ugh
There's stress pondering whether it's best to post here and forget about a post, or reuse posts.
By the latter, I mean replacing both the title and the content of a previous post with new text.
See, I've come to enjoy accumulating only a day's worth of posts here:
Sufficient Unto the Daywhich is an experiment in.. well, as US presidential candidate Kamala Harris might put it "being unburdened by what has been".
My need to do that is arguably rooted in a mental illness in which is bothers me to have older posts existing for longer periods of time, both because it seems a silly waste, and also because I don't like being reminded how "un-replied to" so many of them were. That latter part is because therein do I feel as though I wasted my time writing and posting for it having no "attention impact" on the venue crowd, because it motivated little to no response.
Yeah. Super silly. Somewhat sick, even. But it's me relative to this endeavor.
The tension is due to realizing that solving this problem for me creates another problem, which is one of "pulling the textural rug" out from what others may have already replied to, no doubt providing ample reason to not reply to me in general, because the replies won't make sense in the context of replacement content.
Hmmm... any thoughts on that?
You got up on the political side of the bed.
Hey, don't tempt me.
I have a mind to speak but I don't want our dear patrons to suffer it.
> Hey, don't tempt me.
What? Me? ;-)
> I have a mind to speak but I don't want our dear patrons > to suffer it.
Seems to me that so long as it's free of personal attacks, they'd be making themselves suffer.
Are you saying you find satisfaction/joy/etc. in having whoever is least secure in their self/person/individuality definition you can imagine (because there's no knowing that until testing it) determining the extent of your expression?
I am not particularly against political discussion, I really wouldn't mind for good interesting discussion on that matter... but then again, how often does that get to happen?
Surely, the midnight pub will not reduce to 4chan-quality political discussion. That much is for sure.
But I really don't think that our fellow patros, who are flooded with Kamala Trump bullshit on every other site would welcome Kamala Trump bullshit in one of the nicer places of the internet.
On the other side, we can keep this contained in a single thread and keep ourselves from letting it spill to other tables.
I have wanted to make a post here, by the title "Is this what people want democracy for?". You can imagine the content of that thread. Of course, everybody is free to skip it. I just don't want to have the pub become, even for a couple days, into another 4chan/reddit.
I know it won't really steep to that level. But i am wary...
> I am not particularly against political discussion, I > really wouldn't mind for good interesting discussion on > that matter... but then again, how often does that get > to happen?
Surely we can be unburdened by what has been in other political discussions! :-)
> But I really don't think that our fellow patros, who are > flooded with Kamala Trump bullshit on every other site > would welcome Kamala Trump bullshit in one of the nicer > places of the internet.
That's why I avoided alleged policies.
For starters, I no longer believe any "news" created for money, or what I believe to be regurgitation of the same. One indicator of the latter for me is when I start hearing/reading "points" that are identical to "points" I've heard/read elsewhere. Even if they're true, it bothers me to hear/read others reciting such verbatim. And I experience that on both sides. To me it appears so-called "TDS" isn't limited to just one side. A lot of both "MAGA" and "NEVER (trump)" types seem like followers of a fundamentalist religion to me, mindlessly quoting chapter and verse from their respective permissible scriptures.
(I must admit it seems hilarious to me that left-leaning types would become fundamentalist religious when they're often so anti-religion, and yet there they are quoting their scriptures all glassy-eyed 'n shit....)
But even when it's not the quoting of "news" mediate narrative, I'm not interested in others' assessment of what either candidate has said. That disinterest is rooted in decades of experiencing people war online over the exact same statements, whether or not political. People bring their own meanings heavily affected by their own life experiences to words, which I believe is how the same statements lead to diverse interpretations. It seems very much a "arguing about different movies as though the same movie" kind of a thing - I *think* because we essentially *are* in our own movies in which we're the lead character.
However, I'm fine with characterizations/opinions of candidate statements that acknowledge that phenomenon, and highlight how one's characterization/opinion was likely affected (afflicted? :-) ) by such experiences.
But opinions presented as though universal/collective objective truth? BZZZZT!
I'm also fine with people expressing how they feel a candidate's actions affected their lives, e.g. "I spent $100/month less on gas when Trump was president". Even if they're lying, I've no reason to dispute an expression of personal experience.
So in my initial post, I tried to avoid my interpretation of either candidates' statements or positions. In my life experience, this is a "the biggest assholes win" world. It's not the world I want, but I can barely change me, let alone anyone else. And since I'm still alive, and can imagine things being considerably worse should a lesser asshole fail to deal effectively with other assholes who might do things that lessen/degrade my and/or mine's lives, well... do that math.
> On the other side, we can keep this contained in a single > thread and keep ourselves from letting it spill to other > tables. > > I have wanted to make a post here, by the title "Is this > what people want democracy for?". You can imagine the > content of that thread. Of course, everybody is free to > skip it. I just don't want to have the pub become, even > for a couple days, into another 4chan/reddit. > > I know it won't really steep to that level. But i am > wary...
If a thread like that can't exist here, then maybe m15o should rename the site "Noonday Nursery School"...? :-)
I mostly like the thread title you chose, but not the word 'this' in it. Too vague. I'd rather see a title that indicated tighter discussion boundaries. Or maybe there's a "charter" of sorts in the first post?
But, I think another problem is that the nesting of replies might wreak havoc with how they're displayed.
I want to say there should be encouragement to employ inline quoting as above, but maybe that becomes too much hassle for some...?
Hmmm... I guess what I'm suggesting is drifting in the direction of USENET, and I suppose that just plain doesn't work here...?
Thoughts?
Well since you really want to know my opinion... who cares? Trump? Clin-er, Kamala, who are they?
See, I understand you live in the us, and this is an english-speaking site. This is the problem with english being a sort of 'lingua franca' of the internet: we people all over the world who use english to communicate with the wider world have to put up with the political troubles of a country that's losing relevance by the day.
The results of the us election are largely irrelevant to the world at large by now. The outside policy is going to be much the same. The only difference I can think it will have is the path to ruin that each will take.
If it ever gets to that. You yourself said it in your post about how to win a """democratic""" election. If Trump wins.... do you think the other party will just accept their defeat? Be sure to remember that day when trump supporters stormed the capitol when the democrats do something comparable, say, a coup attempt, when trump wins the ballot.