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
@Free_Press no, that's not how the US system of government works.
It's not about blocking but rather about finding policy proposals compelling... or not.
To say Congress is blocking the aid package is like saying I'm blocking McDonald's from having my $5 when I don't feel like buying their hamburger.
It's not a fair framing of the situation.
@SteveThompson Hi, I'm one.
Congrats. You are now aware of such a person :)
There are plenty of us. I know lots.
@freemo sounds like you prefer to have a generic accent.
Which is itself the adoption of an accent--a generic one :)
@DeeGLloyd@mastodon.world I want to hear arguments, not links to others.
What part of the argument do you find compelling? How would you frame it?
If I wanted to hear from others I'd go hear from others. I'm asking here because I want to hear from the people here.
@freemo well, think about yourself. Do you ever find yourself speaking a different way around certain people as a conscious or unconscious way of relating to them, especially as a positive way of matching them, showing kinship?
I think that happens to a lot or even most of us.
We codeswitch as a way of engaging with other humans.
@SteveThompson the problem is that quite a few voters believe that Biden has gone overboard with these prosecutions, so the promise of pardons bring them over to vote in favor of Trump.
It was yet another misstep on Biden's part, where he might end up having given up reelection to Trump, of all people, which is quite a feat.
@touaregtweet I see that a lot of foreign reporting doesn't really capture the structure of courts in the US, and so don't realize how much control judges commonly have in such cases, don't realize how normal this kind of thing is.
It's all part of the US system's emphasis on checks and balances, preventing the executive branch from having as much ability to throw the book at people.
@oldrawgabbit this is one of those cases where the better criticism of #Trump is to point out that he generally has no idea what he's doing and is ineffective in following through on promises to his supporters.
That has been his track record, and it needs to be emphasized.
Criticizing him on the basis of a plan that some people would support serves to elevate him in the eyes of those potential voters. Better to point out that he fails to implement such plans in the first place so he'd lose with everyone.
@bob It's funny because the post above this in my timeline here is one that is bragging about how great this platform is because it sensors things so well.
The post is literally a guy bragging about how moderation here is so essential, about how much work moderators do, about how we don't appreciate the amount of work they do, to keep us from seeing the things we don't want to be seeing.
So technically you're right, the protocol itself delivers information uncensored, but censorship is definitely a norm around here, one that is celebrated by many.
And we need to acknowledge that.
@DeeGLloyd@mastodon.world okay so you're you're shooting the messenger here, but can you address his actual argument?
I mean, who cares who the guy is, is his argument wrong or right? You sound like you're dismissing it without even considering that even if you don't like the guy for some reason, he might have a point.
Or maybe he doesn't, but unless you actually address what he's saying, how do you know?
@Polynomial_C@mastodon.social
I'd say that is what I define as buy-in 🙂
Yeah, follow the flow, that is part of buying into the system, as I would describe it. You don't have to ideologically or philosophically agree with something to buy into the arrangement or trade-off.
I don't mean ideological by in. Or philosophical by in. I mean practical, going with the offer placed on the table because it's just the direction the person figures is the best way to go.
@Free_Press The thing is, the extremists don't actually have much power unless Democrats cooperate with them.
And we really need to call out the Democrats for cooperating with them.
If Democrats didn't vote alongside the Republican extremists then the whole chamber would easily vote them down and make them sit in the corner irrelevant.
It's only Democrats voting with the extremists that give them any significant power at all.
Who is going to set up that function? Who is going to dole out those rewards?
It's always crucial to consider the motivations behind the motivations, the incentives that bring the individuals on board with the plan.
Otherwise it comes down to magical thinking, that if we get this abstraction working everything will be grand.
No, in the real world you have to think about how individual humans are going to implement the real plan.
But when you say make, you run into the same issue.
Make? How do you make the group work together? How do you enforce it? How do you get enforcers to enforce?
Even in the making you have to have buy-in. You have to convince the makers to make.
An update on and description of #BlueSky distributed capabilities, including a long segment on distributed labeling and moderation, and how the way #Mastodon / #Fediverse handles it promotes contention on this platform.
I always say, there's a lack of focus on technology serving users here, with instances being the primary focus, and that's a shame.
@Free_Press she doesn't, though.
@ianRobinson Occam's razor would have us at least consider that maybe she is simply being honest with her opinions as expressed in orders, without any sort of conspiracy involved
@tntneedham she wasn't put there. That's not how that process worked.
@ianRobinson
@janettespeyer I think it's under appreciated that there are a TON of practical issues when it comes to how to be on fediverse, issues ranging from internal editorial processes through marketing matters through legal matters.
The hosting of one's own instance falls into those issues.
It's not as simple as a lot of people think.
@roknrol I don't actually understand your poll :)
What sort of labels are you talking about? Can you give an example?
I don't know if you are talking about anything from food labeling through pronouns through political labeling.
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:
