If you’re on xitter, most users are toxic and toxicity is incentivised because engagement is money.

If prioritising your mental health, taking a break from ones like X and Facebook help.

Blocking negative content and hope it becomes wholesome can be exhausting and fruitless as it will reccomend it, regardless.

I personally found regularly scrubbing contacts that are not meaningful until you can take breaks more and more helps. Eventually, I refused to allow it my time or to cost my mental health so no longer use it. For me, the cost was greater than the benefit.

That’s a very expensive Nazi bar.

Here in the uk , the P word is probably the most offensive word you could use against a person of Indian descent. Up there with the n word. removed (f word) is also probably the most offensive slur you can use in reference to gay people. It’s correct that they banned them.

Guessing you’re from America where being offensive is cool. Historically people used to justify the n word based on the origins rather than the highly offensive connotations.

UK ain’t woke, just has some acceptance that people from different backgrounds have some value rather than pandering to grumpy white folk who care about nothing but themselves and how inconvenient it is to possibly consider other words.

Best to fork just in case? Ideally to Codeberg.

Same. They were one of the coolest and nicest people I know. I just want them to be happy.

Also worth noting that the current president, the child of a dictator, is using his support to impeach Duterte’s daughter. He also said he wouldn’t support any action of the ICC and now is.

If this action was in isolation, it could be taken at face value, but with other manoeuvrings, it’s looking like Marco’s consolidating his grip on power.

The other point and kind of backing up what you’ve said, is that Fillipino’s I’ve talked to have commented that drug problems in their area disappeared but used to be pretty horrible.

I’m not one to defend crimes against human’s, but one cannot discount the level of criminality and the impact it was already having on people’s lives. Whether the tactics were fair or decent is one thing, but another is, did it work? Did it solve a serious problem the country was grappling with. You only have to look at Mexico to realise that if you don’t deal with these things, the level of murder and suffering often skyrockets.

There should be accountability, but I’m not sure this is about accountability.

Stardew Valley

The dependence had been very much encouraged. The political influence there was a core strategy and very effective.

Yes. You corrected a dyslexic. Well done.

That is more down to poor marketing. Here on Lemmy or reddit there are big open source communities where you can extol the values of it.

I never went with a software project from random scrolling. It has no value to me if it doesn’t meet a need I have right now.

No contributor is going to be good that doesn’t use it.

Why would it be? Software is good based on it’s use and recommendations from real folk, not *s. Many project not on github

In what sense are you using AES? Are you referring to the soviet republic and unironically?

My initial vibes here is this place is mostly soviet supporting communists pretending to be socialists. Anything other than glowing praise of communism is showered in down votes. That’s cool and all, but it feels a bit too echo chamber for my liking.

I always assumed the goal was to bring people with you, rather than go after any unpure view. Maybe arguing with libs online too long has clouded the goal of furthering class consciousness.

Based on my limited knowledge, I can agree with that. I don’t yet know of a system that has been implemented that is optimal.

I think the electorate want change but I don’t think those the current system allow offer that unfortunately. Reformists tend to get filtered out.

This is assuming you need a national political party. In the UK we have a population of 70m, and MPs represent seats of 60k. District councils could represent around 100k people, and county ones could cover 500k. If you localise power so that all decision making for an area sits with the councils running areas of 100k, then you don’t need a nationwide party, a local party could gain a foothold and run an area. If that party is setup, so representatives can easily be voted out or replaced. For example open selection and you have to campaign to represent your local party again every term then the power sits with the members of that local party rather than a national party.

Ultimately, a system can exist for this, but it doesn’t mean that a system does exist or runs effectively in the world at present. Getting that system set up and running is a whole separate problem.

You did cover this, and the thing you suggest about expertise and continuity and problems that can be solved. Term length (and how many seats change each term can solve the latter), while expertise would likely be a solution that can be taken up by think tanks, and there are good ones, and dreadful ones. Legislation on transparency of funding and ownership would be key with that. Secondly health groups, co-operatives can form, that can be paid by councils for their expertise, which can build credibility and hire specialists.

I’m not saying any of this is easy, or would be without contest, but it is very possible, and while if you centre power in the hands of the few, you create elites, if you distribute that power, you can solve the problem around wealth and corruption. A system can be set up that adapts to the demands of the skills that are needed, whether that is technical skills, or knowledge based skills etc.

It was a response to the point about an elite class. In communist systems, that is usually the political class, the ones that make the decisions. That needs to make the decisions and are essential to the system functioning. In a democratic system that is localised, those decision makers don’t have that much power as they have a small sphere of influence and are more administrators. Redistribution of wealth doesn’t mean there is no wealth. Wealth can still exist, be taxed significantly and redistributed.

The point being, you misrepresented my point. Saying there is no elite “political” class, doesn’t mean there is no class.

It does matter, and I don’t accept with a socialist system, you have an elite class. With communism, maybe, but with democratic socialism, the goal is democracy first, because if you give powers to local people, to decentralise, and remove the disenfranchisement that people feel, you get the change for people to push for changes that help their circumstances. This was a view advocated by the late, great Tony Benn.

First past the post puts too much power in the hands of a few “representatives” and the more you break it down, the more working people can campaign and win. It’s hard to campaign against centralisation as it requires a level of organisation, mobilisation, and cohesive view that is very hard to organise. Then you get corruption within that as pro-business interests influence and fund those that aim to divert the movement from the benefits of people. The Labour party in the UK could be an example of that. Currently, they’re pushing for deregulation, growth and tight controls on migration.

Minecraft is one of the biggest games on the planet. Very popular with the young. Not what many would consider beautiful.

That is quite a mixed bag response. Leaves me between they won’t do nothing, and they might do something.

Anyway, that’s enough about yourself…

Feels like you never truly where on Reddit if you felt it was a beacon of warmth and friendliness. Did you ever share an opinion contrary to the prevailing opinion on there?