Well, it worked with the news.

I make Special K bars for get-togethers every once in awhile, and I sometimes get people who ask me if they’re healthy. I always tell them that nothing in them is even the slightest bit healthy except the Special K itself, and even that’s debatable.

The point of whisleblower laws is to make people feel like a lack of whistleblowers means a lack of things to blow whistles over. Then all they have to do is silence any whistles before they’re heard by the general population and boom, public trust in the system is strengthened without actually needing to do anything drastic like actually fixing the system.

I think they’re talking about “justified” madness. Realistic madness is just seeing things that aren’t there, or reacting extremely to mundane stimuli, but if you had somehow been given comprehension of some higher truth about the world that nobody else would ever believe, the actions you take as a result of that knowledge might seem crazy to those around you, even if they’re perfectly logical from your enlightened perspective.

I’ve seen this image floating around for a while, which breaks down the reasoning - or lack thereof in certain media - pretty well.

deleted by creator

My groups usually think of them as a powerful fey creature who sometimes just whisks people away for an indeterminate amount of time, only to bring them back later.

A lot of cops are so high strung that you essentially have to pretend you’re having the time of your life while interacting with them - any nervousness or annoyance is taken to mean that you’re potentially a violent criminal who could kill them at any moment.

Just the realization that a woman holding a pot of hot water could hypothetically use it as a weapon, however unlikely it was in this scenario, was enough to make him instinctively shoot with only minor notice that still did nothing to prevent him from killing her even as she began cowering and apologizing.

This is the culture we’ve allowed the police to build in this country; the job is dangerous, and they’re only human, so they believe they should be forgiven for being scared regardless of the situation, and should be forgiven for taking drastic measures while they’re scared.

Voting is about choosing good candidates well before it gets pared down to 2 options. It’s about choosing a good local government, choosing good representatives, choosing good senators. If the only thing you care about is the President, then you’ll never have a good pool of options from which the parties will pick a presidential candidate. They’re not on our side - it’s our job to force their hand with a deck stacked with good candidates. But only the people who pay attention to politics well before election year get to have a say in stuff like that.

Okay, and how do you plan to get them into the hearts and minds of around 50% of the population in the next 2 months, when the vast majority haven’t even heard of her? It’s not enough to have someone who could be a good president, you also need to get people to vote for them. If you want most of the population to vote for someone, they need to be aware of them as a viable option years beforehand.

I agree that the 2 choices are pawns of the rich, but even if every person who knew about Claudia voted for her, she wouldn’t even get enough votes for her to make the news, much less win. We’re talking about tens of millions of people voting in unison for an election win to happen in this country. At this stage in the game, there are only 2 candidates with that kind of draw power. If you want to focus on the 2028 election (assuming there is one, since there clearly won’t be if Trump wins) to get a 3rd viable candidate on that ballot, that’s a noble plan, but by now this election’s potential winners are already down to 2.

Voting isn’t about closing your eyes and saying “I want someone good to win!” It’s about assessing which people might actually win, and voting for the one that best aligns with your views, however loosely. It’s about strategy. If you want to change that, you need to build national presence in the name of your preferred candidate, and you need to start years ahead of the elections. Big changes don’t happen at the ballot, they happen during the campaigning stage and beforehand. If your candidate isn’t on the news every day leading up to the election, most voters won’t even know they’re an option.

I put my alarm far enough away that I need to get up to turn it off. By then I’m already out of bed, which is otherwise the hardest part for me by far.

Reporting them for being toxic a dozen times has done jackshit, mods themselves agreeing with everything I’m saying here hasn’t either.

This is more the behavior I was talking about. You can’t force the mods to do anything, all you can do is try, and continue to do so even as it continues to yield no meaningful results. Just like those pointing out the tragedy happening in Gaza understand their incessant posting isn’t likely to change anything besides building solidarity with those who are suffering. But again, when people agree with the message behind a post, they aren’t going to join you in brigading against the person posting it, even if he may be posting it for unscrupulous reasons.

At the end of the day this post didn’t get anyone to vote for Trump, but it got people to think about Gaza just a little bit more, which is a good thing. If you want people to add their voices to yours crying out for OP’s ban, you need to draw attention to it in places where they actually did something people will get upset about.

You can’t change someone else’s behavior, you can only control your own. The results are the ends, but the means are more important.

The fact that I said you need to keep trying even as it doesn’t work clearly flew in one ear and out the other for you.

Reject bad behavior when you see it. That’s all you can do. In the same way that we need to draw attention to the holocaust over and over even though we know it likely won’t stop it, we need to point out bad behavior over and over again even if it doesn’t stop it. But don’t point out bad behavior when there’s none to be seen - that just weakens your argument.

You’re right, I’m not doing all I can to raise awareness of the ongoing tragedy. That’s my bad side - feel free to complain about it. I should be doing more.

It’s not an extreme obsession to think every day about an ongoing genocide. In fact, any less is unwarranted apathy. OP’s other traits are less benevolent, but they aren’t showcasing them here, so, again, they’re irrelevant. If OP had mentioned even once that someone should vote for Trump in this thread, I’d agree with you, but you’re the only one bringing it up here, so in this case, you’re the problem.

I’m not ignoring it, it just doesn’t make any sense to be annoyed that someone keeps bringing up the fact that people are dying every day for an unjust cause. It’s why I accused you of wanting to ignore it - because that’s the type of person that benefits from less reminders of the ongoing murders.

Yeah, my mom used to be upset that I didn’t hold onto my old pokemon cards, but not only did I never have any rare ones that would be worth anything anyway, I used them how I wanted to when I wanted to, and when they stopped interesting me, I gave them to someone who was still interested. I don’t regret that.

A post is separate from the user who posted it. This post is meant to point out the tragedy going on in Gaza. It doesn’t matter if OP was the one who posted it, or anyone else. Hell, it’s a clip from Twitter anyway; the words aren’t OP’s in any way - they’re just sharing them.

My point is that if you want to get mad at someone’s negative traits, that’s fine, but this post in this context isn’t negative. Your original complaint wasn’t about OP’s ragebaiting, or their habit of calling people Nazis for disagreeing with them, it was about their incessant posting about the ongoing genocide at Gaza, which - again - isn’t a bad thing.

Everyone has good sides and bad sides, and you chose to complain about OP’s good side, then attempted to justify your complaints by pointing out the fact that they have a bad side, which isn’t showcased here, and is thus irrelevant.