site banner
PaperclipPerfector  16hr ago (text post)   596 thread views

Small-Scale Question Sunday for May 24, 2026

Do you have a dumb question that you're kind of embarrassed to ask in the main thread? Is there something you're just not sure about?

This is your opportunity to ask questions. No question too simple or too silly.

Culture war topics are accepted, and proposals for a better intro post are appreciated.

Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

So, what are you reading?

I'm still on Sayers' Whose Body? Also reading Abelson's The Seven Liberal Arts after rereading Sayers' essay The Lost Tools of Learning.

Currently reading:

  • Desolation Island Patrick O'Brian
  • The Monastery of the Damned Nicholas Tobias
  • Interwar Articles Ernst Junger
  • The City-State of Boston: The Rise and Fall of an Atlantic Power, 1630–1865 Mark Peterson
  • High Output Management Andrew S. Grove

Nearly finished The Matriarch.

I recently finished reading Cat’s Cradle by Kurt Vonnegut, perhaps better known as the Ice-9 book, first published in 1963. It seems like it's supposed to be a highly satirical book that probably made a lot more sense at the time it was published. For me, reading it in 2026, it seemed kind of weird and lame; a bunch of weird characters who didn't make much sense running around and doing stuff that doesn't make much sense. At least the chapters are strangely short, I did at least manage to finish it. I was more interested in the Sci-Fi Ice-9 stuff, but that was maybe like 10% of the book, mostly the last few chapters, and very little discussion of it. I expect a good Motte thread about the idea would be way more interesting. My recommendation is, if you're genuinely interested in 1960s-era social commentary, it may be worth a read. If you're interested in Sci-Fi around the Ice-9 idea, don't bother.

Thanks, saved me a read. I've never been very happy with Vonnegut. Increasingly kind of confused as to how he attained the status he has.

Currently reading Descent of Man by Charles Darwin. What's striking to me is how much of a not-Darwinist Darwin is. I mean, he's a naturalist, yes, but check this out:

As the voice was used more and more, the vocal organs would have been strengthened and perfected through the principle of inherited effects of use

That sounds like Lamarckism to me. Bro be out there batting for the other team. And it's not like he wrote this when he was 12, before he had his head screwed on straight. This was toward the end of his life!

The classroom story we were told about the history of evolution, at least in my school, was very misleading. In my school, we were taught Lamarck was basically the Aristotle of evolution, saying a bunch of harebrained nonsense he made up, and Darwin was basically Newton who came along and explained how it akshually worked. But that is not at all how this played out.

Fascinating. I love a good conspiracy theory. Something about DarwinismTM doesn’t sit right with me. I’m not a young earth creationist, but it does seem there are a lot of big outstanding questions. And it’s presented to every Westerner as a fairy tale story in school.

Why is this? Well it’s obvious. Politics.

Try bringing this up in typical PMC company and see their reaction.

Nah, this is pretty common. Like if you read Maxwell 1865, it looks nothing like the modern presentation of Maxwell’s equations. It’s not because people are lying, it’s because the underlying idea has been substantially cleaned up from the first person to stumble upon it.

Another example: calculus didn’t even have any rigorous foundation until a century after Newton, when Cauchy finally came up with the modern epsilon-delta thing we teach everyone today.

Modern presentation is only wrong in the sense that it’s biased towards presenting the polished ideas in their final state, while attributing this to the original thinkers, when in reality, there’s usually a big story between "guy who originally thought of this" and "what we’re actually presenting to you in class today."

The Gaussian distribution is another example. The distribution itself was proposed by Gauss, yes, but the justification for why this distribution is indeed the peremptory-correct distribution was done by Laplace (who had proposed several prior attempts at his own normal distribution!) The logic of why the normal distribution is the normal distribution—what we now know as the Central Limit Theorem—is the meat of the story, and yet Laplace’s name is merely a footnote to anyone except math nerds.

Still on The Glass Bead Game. Haven't formed a firm opinion just yet despite being nearly 60% done, but intrigued enough to continue. I get that it's a kind of hagiography of Knecht that's not supposed to be taken at face value but I'm hoping there's more to it still.

Battle Cry of Freedom, McPherson.

Haven’t decided whether it has school textbook energy or if I just associate the antebellum material with high school. Setting that confusion aside, I found the beginning extremely compelling. It opens with sheet music: one tune, two sets of lyrics. Eloquent.

There are parts I want to write up for the Motte and parts I want to quote directly. Mostly about the absurd growth of mid-1800s America and how it mapped to the economic and social movements we learned about in school. Consider the Great Awakening. The standard AP explanation is “well, excess land is a pretty good situation for splinter religious groups.” This is underselling it. A glut of natural resources corresponds to a shortage of skilled labor. That suppresses the anti-capitalist sentiments which wrack Europe around this time, and it takes the pressure off social strife, so there’s less unrest and less resistance to industrialization. Moving along that curve pushes the modal worker out of the home and into the factory, or in the case of women, into education. So the next generation is both richer and better educated, creating a much more literate, socially conscious class which is still aligned with the industrialization project rather than conservative. Each surplus reinforces the others.

And none of this is touching on the Peculiar Institution! That’s like half of the opening chapter.

I have a lot more to say about this, but I’m going to hold off until I’ve read some more.

I remember reading it years ago, and found it excellent. Should probably re-read it, and one or two of his other books.

What's everyone's favorite AI image generation model?

I'm running a Pathfinder campaign, and being able to generate on-demand NPC art that looks like the vague idea I had in my head for a character is a huge step forward from having to scour the internet for stock art and make sure I haven't reused anything.

Unfortunately, I've been working with Microsoft's Copilot and ChatGPT (with a brief disappointing dip into Gemini), and recently I've noticed that both of them seem to have regressed in their image generation models: wonky eyes that don't get better, one side of the face significantly differently styled than the other, and my personal most annoying issue, being unable to generate with transparency in the background. ChatGPT can do this, but Copilot and Gemini regularly fail over and over at this task, often generating a white-and-grey square pattern that browsers will use to indicate transparency, but that's the actual background of the image, and you can see points in the background where it messed up and did the same color multiple times instead of alternation. These all feel like issues from the early days of image generation, so I suspect they've regressed their free models to something that's cheaper for them to run.

I'm not opposed to paying for it (though free is clearly better), but I'd really rather pay someone other than OpenAI, I just don't like Altman or how the company is run. And if I'm going to pay someone I'd want a good text model as well, I often use the text models to generate names or flesh out ideas.

Would recommend checking out recraft.ai

I always request a black and white sketch/pen art style, harder to screw up. You can always remove the background with a browser tool after the fact.

This is good information, but I was really hoping I would not have to do either of these things. At some point I was able to get reliably quality artwork with transparent backgrounds, so I know the technology is there. It's possible it's not something I can access.

I think chatgpt works well enough but have noticed that quality drops off fairly quickly if you make multiple requests in a day, regardless of whether they're in the same conversation or not.

I believe there is some kind of stealth rate limiting going on and you only get a few quality requests a day until you get the dogshit version.

This actually fits a lot with my experiences: I can get good results, but sometimes it just absolutely fails in a way the makes me think I'm getting different underlying code.

I have generated a lot of images in a day, including hitting the ~hourly-rate limits multiple times, and I can't say I've noticed this at all.

It has been very noticeable for me so either you're using a different version than me, it's a time of day/load balancing thing, you lack basic visual discernment or maybe they're A/B testing.

I think my vision and discernment is fine, actually, but sure. The other explanations are at least plausible.

I use both GPT Image 2 and Nano Banana Pro 2, but these days, mostly the former. NB was clearly better until I2 came out, and you can probably use them pretty interchangeably, but I get subjectively better results from the former, particularly if I use it through the GPT 5.5 (Thinking) route, which allows for a combination of thinking and image gen.

So, since Colbert is now off CBS, first of all he hosted a really quite funny hourlong program on local community access in Michigan, hosting an hour of "Only in Monroe". This reminded me in parts of when he was, well, more funny - on the Colbert Report in particular, which I have fond memories of. So to have a little time capsule, let's go back and watch an episode from 12 years ago! Also two years after a re-election of an influential president now a good portion into their second term, but it's Obama this time around. Link (best I could find) and cleaned transcript

I find it an interesting mini-window into the happenings of the culture war! There's some good stuff here, Colbert Report never fails to get a laugh from me.

First we have a report about Chinese cyperspies who had charges filed after hacking five US companies and stealing solar secrets. In retrospect, China totally got away with this one, which was IMO a significant Obama admin failure. More topically for use, we have a somewhat racist joke! Yes, for those of you know might not know, Colbert plays a parody of a conservative in this show, so sometimes being offensive is part of the joke - honestly I thought he did a really nice job of straddling the line overall to keep both the comedy and honestly offer some criticism along the way (and not all of it hits Republicans, of course!) But it's still interesting that in this era Colbert can still get away with it. 2014 isn't actually peak woke, you might say.

Yes, cyber spies! It's like a regular spy but instead of a tuxedo you wear an adventure time t-shirt with nacho stains. (laughter) The Justice Department has put out this wanted poster to help us identify these dangerous online criminals. So look for it at the post office, when you go pick up your email, (laughter) and it's a true rogue's gallery. For instance, Gui Chunhui -- who also goes by the alias KandyGoo [sic], a clever way to pass for an American, name yourself after our two most popular foods -- and the infamous Wang Dong, whose name in English translates to Peter Johnson, Jr. (laughter)

It is about time they nailed Wang Dong! I get email offers from Wang Dong all the time, and the pills he sold me never arrived. Now how will she call me Mr. Pleasure at sight of extraordinary power manhood? In an attempt to give an edge to Chinese industries, these guys stole trade secrets from corporations like Westinghouse, U.S. Steel, Alcoa, and the renewable energy company SolarWorld. Of course, the Chinese can't do their own solar research since they no longer have access to the sun. (laughter)

Folks, this is a major threat to our financial future. The Chinese already know how to manufacture all our electronics. Now they're trying to learn how to design them. If they also figure out how to buy them and drop them in the toilet when they're drunk, America will have no role in the world economy!

So in a way it didn't age well twice! Or maybe just once. I don't think the jokes were that mean-spirited. And then we have Hillary Clinton show up as a topic! Yes, she's getting ready to run at this point in time. Karl Rove alleges she has brain damage. Some news clips are played alleging that Republicans are scared of her running so they are trying to talk her out of it or throw water on the idea. There's some jokes about how they aren't going to take it easy on her for being a woman, and jokes about TV Republicans hitting their wives. And a dated primary preview!

Point is, if we're going to stop Hillary, nothing is out of bounds. We have to be completely vicious to her, because the only alternative is running a candidate people like. Jim, who do we have on the bench?

[News clip] Senator Rand Paul is the early frontrunner for Republicans in 2016. [News clip] Mike Huckabee jumped to the head of the pack. [News clip] Rick Perry. Chris Christie. Senator Marco Rubio talking 2016 --

[Stephen] Oh, my God... (laughter) We've got to hit her hard!

Thank God the rest of these losers aren't running again, except for, well, Rubio of course. I can't wait to see clips of his debate meltdown circulate again. Also, bit of a prescient call by Colbert about the tone of things?

In a glimpse of Comedy Central's 2014 America, we then have a Tosh.0 ad, a hard cider ad, a $40/mo T-Mobile 4G LTE data plan ad (500MB cap! unlimited talk and text!), an ad for the Edge of Tomorrow movie, an Infiniti car ad, honestly a pretty cool Sapporo premium beer ad, a California Great America theme park ad.

After the break? A news item about Europe proposing a "right to be forgotten" to Google and such. Whatever happened to this? Apparently, Google (heh) tells me that basically it got limited to European visibility, and only for names; so nothing disappears on the US or worldwide side of the Web. But I will say, corporations are much much better at doing this than people seem to be. However, I think there's still a healthy market for reverse-SEO, though with AI stuff who knows how this will pan out in a few more years.

We then have an Inside Amy Schumer ad, a decent lengthy Apple ad for the iPad Air with a Dead Poet's Society tie-in and one with a travel blogger, a Sharpie ad, a Bacardi liquor ad, an American Express bank ad, a Dignity Health ad introducing the ability to wait for your appointment via online scheduling, a Fiat x Godzilla movie crossover ad, and a one second flash of a lingerie ad that gets cut off. Honestly it doesn't seem like ads have changed all that much. Although modern ads maybe lean a bit too hard into overdone, overplayed "skits" rather than more "cinematic" type ads?

Finally, in a bit that will interest some people here, we had the creator of Mad Men hosted, going in to Part 1 of the final season (yes apparently splitting up the second season to milk it was a thing even back in 2014 at least). Although he claims it was a scheduling issue. IDK man. Anyways:

It's been on for seven seasons. Let me summarize what happened: Don smoked, banged everything on the Eastern Seaboard, sold California, sold some soap, was grim about it. And smoked some more. Is he a criticism of the American male? Because I'm an American male, and should I be taking this personally?

[Weiner] I don't think it's meant as a negative thing. I always sort of thought that he was about the sort of split message that the American male gets: that you are told that you -- to be attractive -- on the one hand, you have to be, like, you know, Little League coach and, like, P.T.A. guy, great husband, great dad. On the other hand, you are supposed to smoke as much, drink as much, and get laid as much as possible.

[Stephen] And get the other guy. [Matthew Weiner] And be carnivorous in business. [Stephen] Right. Those two things. I'm always surprised how much people get off on him winning, but I don't judge him at all. None of this is supposed to be a judgment of the audience. I was afraid he was judging me. When the show started, he was a shiny object, fun, sexy, but as it goes on, he becomes an even more complex character. Why present something complex? Why can't I just be kind of fun and sexy, you know, good-looking guy, and then take all that inner life and just keep it down until one day it just kills me, and then, you know, my loved ones read my letters and cry forever? (laughter)

[Weiner] That is the theory. What you just described is a good theory. [Stephen] This is 1969. [Weiner] Yeah.

I never watched Mad Men, but I know it had at least some impact. Some allege it impacted fashion and brought back some of the furniture and suit aesthetic, cocktails, and I'm sure it had some impact on gender narratives, or at the very least promoted a certain view of historical gender narratives. Thankfully I don't think it really brought back smoking as something cool, although it possibly coincided with the Juul vape wave a year or so later. Is there really a duality in male expectations? Yeah, kinda. You need to be safe, but then also randomly dangerous with swagger at other times. And you need to be oozing confidence in business.

So, anyways, what did we learn from our glance into the past? Well it's just a point in time, but an effectively random one. It's interesting to me how evergreen some of these issues and situations are, in a sense. Worries about cybercrime, nation-state hacking campaigns, industrial espionage against the US, the struggles of the social media age and privacy. A Democrat that seems poised to sweep the primary field early on having laid a ton of groundwork (Newsom), against a grab-bag of unlikable Republicans, who might have a dark horse jump in later on and upend things (TBD, but I sort of think there's a decent chance the nominee isn't Rubio or Vance! not a great chance but maybe 30%?). Is there a prominent TV show right now that talks about masculinity in any big sense? I don't really think so. Ted Lasso sort of presented an alternate vision, Succession had a bit to say, Yellowstone maybe theoretically but it's I think too soapy to really count. I think it's fair to say that the media culture has fragmented significantly since the mid-2010s, at least it feels that way?

(Also, is Mad Men worth watching?)

I loved seasons 1 and 2 of Mad Men. They felt adult and novelistic in a way that Breaking Bad was claimed to feel but, to my mind, never really did. For some reason I've never watched further than that though.

But it's still interesting that in this era Colbert can still get away with it. 2014 isn't actually peak woke, you might say.

Progressives still do this now with SNL just telling nakedly racist jokes. They just need the barest fig leaf of an excuse and they'll roar with laughter at a white man saying the meanest, most racist shit.

This is called, I am told, "media literacy".

I haven't watched SNL for years but I remember Archie Bunker. Norman Lear was pretty progressive in his day.

Im not sure what we should call the phenomenon you're describing but its basically the male equivalent of the Madonna-whore complex. Definitely a thing.

Are people here as autistic as everyone jokes that everyone is or is that just humor? In the survey posted a month ago (tongue-in-cheekily) I was forty something percent German and about as much autistic, but that was entertainment. Are people going on diagnosed autism or just vibes?

Don't answer of course if this is personal.

I grew up going to school with some profoundly autistic kids. They’ll always be my barometer. I’m not terribly inclined to joke about it.

There’s something about the way “autistic” is used in red/gray circles that reminds me of stereotypical gender discourse.

According to the quiz, 27% German, 16% autistic, neither prevailing. I do seem to get along with autistic people, and am more autistic than the average basically normal woman.

I'm not autistic, I just happen to be nerdy enough to blend in.

I've never been diagnosed, but if I am at all autistic, I am only very mildly autistic at most, I think. I was probably more autist-like when younger (when it comes to social awkwardness and issues with eye contact), but I grew out of it over time as I had more social experience.

I also suspect, while having no solid proof, that doing MDMA a few times in my 20s might have helped permanently make me a little bit less autistic. WARNING THOUGH: You cannot expect to do MDMA and become less autistic. It is a potentially dangerous drug and it can have very different effects on different people.

In any case, most of my social improvement had more to do with social experience than with drugs, I'm sure.

I've never had an unusual degree of sensory sensitivity compared to the average population. I don't have any significant issues with social interaction or reading people's facial expressions or subtext. I still have some minor issues with eye contact if I am feeling stressed out or overwhelmed, but I think that's probably pretty common with neurotypicals. Overall, I might actually be more socially adept and socially comfortable than the average person.

I do tend to get heavily into "nerdy" interests from time to time, but not in a compulsive way and not to the detriment of my general functioning, I think.

I tend to be uncomfortable with change, but for what it's worth I also don't particularly like rules and structure.

I do have some psychological issues, but they resemble things like anxiety and ADHD more than autism, or at least autism as I understand it.

“Your result: Neither (24% German, 36% autistic”

I’m definitely not normal, and certainly possess some autistic traits as well, although I don’t feel like I entirely fit in with the autists either.

The style of discussion prevalent on TheMotte certainly selects for autists.

I've never been diagnosed, but yes, I'm plausibly "autistic" under current use of the concept.

When I was young, only the most severe cases of "autism" were ever diagnosed, and IIRC it was considered by most to be a form of "childhood schizophrenia." I was in my 40s, give or take, when the "spectrum" really sank into the zeitgeist and people first started commenting about me being "on" it. Some of my children (who are all now adults) do have psychiatrically diagnosed autism, based on criteria that would clearly apply to me, so it seems fair to say that I'm genuinely autistic, insofar as any such diagnosis admits of authentication. Specifically, my social interaction norms are deep into "spectrum" territory, while my repetitive behavior and sensory processing tendencies are less severe but still noticeably autistic.

But I am "high functioning," especially verbally, and as an adult it seems pointless to get a personal "diagnosis" for a variety of reasons. Would I get an embossed certificate for my wall? I think that clocking me as autistic sometimes helps other people but I've lived an above-average life by most metrics; if it ain't broke, don't fix it! I do look back at many interactions of my youth and, viewed through the lens of disability, a lot of my suffering was arguably the result of other people genuinely abusing me. But they couldn't have known that any more than I did, and blaming myself (despite never really knowing what I had done wrong) probably developed my sense of agency.

As a fellow young at heart if nothing else, I sometimes wonder if, years before it was common, I shouldn't have been diagnosed with something, or if the something I should have been diagnosed with that veered me (and continues to veer me) from typical normal hasn't been identified yet. But as you imply, the usefulness of a diagnosis is debatable, particularly if framed as a disability rather than superpower or talent.

Every quiz I've taken has me not too far from the upper bound of as autistic as you can get while overall still functional. It tracks with my habits and preferences, but no formal diagnosis.

No formal diagnosis here either, but if Beavis and Butt-Head could ever fit the diagnosis that surely would’ve been me as a child. I somewhat felt like I was being targeted in goose’s rant several years ago, taking shots at my personality, :/.

Mostly on the level of "quirky" rather than "disordered". I could have probably gotten a diagnosis if my parent had known how to game the system as people do these days, but realistically all that would have done is let me avoid learning how to hide it.

I've taken some other autism tests and been found to be... definitely not. I have a few autistic friends who can't comprehend how I'm not, though.

Self-reported psychometrics tests always seem dubious to me, including personality tests. (This does not mean I'm suggesting you're autistic.)

I'm in the fun spot of some old friends claiming I'm the most engineery person they have ever met (and they know quite a few engineers) while also scoring quite low on tests (12% in the one that was posted), and having been tested (for my ADHD diagnosis) without showing any signs of autism beyond typical "yeah, the guy's an engineer"-level things.

Like yes, some Stuff Matters, but only in the right context. Yes, if you fuck up basic engineering principles in a job or when building something important you're a fucking idiot but also I couldn't give a damn about which order the cutlery is in or changes in daily routine.

I generally get on well with other engineers but much less so with people who are clearly on the autism spectrum.

My mother claims that I received a (now-technically-outdated) diagnosis of Asperger's syndrome at age 16 (as part of my defense against a frivolous criminal investigation). However, she doesn't actually have the records to back that claim up, and I personally do not recall being informed of any diagnosis at the time.

You wer investigated for a fraudulent marriage?

Q: We have the court file showing that your ill-fated high-school crush was on a girl, not on a boy.

A: If you have my court file, then you should know that that old crush was Indian as well, just like my husband.

A paper that I gave to an unrelated acquaintance (in which I fantasized about kidnapping the crush, trapping her in a cage of sonic stun guns, and making her play Scrabble with me) somehow fell into the hands of the school administration, was misinterpreted as a "terroristic threat" against the crush ("zero tolerance" for """guns""" even if they're nonlethal), and was reported to the police.

Going to have to update my Motte dossier.

I'm joking. I'm just on the male-spectrum, not the autism spectrum; I've checked.

I was pretty autistic on that test - in the same range as @ToaKraka, who seems to be our gold standard here on TheMotte.

I was also diagnosed as an adult when seeking treatment for PTSD. Up until that point, I had no idea. Growing up, there were a lot of comments about how "that boy ain't right" and how I needed to "act normal". The idea that it might be something diagnosable or treatable didn't exist in those communities. Instead of an IEP, I got my ass beat until I could fake it well enough to get by.

Now that I know, it doesn't really change much. Mostly it just informed the PTSD treatment. Well, it informs treatment and gives my partner a new way to playfully make jokes about my behavior at times.

TK: Please don't take the gold standard comparison as an insult. You're one of my favorite people on this forum. The weird shit you dig up and post brightens my day whenever I see it.

Decoupling is autistic in nature, and the rules of The Motte select for extreme decouplers. Everyone else crashes out sooner or later when their sacred cow is violated in front of them.

Also, I am 42 German and 47 autistic, which is disturbingly close to both ToaKraka and Southkraut.

There is probably a correlation between high-functioning autism and ability to decouple, but you certainly don't need to be autistic to decouple.

Decoupling is just basic logical thinking. You don't have to be autistic to be able to be logical.

I was diagnosed before I could speak (that was one of the criteria).

Was that at age what, like a year old? Or did you begin speaking later?

I think so. I speak now.

Maybe it's interesting: I feel like my social (neurotypical) skills have developed, but slower. I was a very weird kid, even looking back from my perspective today. Nowadays, I understand e.g. the Social Shapes Test, I act socially acceptable (at least nobody tells me otherwise), maybe I can pretend to be normal. Although I'm sure anyone around me for more than a few minutes notices that I'm "off", because I barely talk (unprompted), fail to make eye contact, and my interests/philosophy/personality is different than anyone I've met in-person (even other autists and nerds unfortunately).

What is this place?

This website is a place for people who want to move past shady thinking and test their ideas in a court of people who don't all share the same biases. Our goal is to optimize for light, not heat; this is a group effort, and all commentators are asked to do their part.

The weekly Culture War threads host the most controversial topics and are the most visible aspect of The Motte. However, many other topics are appropriate here. We encourage people to post anything related to science, politics, or philosophy; if in doubt, post!

Check out The Vault for an archive of old quality posts. You are encouraged to crosspost these elsewhere.


Why are you called The Motte?

A motte is a stone keep on a raised earthwork common in early medieval fortifications. More pertinently, it's an element in a rhetorical move called a "Motte-and-Bailey", originally identified by philosopher Nicholas Shackel. It describes the tendency in discourse for people to move from a controversial but high value claim to a defensible but less exciting one upon any resistance to the former. He likens this to the medieval fortification, where a desirable land (the bailey) is abandoned when in danger for the more easily defended motte. In Shackel's words, "The Motte represents the defensible but undesired propositions to which one retreats when hard pressed."

On The Motte, always attempt to remain inside your defensible territory, even if you are not being pressed.


New post guidelines

If you're posting something that isn't related to the culture war, we encourage you to post a thread for it. A submission statement is highly appreciated, but isn't necessary for text posts or links to largely-text posts such as blogs or news articles; if we're unsure of the value of your post, we might remove it until you add a submission statement. A submission statement is required for non-text sources (videos, podcasts, images).

Culture war posts go in the culture war thread; all links must either include a submission statement or significant commentary. Bare links without those will be removed.

If in doubt, please post it!


Rules


Recommended Posts And Communities

Recommended Realtime Chats