site banner
Advanced search parameters (with examples): "author:quadnarca", "domain:reddit.com", "over18:true"

Showing 25 of 385 results for

domain:themotte.org

I think you misunderstand me. I was somewhat flippant because I didn't follow that one super closely, and don't remember the upset user in question. My point is more generally that the Motte's moderation philosophy is against 'moral monsters, end of story' framing. this framing was associated more with the left for the past decade, thus why places like the motte exist, and don't exist on Reddit, pre-Musk twitter etc.

But when Turok and Count jumped in, they didn't do it from the left, and the pattern matching of 'the Motte bans leftists' is incorrect.

Fuck bigots, fuck white people, and fuck low human capital, all get banned for a reason other than political association.

I will concede that 'fuck HBD deniers' seems to get a special pass on this space as some kind of legacy protection

Could probably start with a single appeal, in front of an Art II appointed official (not an Art III judge) scheduled for a reasonable time in the future (say 10 business days).

Contra Whinning Coil: somebody flaming out because Whinning Coil was allowed to express racist views.

On this, it's not always just the racism element, more that what the mods appear to be selecting for is having a line of how much contempt you are allowed to give off when expressing a view. This seems mostly with the goal of preventing the forum from becoming trading insults back and forth.

Some positions inherently come with animus. There's a reason I scroll past the HBD discussions. But there are times I feel that users get away with a little more spice against groups that aren't typically here than if those groups were here, such as when feminism comes up.

I'd rather have a system that occasionally unjustly deports a tiny number of people to one which deports almost nobody.

If those are the choices, maybe it's the right one. But we should probably demand better.

I don't at all (look at my post history) think we need to treat every migrant kindly -- especially those with facially bogus asylum claims. But I think we should have treated this individual migrant better.

Of course, there is no actual political movement for "be fucking reasonable, don't let a million Venezuelans and Hondurans in but also don't deport a guy that runs a legit business".

Charitability isn't the only thing that is being measured in any ban. I was just re-reading this post and its replies, in rehashing some old drama to satisfy myself, and there is a reply from Zorba below, to something else that I'm not sure what it was:

I want to be really clear on why it's a warning, though. It's a warning because you have a stellar track record. If you were a new user, this would probably be a quiet remove-post-and-ban; there are people coming from dedicated troll subreddits who are making better posts than this and still earning bans for them. You've been a spectacular long-term contributor, and that gives you a considerable amount of leeway, but not infinite; our ban lists are littered with people who made great post after great post, then some switch got flipped and they turned toxic overnight and now they're permabanned.

Rightly or wrongly, WhiningCoil has a bunch of AAQCs and is generally upvoted and considered a quality, if provocative, user. I can't really think of anyone who thinks the same of AlexanderTurok or BurdensomeCount, even on the left. Do they provide good steelmans of their own side? Seems like they don't, or you'd get more left-leaning posters defending their posts, or you'd get the more even-handed moderators giving more nuanced opinions of how they view the posts. If you've read a lot of moderator warnings, you see that they show their homework when giving any warning or ban.

5. The boss wants to appear to be against it and is generally happy to let underlings do it with plausible deniability so that he doesn't personally take political heat for an unpopular choice.

Every governing body has to figure out how to make those kind of choices. A system that allows them to made while protecting the boss from the blowback is part of the design.

Yep, CIV is especially dangerous in this regard.

The person who actually approved the vaccine is Vinay Prasad, director of The Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research. He reports directly to FDA commissioner Marty Makary, who in turn reports to Secretary Kennedy.

I mean, given the whole one of his wives having cancer thing, idk he does.

Yea civ 6. 5 is a lot better in some ways, but playing tall in civ is far better than wide, which makes the game not quite as fun as civ 6 where you can constantly be expanding.

My knowledge of Ukr politics begins and ends at ‘I support whatever the UGCC wants’, so this is an honest question- does Zaluzhny have sufficient internal support to force through a peace agreement over the nationalist’s objections, or to expand the draft until Ukraine is fully staffed again? Could that be the reason?

As for Zelenskyy, making high risk maneuvers is far from unknown when leaders sense a direct threat to their power.

@Dean

Perhaps after the end of Trump, the USA will be in a position where it can apply for readmission to the human race...

The idea that America's/the Wests standing rises or falls based on how it treats every migrant was a cope to deter critics and act as a self-esteem bolster for migrants themselves.

It clearly seems to have failed to stop the seething (even from totally unrelated migrants an ocean away) so one wonders if it should just be subject to the same critiques as the broader self esteem movement.

It's also... just not that hard to get in contact with government officials, in most countries. In the US, you can absolutely call your Senator because a passport is taking too long to renew, or because the feds are being too annoying about an EPA thing. There's an entire industry of constituent services. You'll get thrown around by half-dozen different aides and they probably won't help much unless it's the sorta problem that can be solved with a phone call, and I'd assume a helpful unrelated donation will get faster a response, but it's absolutely something John Public can and often does do.

Pepsi Throwback (in a can) was better than Pepsi (in a can), but I don't know what else changed in the recipe.

Civ 6 is currently free (including expansions and DLC) on Epic, for anyone who doesn't have it yet.

This is a point in favor of my thinking that video games are better now than ever. All of the video game equivalents of crack cocaine have generally released within the last 15 years. I got horribly addicted to Caves of Qud, Dwarf Fortress, Cataclysm: Dark Days Ahead (I think @TracingWoodgrains may have played all three of these? He had an AAQC on roguelikes on the subreddit), Escape from Tarkov, Mount and Blade Warband, and likely others that I don't remember right now. Maybe that's just my brain being different as an adult somehow, but "gaming crack" seems like it's alive and well. Plus, you can still play all the old stuff!

In a civilized country like the UK, firstly something like this would never have happened as the man would have a right to argue against his deportation in front of a judge, so none of this "ambush deportation" would ever be possible

The UK, it should be noted, cannot deport illegal immigrants at any meaningful rate, and its capacity to do so has completely collapsed. To give foreign readers an idea of how farcical the system is, one Nigerian woman appealed her deportation eight times before deliberately joining a Nigerian terrorist organisation, and then (successfully) arguing that she would face persecution in Nigeria because of her membership of said terrorist organisation.

I'd rather have a system that occasionally unjustly deports a tiny number of people to one which deports almost nobody.

This is also probably the only case I've ever seen where the euphemism 'undocumented migrant' is appropriate. He literally lost his documents, as opposed to just not having them because he's in the country illegally.

Insofar as I've understood the specific criteria for ineligibility for asylum in US is membership in a Communist or otherwise totalitarian party, which is something that might apply to a Pinochet regime opponent but by no means was guaranteed to be the fact.

Sounds like Civ 6? I'm still on 5 (by choice). Skeptical towards 7 too.

This was an unusually drama heavy week. I’m going to encourage you to stick around to read the first quality contributions report after your arrival and see what we’re aiming for here.

If he was granted asylum due to fear of torture by Pinochet, then he was a communist who should have been handed over to operation condor at the time, and was ineligible for asylum under US law. Finding and deporting such cases is a stated priority of the Trump admin.

I think the great LKY put it far far better than I ever could talking about the true character of Americans

I very much enjoyed your link because I enjoy listening to historical leaders talk about how they see the world and why.

But I don't see this link as a meaningful example of America's flaws. In the video, LKY talks about how a CIA officer tried to bribe a Singaporean security official and why he won't work with America because of the fallout. This is something that all countries would do and have done on 1000s of occasions. The fact that the US did this in a hap-hazard, unskilled way I don't think reflects poorly on the US. If anything, the fact that the CIA was incompetent I think reflects well on the US for not "needing" this type of espionage for most of its history. I expect these days the CIA to be significantly more competent than the 1960s because it has now existed for 80 years instead of 20.

Well yes. It's a TV drama after all. No one's going to watch a story about common problems that are easily diagnosed and solved.

It's still probably good advice for real doctors.

In the show's defense, sometimes it's not a zebra, it's horse with stripes painted on it so that they waste the whole episode assuming it's a zebra.