IMO a good summary of the whole thing is "we replaced metaphors that obscure meaning with a simple plan, that boils down to 1) gather info, 2) decide, 3) do it".
Ditto; for me it's like a small, powerful, and flexible oven. Chicken wings, taters, spring rolls, sometimes I even use it as a dehydrator for my homemade spice mixes.
Developing and following basic principles of organisation:
For some people this might look obvious, but for me it wasn't - my mum is noticeably disorganised and my father was a hoarder, so I never had the chance to learn those things through my childhood. But once I got those things right, they improved my quality of life by a lot.
The problem is not being communist (or following Deng Xiaoping), that's fine. It's to follow certain Reddit patterns of moderation that you see regardless of the mod being communist or not, such as hidden rules.
And the presence of that specific hidden rule ("don't criticise the Chinese government here") there is an open secret. It's enforced so often that, even in cases like this - where dessalines is actually saying the truth* - people don't believe it.
*check the modlog, the guy was behaving like a wild monkey.
I heavily recommend people interested in bad faith argumentation (how to identify it, how to combat it) to read this text. It's didactic, because of how obviously the guy is twisting things to prove black and white.
Nicotine contributes to the taste of cigarettes and the pleasures of smoking. The presence of nicotine, however, does not make cigarettes a drug or smoking addiction.
Yeah, and gravity doesn't work on Fridays. /s
Coffee, Mr. Chairman, contains caffeine and few people seem to enjoy coffee that does not. Does that make coffee a drug?
Interesting fallacy he uses here - it's like a loaded question, but instead of building it around an assumption, he does it around the connotation of a word (drug), to create a false equivalence.
Yes, caffeine is a drug. Yes, it's addictive. And abstinence syndrome is a pain. The reason you don't see it being enforced as other drugs is because it's relatively benign, but you can't say the same about nicotine. (NB: this is coming from a smoker who drinks a buttload of coffee and yerba.)
Are coffee drinkers drug addicts?
Chaining another rhetorical question to further impact the appeal to emotion of the above.
People can and do quit smoking
Yeah, people can and do quit crack cocaine too. It doesn't stop it being a drug.
Smoking is not intoxicating; no one gets drunk from cigarettes and no one has said that smokers do not function normally. Smoking does not impair judgment.
Unless something in the report is suggests that, he's building a straw man and beating it to death.
Point five, Phillip Morris research does not establish that smoking is addictive.
Yeah, and my cat's research does not establish that scratching furniture damages it. /s
If a mod tells someone "don't say this here", or "get the fuck out", their word is law. That's power. And that power is delegated by the other users, when they join the community, under the condition the mod will use that power to improve the collective space that everyone (not just the e-janny) is building there.
And without users, there's no community. It's only when you have a bunch of people there, sharing stuff, connecting, etc. that you can say "yup, this is a community". Same deal with an instance - without users, it's just a computer wasting power.
So it's a give and take. Both sides owe each other, as both are necessary to build the community.
There's also the matter that all human beings eventually fuck up, sometimes really bad. If that human being is a mod, acting as such, a community needs tools to tell them "you fucked up". And then decide to either keep trusting the mod or pack their things and emigrate. But for that, you need transparency - and for transparency you need to know why the mod did something.
Regarding money, instance costs should be a collective effort. That's why so many instances rely on donations.
It's sensible to provide a reason for the bans because the community should be able to know when, why, and how you enforced the power they delegated to you. It isn't just for the one being banned.
And mods do owe the community something. At the very least: transparency, safety, fairness, and reliability.
I didn't even need to read the instance name. Only "Rule 1, 2" was enough to know this was from .ml. The admins there behave pretty much the same as Reddit admins; always fucking enforcing hidden rules. The link Blaze posted should show well enough which is the hidden rule in question.
Note that this is clearly done by the admins, not by some power-tripping mod. For example, one of the communities listed there (SNOOcalypse) has been locked down for a whole year, and the only mod there is my old account. (In fact one of the reasons I locked that comm down was because I wasn't willing to play along this shit.)
I often say this, but the whole focus on "recycling" is on its own a big red herring. There are three R's, and they should be applied in order: reduce, reuse, recycle. But of course the industry "conveniently" forgets the first two, as they reduce consumption.
And this shit needs to be legislated across the world; there's no such thing as "let the customers choose lol" when customers have no options. Starting by spurious usage, where glass and others make a viable alternative.
The whole thing is also an example of "ackshyually" being weaponised - "achshyually plastic is recyclable lmao" is technically correct but as the video shows, in practice, it won't.
Browning food to perfection. Specially when it's the bottom of something I can't flip, like frittata.
He vomited an assumption on how people would react, and acted on it. The outcome of his actions proved the assumption wrong. At this stage, a sane / rational person would step back and say "...perhaps I should inform myself". But no, this bloody muppet had to vomit yet another assumption - why their reaction was negative. *rolls eyes*
Alt-text: «God was like, "Let there be light," and there was light.»
[unfunny guy analysing the whole thing]
The case with "with all due respect" is a lot like Japanese 貴様 kisama: misplaced respect is interpreted as ironic and sarcastic, thus rude.
Because, like, there are a few cases where "with all due respect" is genuine, but they all involve someone in a hierarchically inferior position contradicting a superior; student/teacher, underlying/boss, etc. In those situations the expression is there to convey "I acknowledge my position, and I'm not questioning it, but I need to say my honest views".
On the internet, though? Hierarchy? Mpfffffft. [/unfunny guy]
inb4 I got the OP, on "all due respect" + no respect = "this is how much respect you deserve: ZERO!". I'm just nerding out with language.