunch of positive and uplifting content, but about 10% of posts are just making fun of trans people, or immigrants, or supporting Nazis, or what have you. Someone calls the community moderator on that content, and they go, “Read again. Slowly. Look at all these positive posts you’re IGNORING.”

Do you not understand how online communication works? This person was not referring to those other posts, so you bringing them up and acting all self-righteous about it just seems kinda silly and ridiculous. It’s like pure rage bait behavior, but it seems like you actually believe it. They don’t have any issue with those posts, didn’t bring them up, and they don’t excuse the harmful content you’re hosting. I don’t understand why you think the existence of positive posts makes the negative ones okay, or why you have a bizarre expectation that they have to weigh in the non-hateful content when judging the hateful.

“This user just posted Nazi apologia, but they have a different post supporting gay marriage so it must be okay!” This is what you sound like.

Try using a bigger screen, or moving your screen further from your face. When moving your focus off the dot, move it to the closest part of the image and then move from there. It can help to align a feature in your periphery before moving to it.

That wouldn’t be crossing. Crossing is when you focus your eyes in front of the image. Wall-eyed is where you unfocus your eyes behind the image. Trying to look at your nose is crossing. The way you look at most magic eye images is wall-eyed.

I don’t think so. When I cross my eyes, it looks correct. Wall-eyed viewing makes it look like a hole. Crossing your eyes makes them go inward. Wall-eyed makes them go parallel. They’re created specifically for crossing eyes.

I use the lowest setting on every machine gun, intentionally. It conserves the most ammo and allows me to use the HMG almost like a DMR that has a ton of ammo. I’m tap firing, only hitting headshots, and clearing hordes way faster than just spraying and sending 50% of shots into the dirt. The only time I switch to high firerate is to delete heavies, which have much larger hitboxes.