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
@J12t@social.coop
Well we do need to emphasize one part of the equation, and this is a really difficult one to address especially address tactfully, but it's one that is really common in areas where people work very hard because they genuinely want to make the world a better place.
That part of the equation is, some tasks are honestly not really worth doing. Sometimes people work themselves to the bone to do something that honestly just doesn't have that much impact in the end.
I would like to focus on the other side of the equation, making it less expensive/resource intensive/time intensive to do what needs to be done around here to save people those costs in the first place.
But that being said, to focus on the mental health side of things, we also need people to sit back and make honest evaluations of the real value of what they are spending their energies on.
A simple majority senators could override him though. If most senators want to have the vote, they can call for the vote.
He might be pushing for the vote to out senators who want to vote in favor of it.
Keep in mind that the structure of the Senate Don't give the majority leader nearly as much power as a lot of people believe.
The Senate is largely majoritarian, so the leader can only really do what most of the Senators will allow; he's bound by the wants of the chamber
So if he's giving such a vote, it's reflecting a general sense among senators that there should be one, for whatever reasons, political or strategic.
The domain name problem isn't a big deal with dynamic DNS.
If you're not assuming a constant internet connection a bigger issue is receiving notifications (such as new content) that was generated while you were offline.
But I'm curious what advantages you have in mind.
Sure. I'm always happy to learn more about history.
Indeed I did!
I'm not offended. I'm just sad for people who so openly embrace prejudice like that instead of expanding their minds.
I don't see the contradiction.
Those predictions, and the results of them, are some of the best, most subversive things there are.
Or one who isn't so consumed with prejudice...
It's not enlightened to be so afraid of entertaining questions. That's how we challenge ourselves and learn more about the world we live in.
Careful. There would be PR issues with a church presenting abortion as something approaching a religious ceremony.
@gcblasing@mstdn.social
I mean, the Court had a term that was specifically marked by rulings in favor of voters and the democratic process, from its rulings against administration overruling of congressional authority through support of the Voting Rights Act.
This cartoon is pretty off base.
@nataliedavisgdread@newsie.social
It's pretty ironic that one would talk about saving American democracy by preventing the democratic process from electing the guy.
It's pretty weird that the article didn't bother explaining how they were awarded these payments.
Presumably some law or procedure wrote them these checks, and maybe that needs to be reformed, but without identifying how the payments were issued we are left not knowing what to fix or reform.
Yes, there's a long history of legislation that is invalid or illegal. What of it?
It's really notable to me that you didn't actually provide any argument as to where a flaw might be in what I said.
Just pointing to other people doing the same thing doesn't mean it's not wrong for them to have done it.
I mean, that's how it goes down in the mythology, but it doesn't change that SCOTUS did not order the counting to stop.
People who actually care about history, and people who actually care about how the US government functions, are done a disservice by that misleading account of what happened in Florida.
And it's a shame. Citizens need to know civics, need to know how their government works, if they want to engage with it.
I always laugh when reporters report about things they don't know or say they don't understand.
Come back when you figure it out, reporter?
Oh gosh, Vox gets this stuff wrong so often. Well, it gets clicks out of it.
No, the SCOTUS didn't put itself in charge of the executive branch. Quite the opposite.
It keeps saying the executive can do whatever it wants, so long as it stays within the laws passed by Congress.
Specifically what in the SCOTUS ruling do you think they got wrong?
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:
