The inside of the cone is coated in chocolate to prevent it from getting soggy from all the melted icecream. It tends to pool at the bottom because that’s how gravity works.

There is no “random” plug of chocolate. It’s an inherent function of the product. No matter what the flavour of icecream is, the cone itself is inherently a chocolate product.

So yes, you are, in fact, knowingly purchasing chocolate products, as evidenced by the fact that you’re currently complaining about all the chocolate in these cones that you keep purchasing. If you hate chocolate that much, then maybe just don’t buy it?

This is entirely a problem of your own making. And people are correct in pointing out that your responses have been nothing but toxic.

I don’t follow any blogs particularly consistently/regularly, but the one that I find myself coming back to at intervals is Raymond Chen’s The Old New Thing. It’s got a pretty heavy programming focus, but also occasionally covers interesting little trivia from Windows history. I’m not a professional coder, and I no longer even do any coding as a hobby, so take it from me when I say that there’s content of interest to programmers and non-programmers alike.

References and phrases don’t make a culture. The words may change, but the culture here is absolutely the same as Reddit. Which is why it’s so damned cringe when you see someone on Lemmy offer a smug, self-satisfied criticism of some supposed inferiority in the Reddit userbase. That kind of smugness is peak Reddit-culture.

Uh huh, because that’s what they were advocating for. Sure. I’m gonna do you the favour of assuming good faith, so I’m not sure if you just didn’t read the operative word “supposedly” in their comment, but if not: don’t be so naïve.

There are widely documented occasions on which smaller instances have been blacklisted based on entirely spurious and false accusations of “fascism”. All it takes is for one large enough instance to defederate, and others will follow based on their word alone. This results in the affected instance becoming non-viable, due to absence of any visibility amongst the wider fediverse. In one well-known case, an instance was branded as “fascist” and forced to shut down because the admin refused to take censorious actions that would have been illegal in their country.

That is the outcome you are advocating for when you suggest that such instances should be “iced out”. And that outcome is the “toxic community” that we should be most wary of, because it is insidious and cloaks itself in a guise of supposed good intentions.

And before you suggest that these are isolated incidents that don’t reflect the behaviours of communities at large: don’t forget that it was mere days ago that feddit.uk, a rather large instance, was defederated by another large instance based on entirely baseless and spurious claims of transphobia, prompting the instance admin to issue a “guidance” post that basically just reiterated the existing rules… and suddenly this was seen as ok, and not transphobic at all. Imagine if the admin had instead not issued this statement, and pointed out that the existing rules were already sufficient? The instance’s anti-transphobia stance has not changed, but I don’t doubt that other instances would have portrayed such a response as doubling down on transphobia and defederated. So even large instances are not immune!

Defederation should be a last resort for rogue instances that support actual problematic behaviours like fascism. It should never be considered an action of first resort based on any accusation of supposed fascism or communism. Which was OP’s point. Yet it never ceases to shock and amaze me at how openly and readily people are willing to suggest such a thing.

Literally nobody is suggesting that actual fascist instances should not be defederated. Nobody needs to debate what should be done about those, because the answer is obvious, and already widely implemented (i.e. defederate). So why even bring it up, as if it’s a valid rebuttal to OP’s point? It’s not, and it’s disappointing how so many discussions on this subject devolve to comments with an absolutist stance that has a feelgood vibe, without actually analysing it for cogency to the actual discussion at hand.

I never cease to be baffled by the seemingly boundless glee with which Americans will repeat this myth that has no basis outside of Internet cope. Literally nobody born in the last 100 years would read “trump” to mean “fart”. The only meaning of “trump” to British people is the winning suit in a game of cards, or the concept of winning in general. There’s literally a collectible card game in Britain called “Top Trumps”, and let me tell you, it ain’t about huffing farts. Unlike your absurd comment.

And even if people did understand “trump” to mean “fart”, it’s still an astonishing feat of mental gymnastics to claim that “it makes no sense that you would elect someone called that”, because funnily enough, a person’s name is totally unrelated to their ability to do the job, and lots of people have funny-sounding names that go completely unremarked upon, because people understand that a name is just a name.

I absolutely hate the guy, and yet when I see people purporting to make fun of his name based on something that isn’t even true, rather than, y’know, attacking his actual policies and actions, it makes me despair at the pathetic state of American politics. Seriously, your country is going to the dogs, and the best thing you could think of to combat that is to baselessly make fun of a guy’s name?

But a tomato isn’t even an actual fruit…

“Actual” refers to the ordinary “plain English” meaning. Under the “plain English” definition, i.e. non-technical, non-domain-specific, a tomato is a vegetable.

It’s a botanical fruit, but an actual vegetable.