It's impressive how duckduckgo manages to be so much better than bing despite being a frontend for bing
Home to all things "Mildly Infuriating" Not infuriating, not enraging. Mildly Infuriating. All posts should reflect that.
I want my day mildly ruined, not completely ruined. Please remember to refrain from reposting old content. If you post a post from reddit it is good practice to include a link and credit the OP. I'm not about stealing content!
It's just good to get something in this website for casual viewing whilst refreshing original content is added overtime.
Rules:
1. Be Respectful
Refrain from using harmful language pertaining to a protected characteristic: e.g. race, gender, sexuality, disability or religion.
Refrain from being argumentative when responding or commenting to posts/replies. Personal attacks are not welcome here.
...
2. No Illegal Content
Content that violates the law. Any post/comment found to be in breach of common law will be removed and given to the authorities if required.
That means: -No promoting violence/threats against any individuals
-No CSA content or Revenge Porn
-No sharing private/personal information (Doxxing)
...
3. No Spam
Posting the same post, no matter the intent is against the rules.
-If you have posted content, please refrain from re-posting said content within this community.
-Do not spam posts with intent to harass, annoy, bully, advertise, scam or harm this community.
-No posting Scams/Advertisements/Phishing Links/IP Grabbers
-No Bots, Bots will be banned from the community.
...
4. No Porn/Explicit
Content
-Do not post explicit content. Lemmy.World is not the instance for NSFW content.
-Do not post Gore or Shock Content.
...
5. No Enciting Harassment,
Brigading, Doxxing or Witch Hunts
-Do not Brigade other Communities
-No calls to action against other communities/users within Lemmy or outside of Lemmy.
-No Witch Hunts against users/communities.
-No content that harasses members within or outside of the community.
...
6. NSFW should be behind NSFW tags.
-Content that is NSFW should be behind NSFW tags.
-Content that might be distressing should be kept behind NSFW tags.
...
7. Content should match the theme of this community.
-Content should be Mildly infuriating.
-At this time we permit content that is infuriating until an infuriating community is made available.
...
8. Reposting of Reddit content is permitted, try to credit the OC.
-Please consider crediting the OC when reposting content. A name of the user or a link to the original post is sufficient.
...
...
Also check out:
Partnered Communities:
Reach out to LillianVS for inclusion on the sidebar.
All communities included on the sidebar are to be made in compliance with the instance rules.
Racism justifies harassment and home invasion? I don't think I can necessarily agree with that. Consequences, yes. But harassment? I'll have to think about it.
The point Malki was making, I think (and the way I take it) is less about the purpose or content of the discourse and more about the harassment veiled in false civility as a means of silencing discussion.
There's also an element of Person C inserting themselves into a private conversation between Person A and Person B, even if that conversation is being held in a public place.
Pretend he's not a sea lion, but a conservative, and you'll get the intended effect.
Yeah. Not gonna cry over what the victims of racism do to racists.
How is the sea lion silencing discussion? They weren't discussing anything, they were having a racist circlejerk. The racist lady said a racist thing and the sea lion invited discussion by asking, "Why did you say that racist thing?" and then they refused to actually explain why they're racist against sea lions, treating it as self-evident that being racist against sea lions is correct and thus that it is unreasonable to question it.
He can't choose not to be a sea lion. This is kind of incoherent. "Pretend he's not black, but a conservative." This sea lion could also be conservative, that doesn't really have anything to do with the fact that he's being criticized for immutable properties he was born with, not for anything of substance.
Again sea lioning is a type of behavior not a type of person or being. As a form of humor they rather than have a person embody the behavior be a literal sea lion because whimsical tension between the metaphorical sea lion also being an actual sea lion is funny.
That just doesn't work, because the sea lion's behavior in the comic is entirely reasonable, and it is the other characters who are being unreasonable. If the point of the comic is that the sea lion's behavior is bad, they should have actually made the sea lion do something bad instead of call out someone being racist against him
How would you have written this comic to get the idea across, then?
I literally already explained that in the comment you're replying to. The sea lion should have done something bad to deserve being criticized.
Eh...I dunno. I'm not going to tone police anyone, and consequences for bad actions are definitely good, but do two very-wrongs make a kinda-right? I'm not sold.
Look...if you don't vibe with the comic, that's fine. It's just obviously not about all the stuff that you seem to think it's about.
But it literally is? You're the one coming up with weird interpretations about "what if it was actually about xyz"
What is actually happening in the comic is that a character is being racist and the victim of that racism is portrayed as being wrong and annoying for calling out the racism. That's literally what's happening in the comic. It doesn't require any kind of gymnastics or interpretation, that's the surface level reading of what is occurring in the comic.
No. What is actually happening in the comic is that a character is having a discussion with another person (not a racist conversation, because sea lions are not sentient beings despite what is about to happen). Treating it as anything more than that is reading something into the story not intended by the original comic. Not everything is so literal, particularly with Malki comics.
sea lions literally are sentient beings in the context of the comic. the only justification the comic gives for why sea lions are bad requires them being sentient beings so that they can speak up against random racist tirades about them.
are you literate
I'm a simple man. You go into ad hominem territory, I leave the conversation. See ya.
You realize internet sealions don't actually invade homes?
You realise the harassment stops if you don't respond?
I realize that. The person above seemed to think that everything in this clearly allegorical comic is somehow intended to be taken literally.