@Tinted's banner p

Tinted


				

				

				
0 followers   follows 1 user  
joined 2024 May 23 10:50:00 UTC

				

User ID: 3069

Tinted


				
				
				

				
0 followers   follows 1 user   joined 2024 May 23 10:50:00 UTC

					

No bio...


					

User ID: 3069

I always wonder which people are really that historically ignorant. Noise, signal, so hard to tell. So little worth listening to at all?

This stuff kicked off at least as early as 2012, and it was more "nerd wars" and professor/student social media drama than politics to start with. (Tumblr isn't "big tech" either, though prior Twitter certainly made things even worse...) Trump is obviously a symptom of a problem that won't go away when he does.

The messaging coming from the Harris-Walz campaign has pivoted away from the rhetoric of civil conflict and toward the sort of calm, patriotic cheerfulness that typified the presidencies of Barack Obama and Bill Clinton.

The presidency of Bill Clinton was also typified by blowjobs...

Sorry, I'm simultaneously discussing weird down thread. Weird is starting to sound weird. Weird.

Help

Can someone please explain why they take Noah Smith seriously? He's a colossal wonk and he looks like that weird Trekkie guy.

(This is a serious question. I've noticed a few people link him on HN too. He never gets a good reception.)

"Escalate or die" ?

Those are the pastel people who police transgression, yes?

I wonder about your background. Where have you "heard from many men" about having sex with random objects?

(Nah, autistic people aren't neckbeards. Autistic people are precious innocents. Neckbeards are creepy. Vile, dangerous, pathetic, gross, freaks...)

Reddit atheists ended up being weirdos par excellence. (Even the Latinx ones.) I hear plenty about "cis gays" too.

Somebody'll manage if it's convenient.

"Strategy" is saying too much. The people doing it aren't in control, and won't be able to stop it when kids start giving other kids beatings because of what they said. But it absolutely does nudge culture (and future actions) one way or another.

Most people on both sides definitely enjoy hurting people, also.

I think a lot of "weird/creepy nerd" types who roleplay as Democratically influential are just in denial about where this is all going.

Do you actually believe that? It's such a weird thing to say. Doing that for real absolutely has big incel energy. And the movie's pretty neckbeardy even as a movie.

  • -16

Eh. You get what you incentivize. Is the ignorance here genuine or feigned? These guys always had a "we don't have enough kids" fixation anyway...

This only really makes sense if you assume there are only two sides. The eager willingness to play the "Republican talk radio" game ticked off people who needn't have been anything but friends.

Of course, it makes more sense if getting to hurt people is the point and the policy is just an excuse.

So that's what Twitter was on about last night. Nice to know I can stop feeling uneasy about the Kamala blowjob jokes.

More books, less online. Some anime fandom around the edges. And I was never much of a gamer, unless you count Myst. But none of that mattered. You have the principle.

It's very old drama, and one of the several things that moved me from "grew up in fandom and thinks freedom of expression is very important" to "many progressives successfully dedicated themselves to changing my mind."

I'll have to go look for the link.

Edit: here it is.

(Hear, hear! I think this is the first comment I've upvoted on this site.)

There's a lesson to be learned in the idea that justice and hate aren't so clearly delineated. It just needs to be contemplated by more people from more walks of life first.

I agree with Scott that persecuting people won't teach them anything useful. I recommend a leaf from Ozy's book: separate them from their children, raise the kids in your own culture, use violence only when necessary to eliminate expressions of their culture that might contaminate the succeeding generations.

It's a long-term project, but historical precedent says it can be effective if you're organized and consistent about it.

In the sense that neither is protected when it would protect an opponent?

I think this is probably dangerous, but I also thought letting the SJ set hijack "safety" was dangerous. So neutral on the "it all goes away" front now.

(I am requesting you let me watch. Pretty please?)

Would you happen to be newaltright on Substack? You have a very similar style.

Maybe because advocating for the assassination of your political opponents is not really bad and completely unacceptable?

Some groups of people think killing political enemies offhand is bad. Other groups think it's good. Nobody is clearly in the majority at the moment. (I probably meet more of the latter than the former.) So either (any) set of socially acceptable behavior is acceptable, so to speak...

It's all just a matter of the mob.

Most of the commentary I'm seeing elsewhere is of the "we came so close to a better world today" variety. (Quote, not paraphrase.)

Of course, I follow people who are fairly left of typical here. But the overlap between that and the more extreme rhetoric is significant enough.

Some people just aren't worth the attention. Calling a beard a beard was another important lesson.

That was an observation, not a statement of opinion. Politically irrelevant weirdos are not a constituency.