But is that normalized for cost of living? Highest in the nation might still be near subsistence level in one of the highest COL states.

Damn that seems like a core feature. Not sure I’ll use it without this.

This strikes me as a pretend leak kind of story.

Andrew Callaghan. Just sit there an ask Trump simple questions with a vibe so chill he self destructs without any outside interference.

I don’t think it is failed. It has reached self-sustaining levels for many topics. It will need further growth to make smaller, niche topics self-sustaining. Whether this growth will take place is an open question. I know my instance is growing in terms of activity, but I’m not sure how others are faring.

But as long as it isn’t shrinking, I think it’s well-positioned to absorb more growth as users discover it or become disillusioned with Reddit or other sites in the future.

There is definitely a fairly large subset of problems that are rather effectively solved by running away from them.

The issue appears when the problems are of your own creation but you simply run away instead of solving the underlying issue. So if you keep kicking beehives, you should stop doing that.

Reminds me of bing’s chat feature that gives citations that don’t contain the information in question.

Basically all of them.

Not sure which version everyone is on but the cross-posting button is broken in the latest Lemmy version. Hopefully it will be fixed soon.

I think the idea that MLs are a far left ideology is pretty questionable honestly. But that is the conventional wisdom certainly.

The definition most people use for left and right isn’t really consistent or coherent. If you do try to iron out those inconsistencies, you’ll find that MLs don’t really fit with the rest of the left.

Yup that’s what I was talking about.

Maybe if you have an electric car you could hack in and replace the space ship sounds with your preferred space ship sounds. Might be illegal though.

Based on the information in the article this seems way over the line. Is there some context missing or is it just that?

This is an important finding, coming from a relatively unbiased and credible body. Israel has already been muddying the water by spinning a narrative that the UN has some secret antisemitic agenda, and I expect they will double down in response to this.

This report needs to be backed up by individual nations if its findings are to be accepted. Global citizens must pressure our governments to acknowledge and act on these findings. If we do not, many of them will find ways to downplay or obfuscate them, and the situation will not improve.

You can’t be a good president if you’re over 65.

You can’t be a good president if you’re under 65.

You can’t be a good president.

Very concerning if true, though unless this is regarding the mod OP mentioned, this is not the exact issue at hand.

In my opinion, the mod structure established by Reddit and perpetuated by Lemmy is extremely flawed and will inevitably lead to abuses like this. This is the predictable result of all governance structures that lack democratic oversight. Exactly what the best oversight would look like I do not know but I hope there will be experimentation in this vein in the future. Until such time, I doubt this issue will be resolved very successfully.

OK I agree it probably should have been a clear statement of the rules and then conversation over. Going back and forth with a combative attitude is not an effective moderation strategy.

But this seems like a minor criticism. Overall I appreciate the attempt to explain the rules, I just think it could be done better.

I did and I didn’t see anything like what you’re describing. Low effort, provocative content, yes, trolling, no. Trolling is not just an opinion you find offensive.

This the issue with trying to police trolling. No one can agree on what it means. Moderation standards need to be based on clear definition in line with community consensus. Vague prohibitions like trolling lead to bias and moderation abuse.

I’m not opposed to removing these types of comments but if so it needs to be based on a clear standard that everyone can understand. A prohibition on “trolling” clearly is not adequate for this purpose.

Can you give an example of what you’re talking about? I think more mod communication is good so my initial response is to oppose this suggestion.

People who think this way are either behaving irrationally or don’t understand electoral strategy. I will always vote for the better of the two candidates in the current system. If it was Trump vs Hitler, well damn, I guess I’m voting for Trump. It’s not an endorsement of anyone, it’s simply a matter of how to minimize the harm of the current system.

By the way, Trump supports genocide more than Biden, so if that’s your key issue, you should vote for Biden.