volkris @volkris@qoto.org
I think the most pressing and fundamental problem of the day is that people lack a practically effective means of sorting out questions of fact in the larger world. We can hardly begin to discuss ways of addressing reality if we can't agree what reality even is, after all.
The institutions that have served this role in the past have dropped the ball, so the next best solution is talking to each other, particularly to those who disagree, to sort out conflicting claims.
Unfortunately, far too many actively oppose this, leaving all opposing claims untested. It's very regressive.
So that's my hobby, striving to understanding the arguments of all sides at least because it's interesting to see how mythologies are formed but also because maybe through that process we can all have our beliefs tested.
But if nothing else, social media platforms like this are chances to vent frustrations that on so many issues both sides are obviously wrong ;)
Joined Dec 2022
volkris
boosted
@AGHamilton29: "This is framed as if recusal would be expected in such circumstances, which is insane and ridiculous.
If Judges had to recuse just because they had interactions with lawyers involved in cases before them, you would run out of eligible judges rather quickly.
https://twitter.com/AGHamilton29/status/1700190430451699806
(H/T @mkhammer RT )
Burning Man is not a silicon valley event, though. People from across the country, and across the world, come together to make it happen.
This is what I'm talking about, the misleading descriptions of the event that really don't reflect what it is.
Sure: from new labor rules that interfere with workers' abilities to set their own hours through regulations that interfere with infrastructure like roads and even drainage ditches, actions of this administration have been directly impacting people in negative ways that don't get nearly enough attention.
Yes but beyond wanting government to do more, are they willing to make sacrifices to see it happen?
Everyone wants stuff, but when they are presented with the costs the opinions can change quite a bit.
Well right, because in the US system inferior courts not only handle vastly different sorts of questions but exist under the politicized branch subject to legislative oversight.
So it's apples and oranges, even if we were going to accept that because it happens there it should happen here.
@guardian Well a whole lot of us are also experiencing the tremendously negative impacts of #Biden administration, ranging from economic issues through ways that his executive orders have interfered with scientific missions in the country.
It's not just poll numbers. The poll numbers might be reflecting the lived experiences that we are encountering under this administration, the ways in which he is directly responsible for harming prosperity throughout the US.
Right but given the reporting over the years I can understand why people think that Burning Man is nothing but rich wankers these days.
People who don't hear anything other than the reports about the rich people there won't realize that there is so much more to it, which is a bit unfortunate, and I'm not sure how to respond to that other than pushing back a bit when it comes up.
@ericwelch Well then if not legally then how?
@Decad3nce oh, I'm not claiming any goal. I'm simply saying what they do; I'm not going to speculate about why they do what they do.
I mean, I could, but I'm holding off on it :)
Yes, there are folks attending the event that are jerks. And a lot of others at the event emphatically call them out, and there's a general social norm in the community that calls them out.
It's wrong to judge the whole thing by a few jerks that the norms of the event actively reject, though.
Citation?
But that's just factually false. They didn't deliver value to the Russians; they didn't deliver value to anyone; the complaint is over the lack of delivering value in that moment.
Again, you asked what the difference is, and that's the answer: something vs nothing, a world of difference.
Why should he recuse? Giving an interview is not exactly a conflict of interests that would normally warrant recusal.
Supreme Court justices live in the real world like the rest of us. This haranguing just seems politically motivated.
@Decad3nce, to answer your question simply: nope.
It's sad that there are so many articles that focus only on the rich folks who show up at #BurningMan without covering the huge numbers of participants who don't fit that description, who work and save and struggle just to get there and join their community, to do something beautiful... and who themselves have a dim view of wealthy folks who just jump in without giving back.
The burners that I know are evenly split between career professionals and wage earners, and one of the most amazing thing about the community is how it brings them all together, to help each other out.
But so many articles would have readers believe burning is just about rich people hanging out on the playa.
It's far from an accurate picture of the community and event.
@Jorsh do you realize how nutty you come across with such comparisons?
You suggest the majority of Twitter users want people to die? As they say, an extraordinary claim requires extraordinary evidence, so where's your citation for that?
It's the difference between action and inaction. It's a tremendous difference.
It's the difference between holding someone guilty of committing a crime and charging them with something they literally didn't do.
It's a world of difference.
@jackiegardina yes, but Nina Totenberg often says things that don't line up with the public record so she's not exactly a reliable source.
@ericwelch that's not how corporations work, and heck, Musk isn't even CEO of the company.
Punishing Twitter impacts all of the corporate stakeholders, so this focus on Musk amounts to an irrational obsession.
@watson@freeatlantis.com
Ha, letting private companies do what they want is not exactly in vogue for the left lately, especially in the US.
I think the most pressing and fundamental problem of the day is that people lack a practically effective means of sorting out questions of fact in the larger world. We can hardly begin to discuss ways of addressing reality if we can't agree what reality even is, after all.
The institutions that have served this role in the past have dropped the ball, so the next best solution is talking to each other, particularly to those who disagree, to sort out conflicting claims.
Unfortunately, far too many actively oppose this, leaving all opposing claims untested. It's very regressive.
So that's my hobby, striving to understanding the arguments of all sides at least because it's interesting to see how mythologies are formed but also because maybe through that process we can all have our beliefs tested.
But if nothing else, social media platforms like this are chances to vent frustrations that on so many issues both sides are obviously wrong ;)
Joined Dec 2022
volkris's choices:
