💾 Archived View for midnight.pub › replies › 9829 captured on 2024-12-17 at 19:05:09. Gemini links have been rewritten to link to archived content
-=-=-=-=-=-=-
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?
I second this