BANNED USER: last straw
AhhhTheFrench
We will sell no wine before its time
Interesting that you clicked on this...I hope your day is going well and you're at least finding our conversation stimulating, if you're not finding it pleasant. Looking to reinforce your beliefs about about me? Dig up some dirt? Have at it! Only cowards and scam artists make their profile private.
User ID: 2897
Banned by: @Amadan
You see every post of mine in the queue as do all the other mods, due to low vote count, I think this leads to a focus that otherwise wouldn't fall on me. I thought that was an accurate assessment of that post, especially since the author couldn't see my post. But again, I will dial it down much further.
The author can't even see my comment. They blocked me months ago. What would eating a ban with a user name "TheThrowaway" even stand for?
You wouldn't have misanthropes trying to repeatedly bait people. That would be one of my strictures.
I go out of my way to grab luggage and put it in the overhead bid for old people, I pay for small differences if people are short, I haul people in small towns in france up hill in wheelchairs if other folks ignore them. I am good in crisis and in calm times. I'm just generally a good person in public. I tip well, I'm polite, and I help when I can. If everyone did this the world would be a great place.
This is what I am talking about when I am referring to the religious "gish gallop" style of operation. This whole screed could have been done in 3 sentences.
No, you should just be nice to people. I do it so often people think I work for the hotel or cruise line. My behavior confuses most "religious" folks, because I am actually nice without any expectations.
Religious nonsense taking over. No one wants to post to a place that denies reality.
There is no such thing in reality. If you could prove one it would then be reality.
No I am saying that the blanket statement of "The Second Amendment doesn't exist in Blue Tribe areas," is provably wrong.
failed to include or failed to not include, this is confusing.
Maine is a blue tribe area, it is all 2A all the way down, same for Vermont, even more blue, also 2A friendly. There is now a 72 hour waiting period in Maine due to the Lewiston shootings, not that one had anything to do with the other from a factual standpoint. But you can buy a gun and tuck it in your waistband in the bluest city in the state if you want.
You could use it as a sorting mechanism, but I doubt that is what most men are going for. The other pics I see commonly complained about on both sides in the driving selfie and the mirror selfie, or the top down selfie if the subject is fat.
Hitting a pool ball.
To relegate the rise of the working class victories to just the 40 hour work week is criminal. You used to have 6 year olds cutting their fingers off shucking oysters. We've come a long way.
Top level seems sparse this week, I posted this just before Trump's verdict was dropping and I thought it might be at least a little entertaining, so I would like to proffer it again as an unsung culture war issue, BOATS!
Boating/Fishing and Right Wing Associations.
Inspired by a post in Wellness Wednesday, it took on a bit of a culture war tone as I wrote my response.
To the best of my recollection this is kind of a thing that started really turning ugly during covid. The notion guys with fish in their profile picks were all right wing anti-vaxxers because an odd amount of the posts on the hermaincainaward subreddit had a dude with a fish held high in their profile...
I've seen that "trend" other places where people have kind of sussed out a correlation of fish pictures and right wing proclivities, I just did a quick search on the tinder subreddit and others, I've found the question going back at least 6 years.. There are dozens more posts like this every year asking "Why all the fish pics" or "Stop with the fish pics".
There were also those boat parades for Trump etc...recreational power boating and ocean fishing are generally very white, sometimes wealthy. Fly fishing is even whiter and wealthier, think float plane trips to remote Alaskan camps and guided week long floats down untouched rivers. Bass fishing is white redneck hick Trump central and that is what a lot of people think of because of the televised tournaments and occasional news articles, add in a little cruelty to animals and you've got a stew going.
Some on the more extreme left, and probably a lot of young women of dating age must figure if you're fishing from shore or bass fishing you're a white trash trumper. They figure if you're fishing from a boat or racing to a sandbar to party that you're middle class to small business owner, killing animals for fun and burning gas while polluting the world, and if you're fly fishing in Kamchatka or deep sea fishing from a GT70 then you're a fat cat that needs to be eaten when the revolution comes (but maybe that won't be for a while so let's see where this goes).
https://old.reddit.com/r/HermanCainAward/comments/quo8p7/grandpa_catches_a_big_fish_and_a_big_virus/ https://old.reddit.com/r/HermanCainAward/comments/rb2tzq/update_guy_thought_he_was_a_legend_for_not_taking/ https://old.reddit.com/r/WhitePeopleTwitter/comments/nyoc9z/why_do_they_all_have_boats/ https://old.reddit.com/r/unpopularopinion/comments/168ivpu/when_men_hold_up_fish_in_their_dating_profile/ https://old.reddit.com/r/Tinder/comments/u5eaiy/whats_wrong_with_fish_pictures_i_see_so_many/
I would only disagree with this comment insofar as we don't have data for themott and I'm sure it is quite divergent from ACX by now and very different.
As has been pointed out may times by myself, Scotty and a half dozen or more others in the this space, a forum or online gathering spot that doesn't explicitly ban witches will eventually be filled only with witches, that is what we are watching slowly happen. No offense to my current and future online wiccan brothers and sisters, it will still be fun while it lasts.
Religious belief or claimed religious belief is not a minority view, not on themott or in the US in general. Most people, when asked, describe some kind of belief in a higher power, even as they don't attend church or act by any of the strictures of their claimed belief system.
It has been made clear to me in plain language by the powers that this should not be considered a rationalist space and I should not be trying to approach it as such, so I am no longer going to do so.
I would also add this isn't really much to do with you personally or how you conduct yourself, people just happened to pile on in this particular thread for some reason.
It can be easy to circumvent with cursory knowledge of computers and the internet. I humbly suggest that a quick google might provide you with the solution you seek. Should you not wish to self study, a clean machine at a public wifi spot will see you to your new account just fine.
Yes, actual repeatable, testable proof in a controlled setting of what they claim.
Well then respectfully prepare to have your mind blown.
They do eventually go bad, but it is often just 1 or 2 cells, you can just swap those 2 cells and the battery is good again, they are basically made up of lots and lots of laptop battery blades. I've done it with success.
My only goal has been to point out that religion or god should not be taken as the baseline truth of the world, I often see it assumed to be true as themotte becomes more and more religious. I also personally am confused as to how smart, curious, and eloquent people can believe in god, with all the logical compromises, weirdness and broken thought processes that would cause for me. My conclusions as to their thinking and motivations would seem to be insulting to the believer in some way, so I shall refrain from speculating on them here.
I don't understand why they get to make outrageous false claims with impunity but I'm somehow the bad guy here.
Because it doesn't matter if someone is making outrageous false claims. You can respond with contradictory evidence or simply choose not to respond. Responding by saying that the claim itself being outrageous is inherently disqualifying is not only contrary to an open discourse, it amounts to in-group based censorship.
No, the burden of proof is on the maker of said fantastical claim, if you don't provide any evidence of the rain god or your invisible flying unicorn that we just can't see or hear, or test in any way. Then yes I can call it outrageous and dismiss it out of hand. It isn't censorship, it is common sense and common courtesy to the rest of the world not to engage with that kind of thing.
I'm getting there, it is a process. I still do think every single one of my comments must be manually approved though.
More options
Context Copy link