@Fruck's banner p

Fruck

Lacks all conviction

1 follower   follows 0 users  
joined 2022 September 06 21:19:04 UTC

Fruck is just this guy, you know?

Verified Email

				

User ID: 889

Fruck

Lacks all conviction

1 follower   follows 0 users   joined 2022 September 06 21:19:04 UTC

					

Fruck is just this guy, you know?


					

User ID: 889

Verified Email

Come on dude, your argument was good without the strawman.

Right, and we are assuming remzem did this to fuck with the moderators based on what exactly? Because from what I see remzem wrote a funny but insufficiently deferential comment, realised it wasn't going to fly and deleted it, and is now copping flak because someone in the future might abuse this deleting? This is fucking retarded, we are incentivising not fixing mistakes to ward off an issue we have never had a problem with.

Although admittedly, if I scrutinise my feelings, I probably would have just rolled my eyes at this thread if it hadn't begun with @cjet79 feeling slighted and wanting to clap back, SO HE UNDELETED A COMMENT SO HE COULD REPLY TO IT.

Can you please stop just saying ridiculous shit without even attempting to justify it?

I got to the part where the mum who lives on a sheep farm got a headache from hearing the sheep bleating and lost my ability to suspend disbelief.

What was the point of this, aside from booo outgroup?

I would be on board with this if we weren't talking about illegal, undocumented, non-citizens. I would actually be ok with indentured servitude if it was between consenting adults. But the system as it stands seems almost designed to be abused.

I really don't think defending pedophiles is a good way to avoid being perceived as causing societal problems. But even if it was, I would rather go to prison.

It isn't efficient (although as you say, it's not less efficient than most other keyboard layouts we've tried) and if he'd just said that I wouldn't have said anything. But calling it pointless is just wrong - there was a point to its design, and the point to it now is that all of the world's fastest typists are fluent in it and converting them would be a monumental task.

That said, we could definitely do better if we could start over. There was a keyboard design for thumbsticks I used to have on the psp that I reached 68wpm on after only a month's usage for example.

Don't be crazy! It's just because that's the only time nearly 100% of babies are in the hospital. Being handled by... health care workers.

Why would you argue y2 when you could be constructing x3?

It was the Friday fun thread. I don't want anyone to feel bad in the Friday fun thread. This is not a speak plainly issue because the joke was only, in my eyes, a clear cut example of the issue of surface level engagement. It was in itself not a big deal, but it both made me think of a problem I had seen more and more and appeared to be a perfect example of it.

I made a mistake in this Wellness post. I forgot how highly smart people value their intelligence, and so my claim that I no longer felt stupid here is all anyone can focus on and has caused great injury. I am sorry. You should probably mod me. Threatening to shut down analogies and metaphors on the speak plainly rule is absurd.

Yes, less engagement is what this place needs.

This is not trolling, or if it is, it's white hat trolling. It is revealing a critical flaw in the metrics the motte uses to gauge quality. Yes our stated preference is to generate interesting and entertaining conversations, but our revealed preferences say actually, it is just about writing long posts.

If firmamenti hadn't said anything about chatgpt or written this in reply to FNE, just posted it as a top level post, would it have been banned do you think? What if they'd just written it, no gpt involved? I am almost certain it would not. Because yes, what we want is interesting, entertaining and informative posts, but telling someone their post is boring and badly written is against the rules unless you put an absurd amount of effort into couching it in a way that has doesn't trigger negative emotions (and so it is usually immediately dismissed by the target).

If you don't like how someone writes, block them or minimise their post we are told, because you can't say "Hey you need to write less because you are bad at it." You say failing at writing long posts well is just as bad as writing a short post, but there is no mechanism for punishing the former, so that's what we get.

Yeah this is fucking torture, but firmamenti is correct, this would have been tolerated.

What benefit would anyone gain from going on your show to talk about the 2020 election? It looks like all downside to me at the moment man, you need to sweeten the pot a little.

You have home ground advantage and podcasting experience, you get a great episode (at least conceptually, I would love to listen to motters argue) and a very positive spin on a potential mea culpa (I know it's unfair to imply you are working an angle and I apologise, but it is a positive thing you'd get.) Meanwhile they get a potential embarrassment and have to expose their identity.

Also it's @jkf, I used to catch on that too.

I mean over the past few months. What it feels like to me, is that everyone is afraid of a) looking stupid and b) getting modded, so they pull back, and like @f3zinker said only engage with the barest surface reading of the posts. And so every second thread devolves into arguments over semantics - I'm half afraid someone's going to pull me up here and show me three threads in a row with no semantics, like that means anything. I'll get dinged for not "speaking plainly".

I don't want to go anywhere, I had hoped I could maybe wake people up to the fact that it kind of looks like we're all retreating into autism to avoid our humanity.

Edit: accidentally hit post. To continue: I have professed my love for this community many times, and I always try to encourage good writing when I see it in posts, I think there's only one or two users who encourage others more than I do in fact. I haven't been here as long as you, but it is special to me too. Like I said, I don't know how to fix the problem.

This is ironic. I enjoyed the op, it made me feel a sense of community and camaraderie, so I did my duty. And through the volunteer system I just watched @Amadan ban @Nantafiria for a week for getting upset at a mod note Amadan wrote accusing them of trying to be as annoying as possible. I would find this whole affair objectionable even if I didn't consider the possibility that Nantafiria wasn't trying to be as annoying as possible, but through that lens it's a fucking clown show. Basically Amadan put on his mod hat so he could fling shit at regulars and then ban them if they dared respond in kind.

I was given the option of reporting it as deserving a warning or deserving a ban, and I went with deserving a warning because I thought to myself 'mods aren't going to get banned anyway so what's the point in going for that?' But as I was reading more of this thread I was reminded of this post by Amadan yesterday -

Feel free to report my moderation as "uncharitable." As is always the case, when someone reports one of my posts, I will let another mod judge.

And I realised there is no point to any of it. Never mind a ban, no one is going to warn him, mods don't get bans or warnings, they get to occasionally walk back their most egregious offences after the fact - that's why he can throw the idea in @AvocadoPanic's face and then put his mod hat on for no other reason than to mock Nanta and @TheNybbler and tell them to "write gooder" - a joke designed to look silly and fun from the outside while slapping the targets in the face with hypocrisy. In other words, maximally antagonistic. And then Nanta naturally responds in shock and outrage, and Amadan acts like he has no choice but to ban him for it. What a fucking joke. Why are mods even in the system?

there is some overlap between schizophrenia and gender dysphoria.

That study is ridiculous. It seems to have been written specifically to present the single undocumented case study involving the most perfect possible patient to demonstrate a link between schizophrenia and dysphoria, a guy who ramped up attempts to transition only during psychotic breaks. It defines dysphoria, but never defines psychosis. This might be cynical, but it looks to me like two doctors building careers for themselves as experts in psychotic dysphoria based on one guy whose schizophrenia cleared up after 5 visits.

Check it out, the the conclusion reads (emphasis mine):

This case presentation depicts a clear pattern of gender identity change from male to female coinciding solely with psychotic breaks of schizoaffective disorder, bipolar type. The authors postulate that gender dysphoria can co-occur with other psychiatric disorders or as a direct result of acute psychosis. It is important to note the distinction between “gender dysphoria” and “transgender/gender non-binary identity”. As stated above, gender dysphoria occurs when a discrepancy between one’s sex assigned at birth and one’s gender identity causes distress or impairment in function while transgender/gender non-binary identity is an umbrella term for people whose gender identity is different from the sex assigned to them at birth. It is important to note that one can occur without the other and not everyone with gender dysphoria symptoms would benefit from HRT, surgery, or other gender-affirming interventions. On the other hand, many transgender individuals and gender non-binary individuals who do not meet the criteria for gender dysphoria may benefit considerably from gender-affirming treatments. Additionally, the authors consider that it would be noteworthy to study gender variance during the various stages of schizoaffective disorder to better understand if gender dysphoria tends to occur more during periods of psychotic episodes versus mood episodes.

The authors emphasize the critical importance of distinguishing between the two presentations of gender dysphoria (co-occurring with psychiatric disorders or as a direct result of acute psychosis) to ensure an accurate diagnosis before proceeding with treatment for gender concerns. A thorough diagnostic evaluation, physical examination, and the collection of collateral information are all necessary steps in the proper diagnosis and the allocation of treatment planning. Additionally, the patient’s capacity to make decisions should be well-established before proceeding with any plans for treatment. Furthermore, emphasis should be placed on the consideration of each case on an individual basis with unique needs as the field of medicine moves briskly towards recognizing health equity at every level of medical attention

I don't know if it's an invention, but I wouldn't be surprised at all.

Any feeling full stop really. Any cognition at all in fact. I'm actually only capable of engaging with reality using my brain, I didn't realise that made me psychologically unhealthy.

Actually I think you need to define psychologically healthy, because you don't seem to be describing it in my eyes. You also don't have to feel like you are losing status if I fuck your wife in front of you, or force you to blow me, but I would suggest not doing so demonstrates a lack of self respect (or a fetish, if they can be separated) not good psychological health.

Come the fuck on, your first post was consensus building already, no need to take it a step further and paint like, 90% of the guys I grew up with - including myself - as God damned serial killers just because we think conquest is cooler than road building.

Lol, reluctant. As if it isn't plainly obvious what your goal is here - a grand display of your power. "Ha ha ha" you say, "every single comment in this chain by both of us was reported multiple times, but I will enforce this one on you because I can, because this exchange didn't end with you slinking away defeated and I will not accept that result."

PS my mental model of you is flawless.

Fruck studiously takes notes for the next time he wants to shit all over someone in a way that also belittles the community but doesn't break any rules.

False. A mod getting banned would probably mean that mod being removed, which has happened once.

Why were they removed? Do you recall?

Whether or not you appreciate my tone, responding with "fuck you and the horse you rode in on" has never been acceptable.

Neither has accusing someone of trying to be so annoying they get banned. And I don't care about his history, you provoked him. That's banana republic shit. No he shouldn't have replied that way, but he wouldn't have had the chance if you hadn't put your mod hat on to throw zingers at him. Or am I crazy, and nobody else here would find it upsetting to be accused of being so fucking annoying it looks like a deliberate ploy to get banned?

I don't expect mods to be robots. But when you wear your mod hat I do expect you to behave the way you want others to, because that's the freaking job. Be better, give us a model to live by instead of demanding we do as you say, not as you do. I don't think I'm asking for the moon here, you can write interesting mod notes without resorting to mud slinging can't you?

Rudd was a rebel, a revolutionary, but now in his own words, is a "good Jewish boy". @fuckduck9000 nailed it, didn't he? And this is just one last gambit before the hammer drops.

I would have appreciated the pile in earlier, I don't know why anyone would think I wasn't expecting pushback, if everyone agreed with me there wouldn't be a problem because everyone would have also decided to make an effort to understand every post they reply to at the start of the year.

But I have learned my lesson now. I was picking on people and no I don't get to find out how I should just shut up already. This is fine.

For clarity, acting as if I think something which even the people arguing with me about it down thread agree nobody ever thinks is ironic stupidity?