Journal of Other Forum Analysis

[benji]

 You cannot create a climate-considerate world if you believe in indefinite growth, the current axiom to our global way of thinking.

Somebody should tell Earth and the rest of the universe that it's been doing it wrong for billions of years.

Malthus, Marx (to pick just two of an endless number) and the rest were all wrong, we don't exist in a permanently static world created with everything that would ever exist 6000 years ago. Get over it already.

Like give me the economic model and blueprint to make GHG reversal real and THEN explain why that should make us more hopeful.

Capitalism. Prices handle what you want. It's just not doing it fast enough for you because you demand everything be immediate or else, in part because you all hate allowing nuclear power since it violates your actual goals of degrowth to eliminate the large population of the increasingly unimpoverished "unwashed" who haven't received the favor of the elite caste you imagine yourself to be part of.

[Potato]

Did anyone reply to the PS thread with boring sad dad simulators?*


*Before anyone gets all butthurt Xbox are shite too. Turn that thing on thinking, oh wow, what amazing exclusives will I play on my Game Pass subscription, and the answer is always fuck all

It's ok to disparage Sony on nubore. I think all the PlayStation manbabies stuck with old bore.

[Boredfrom]

Is actually really annoying the console wars talk here. I’m just not a Sony fanboy.

[Colonel Mustard]

I was told I was racist or something for not sucking it up and voting for Jim Justice when he ran as a democrat. He switched parties a few months after the election. Seriously, the only people that run here that get major support from the parties are either ex coal barons or pharmaceutical. shitheals. 

We had some decent candidates last time and their campaigns got nuked from orbit by Democratic Party when they had gaul to call Joe Manchin what he is: a corrupt piece of shit.

[Uncle]

Did anyone reply to the PS thread with boring sad dad simulators?*


*Before anyone gets all butthurt Xbox are shite too. Turn that thing on thinking, oh wow, what amazing exclusives will I play on my Game Pass subscription, and the answer is always fuck all

It's ok to disparage Sony on nubore. I think all the PlayStation manbabies stuck with old bore.

really it should be fine to disparage anything, since nobody here is a brand™ ambassador©

I had a good time with the switch before I got my steam deck

teh switch is teh kiddie suxxor grafix, none of it fucking matters, I'm not getting paid to enjoy nintendo games, call them shit all day

Spoiler:  (click to show)(click to hide)

however I will get mad if anyone unironically loves the epic store lol

[benji]

This is a Steam safe space. Capital G-Gamers attacking it will be executed on sight.

[ClothedMac]

It sucks, but at the same time that makes their acting role possibilities even smaller unfortunately. These companies just won't cast them for anything.

That is also true… and kind of depressing:

That movie is for little people what The Wizard of Oz and Burlesque is for gays

1690671030[/url]']
that cunt is some little bitch from scotland that whines about his townsfolk and how he wishes he could move and live in some multicultural paradise, which i would bet in reality his townsfolk are actually a bunch of good people you can shoot the shit with and down to earth

Being that I’m the only Scottish cunt on here, what he is is a small town cunt who didn’t have the courage to move to Glasgow or Edinburgh. So what he’s doing is overcompensating and acting like he’s got all the answers. If you asked most people around here for their thoughts on the politics of Appalachia they’d look at you like you were a mental case. Not because they’re ignorant but because it’s so far out of their ken, it would be like asking someone from Appalachia what they think about the politics of Kilmarnock.

I would take a guess and say, "He's a cunt!"

[ClothedMac]

I dunno, this seems a little too victim-blamey for me. Seems weird to chide people for not having hope, when.. *gestures at everything*

No, no, I need something harder...

There's just not a reality where capitalism and fixing global warming can coexist.
This is essentially the problem. We fundamentally live under a political and economical system that from the outset was never actually meant to address large moral or ecological crises; it was meant to amass capital at the expense of everything and everyone else.

etc.

Same story from Nepenthe.  I don't do anything because nobody else will.  Instead you all purge and burn everything so I can be made Glorious Ruler and solve everything with a carrot based economy.


Those who aren't starting right now will be judged.

[Polident]

Trying to wrap my head around this. They’re mad somebody making a documentary is documenting the subject. It’s been well established how calling out hypocrisy doesn’t work on people without values and virtue. So it’s not calling that part out. Or the general sociopathy. It’s that they’re angry at the form. The medium. They’re not even fighting an entity anymore.

[benji]

There's just not a reality where capitalism and fixing global warming can coexist.
This is essentially the problem. We fundamentally live under a political and economical system that from the outset was never actually meant to address large moral or ecological crises; it was meant to amass capital at the expense of everything and everyone else.

etc.

Same story from Nepenthe.  I don't do anything because nobody else will.  Instead you all purge and burn everything so I can be made Glorious Ruler and solve everything with a carrot based economy.


Those who aren't starting right now will be judged.

I admit I only sorta skimmed her gibberish this time so I didn't notice this line. It's a perfect encapsulation of her ignorance about how ignorant she is. Nobody designed capitalism and imposed it on anyone, it doesn't need to be, no other system is prevented only imposing it on everyone else without their consent is. She fundamentally can't conceive of processes that aren't imposed from the top down, no wonder she's always exhausted at the community's refusal to submit to her plans.

Remember, staff members are required to be subject matter experts on an endless number of subjects:

Spoiler:  (click to show)(click to hide)

THIS division of labor, from which so many advantages are derived, is not originally the effect of any human wisdom, which foresees and intends that general opulence to which it gives occasion. It is the necessary, though very slow and gradual, consequence of a certain propensity in human nature which has in view no such extensive utility; the propensity to truck, barter, and exchange one thing for another.

Whether this propensity be one of those original principles in human nature, of which no further account can be given; or whether, as seems more probable, it be the necessary consequence of the faculties of reason and speech, it belongs not to our present subject to inquire. It is common to all men, and to be found in no other race of animals, which seem to know neither this nor any other species of contracts. Two greyhounds, in running down the same hare, have sometimes the appearance of acting in some sort of concert. Each turns her toward his companion, or endeavors to intercept her when his companion turns her toward himself. This, however, is not the effect of any contract, but of the accidental concurrence of their passions in the same object at that particular time. Nobody ever saw a dog make a fair and deliberate exchange of one bone for another with another dog. Nobody ever saw one animal by its gestures and natural cries signify to another, this is mine, that yours; I am willing to give this for that. When an animal wants to obtain something either of a man or of another animal, it has no other means of persuasion but to gain the favor of those whose service it requires. A puppy fawns upon its dam, and a spaniel endeavors by a thousand attractions to engage the attention of its master who is at dinner, when it wants to be fed by him. Man sometimes uses the same arts with his brethren, and when lie has no other means of engaging them to act according to his inclinations, endeavors by every servile and fawning attention to obtain their goodwill. He had not time, however, to do this upon every occasion In civilized society he stands at all times in need of the co-operation and assistance of great multitudes, while his whole life is scarce sufficient to gain the friendship of a few persons. In almost every other race of animals, each individual, when it is grown up to maturity, is entirely independent, and in its natural state has occasion for the assistance of no other living creature. But man has almost constant occasion for the help of his brethren, and it is in vain for him to expect it from their benevolence only. He will be more likely to prevail if he can interest their self-love in his favor, and show them that it is for their own advantage to do for him what he requires of them. Whoever offers to another a bargain of any kind, proposes to do this: Give me that which I want, and you shall have this which you want, is the meaning of every such offer; and it is in this manner that we obtain from one another the far greater part of those good offices which we stand in need of. It is not from the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer, or the baker, that we expect our dinner, but from their regard to their own interest. We address ourselves, not to their humanity, but to their self-love, and never talk to them of our own necessities, but of their advantages. Nobody but a beggar chooses to depend chiefly upon the benevolence of his fellow-citizens. Even a beggar does not depend upon it entirely. The charity of well-disposed people, indeed, supplies him with the whole fund of his subsistence. But though this principle ultimately provides him with all the necessaries of life which he has occasion for, it neither does nor can provide him with them as he has occasion for them. The greater part of his occasional wants are supplied in the same manner as those of other people, by treaty, by barter, and by purchase. With the money which one man gives him he purchases food. The old clothes which another bestows upon him he exchanges for other old clothes which suit him better, or for lodging, or for food, or for money, with which he can buy either food, clothes, or lodging, as he has occasion.

As it is by treaty, by barter, and by purchase, that we obtain from one another the greater part of those mutual good offices which we stand in need of, so it is this same trucking disposition which originally gives occasion to the division of labor. In a tribe of hunters or shepherds a particular person makes bows and arrows, for example, with more readiness and dexterity than any other. He frequently exchanges them for cattle or for venison with his companions; and he finds at last that he can in this manner get more cattle and venison than if he himself went to the field to catch them. From a regard to his own interest, therefore, the making of bows and arrows grows to be his chief business, and he becomes a sort of armorer. Another excels in making the frames and covers of their little huts or movable houses. He is accustomed to be of use in this way to his neighbors, who reward him in the same manner with cattle and with venison, till at last he finds it his interest to dedicate himself entirely to this employment, and to become a sort of house carpenter. In the same manner a third becomes a smith or a brazier; a fourth a tanner or dresser of hides or skins, the principal part of the clothing of the savages. And thus the certainty of being able to exchange all that surplus part of the produce of his own labor, which is over and above his own consumption, for such parts of the produce of other men's labor as he may have occasion for, encourages every man to apply himself to a particular occupation, and to cultivate and bring to perfection whatever talent or genius he may possess for that particular species of business.

The difference of natural talents in different men is, in reality, much less than we are aware of; and the very different genius which appears to distinguish men of different professions, when grown up to maturity, is not upon many occasions so much the cause as the effect of the division of labor. The difference between the most dissimilar characters, between a philosopher and a common street porter, for example, seems to arise not so much from nature, as from habit, custom, and education. When they came into the world, and for the first six or eight years of their existence, they were, perhaps, very much alike, and neither their parents nor playfellows could perceive any remarkable difference. About that age, or soon after, they come to be employed in very different occupations. The difference of talents comes then to be taken notice of, and widens by degrees, till at last the vanity of the philosopher is willing to acknowledge scarce any resemblance. But without the disposition to truck, barter, and exchange, every man must have procured to himself every necessary and convenience of life which he wanted. All must have had the same duties to perform, and the same work to do, and there could have been no such difference of employment as could alone give occasion to any great difference of talents.

As it is this disposition which forms that difference of talents, so remarkable among men of different professions, so it is this same disposition which renders that difference useful. Many tribes of animals acknowledged to be all of the same species, derive from nature a much more remark- able distinction of genius, than what, antecedent to custom and education, appears to take place among men. By nature a philosopher is not in genius and disposition half so different from a street porter, as a mastiff is from a greyhound, or a greyhound from a spaniel, or this last from a shepherd's dog. Those different tribes of animals, however, though all of the same species, are of scarce any use to one another. The strength of the mastiff is not in the least supported either by the swiftness of the greyhound, or by the sagacity of the spaniel, or by the docility of the shepherd's dog. The effects of those different geniuses and talents, for want of the power or disposition to barter and exchange, cannot be brought into a common stock, and do not in the least contribute to the better accommodation and convenience of the species. Each animal is still obliged to support and defend itself, separately and independently, and derives no sort of advantage from that variety of talents with which nature has distinguished its fellows. Among men, on the contrary, the most dissimilar geniuses are of use to one another; the different produces of their respective talents, by the general disposition to truck, barter, and exchange, being brought, as it were, into a common stock, where every man may purchase whatever part of the produce of other men's talents he has occasion for.

Someday Nepenthe and the rest of ResetERA.com might make it to the Enlightenment and we'll be able to move onto post-Enlightenment thinking:

Spoiler:  (click to show)(click to hide)

This corresponds to what I have called earlier the mere pattern predictions to which we are increasingly confined as we penetrate from the realm in which relatively simple laws prevail into the range of phenomena where organized complexity rules. As we advance we find more and more frequently that we can in fact ascertain only some but not all the particular circumstances which determine the outcome of a given process; and in consequence we are able to predict only some but not all the properties of the result we have to expect. Often all that we shall be able to predict will be some abstract characteristic of the pattern that will appear – relations between kinds of elements about which individually we know very little. Yet, as I am anxious to repeat, we will still achieve predictions which can be falsified and which therefore are of empirical significance.

Of course, compared with the precise predictions we have learnt to expect in the physical sciences, this sort of mere pattern predictions is a second best with which one does not like to have to be content. Yet the danger of which I want to warn is precisely the belief that in order to have a claim to be accepted as scientific it is necessary to achieve more. This way lies charlatanism and worse. To act on the belief that we possess the knowledge and the power which enable us to shape the processes of society entirely to our liking, knowledge which in fact we do not possess, is likely to make us do much harm. In the physical sciences there may be little objection to trying to do the impossible; one might even feel that one ought not to discourage the over-confident because their experiments may after all produce some new insights. But in the social field the erroneous belief that the exercise of some power would have beneficial consequences is likely to lead to a new power to coerce other men being conferred on some authority. Even if such power is not in itself bad, its exercise is likely to impede the functioning of those spontaneous ordering forces by which, without understanding them, man is in fact so largely assisted in the pursuit of his aims. We are only beginning to understand on how subtle a communication system the functioning of an advanced industrial society is based – a communications system which we call the market and which turns out to be a more efficient mechanism for digesting dispersed information than any that man has deliberately designed.

If man is not to do more harm than good in his efforts to improve the social order, he will have to learn that in this, as in all other fields where essential complexity of an organized kind prevails, he cannot acquire the full knowledge which would make mastery of the events possible. He will therefore have to use what knowledge he can achieve, not to shape the results as the craftsman shapes his handiwork, but rather to cultivate a growth by providing the appropriate environment, in the manner in which the gardener does this for his plants. There is danger in the exuberant feeling of ever growing power which the advance of the physical sciences has engendered and which tempts man to try, “dizzy with success”, to use a characteristic phrase of early communism, to subject not only our natural but also our human environment to the control of a human will. The recognition of the insuperable limits to his knowledge ought indeed to teach the student of society a lesson of humility which should guard him against becoming an accomplice in men’s fatal striving to control society – a striving which makes him not only a tyrant over his fellows, but which may well make him the destroyer of a civilization which no brain has designed but which has grown from the free efforts of millions of individuals.

Or to put all the above more concisely:

The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design. To the naive mind that can conceive of order only as the product of deliberate arrangement, it may seem absurd that in complex conditions order, and adaptation to the unknown, can be achieved more effectively by decentralizing decisions and that a division of authority will actually extend the possibility of overall order. Yet that decentralization actually leads to more information being taken into account.

[benji]

Many such cases. I know of at least one "video game" forum where you can see this a lot if you can get through all the posts full of racism and transphobia.

[benji]

Every year, hundreds of thousands of students around the U.S. participate in competitive debate. Most start competing at a young age (early high school or even middle school), eager to learn about politics. At its best, the activity teaches students how to think critically about the government and the trade-offs that policymakers face. They are assigned to argue for different positions that they may not agree with and engage with their peers’ diverse perspectives.

...

In a traditional debate round, students argue over a topic assigned by the tournament — for example, “The U.S. should adopt universal healthcare.” One side is expected to argue in favor of the motion (the affirmation side), and one against (the negation side). However, in recent years, many debaters have decided to flat-out ignore the assigned topic and instead hijack the round by proposing brand new (i.e., wholly unrelated to the original topic), debater-created resolutions that advocate complex social criticisms based on various theories — Marxism, anti-militarism, feminist international relations theory, neocolonialism, securitization, anthropocentrism, orientalism, racial positionality, Afro-Pessimism, disablism, queer ecology, and transfeminism. (To be clear, traditional feminism is out of fashion and seen as too essentialist.)

These critical theory1 arguments, known as kritiks, are usually wielded by the negation side to criticize the fundamental assumptions of their affirmation side opponents. Kritik advocates argue that the world is so systematically broken that discussing public policy proposals and reforms misses what really matters: the need to fundamentally revolutionize society in some way. For example, if the topic was “The U.S. should increase the federal minimum wage,” the affirmation side might provide some arguments supporting this policy. But then the negation side, instead of arguing that the government shouldn’t raise the minimum wage, might reject spending any time on the original resolution and counter-propose a Marxist kritik.2 Here’s an example of how the negation might introduce this kritik:

Revolutionary theory is a prior question — the aff [proposal about raising the minimum wage] is irrelevant in the grand scheme of capitalism... [You as a judge should] evaluate the debate as a dialectical materialist — you are a historian inquiring into the determinant factors behind the PMC [first affirmation speech] — The role of the ballot is to endorse the historical outlook of the topic with the most explanatory power... Vote negative to endorse Marxist labor theory of value.

Kritiks are so persuasive to left-wing judges that debaters can’t succeed in the activity without being great at them. Competitors who don’t want to argue for kritiks themselves still have to learn how to respond to them without contesting their radical premises. For example, many leftist judges will not accept a response to a Marxism kritik that argues that capitalism is good. Instead, debaters have to concede that capitalism is a bad system and make other leftist arguments like, “it’s capitalistic to fail to argue for the topic” and “Marxism isn’t the most effective response to capitalism; instead we need to look to other critical theories” (like Afro-Pessimism or transfeminism). This drives out students who don’t want to learn about critical theory and creates a vicious cycle where the only people left are kritik debaters.

Furthermore, even though kritiks philosophically attack power structures, in practice they have frequently entrenched inequities in debate. Kritiks are often (although not always) strategically employed by students from big, well-funded debate programs. Their opponents—who often attend schools with fewer coaches and resources—may not be familiar with the dense philosophical arguments. This is especially challenging because kritik teams reject the topic that their opponents are expecting, and surprise them with completely new content that they have not prepared for.

Amazing trolling exploit.

Spoiler:  (click to show)(click to hide)

Wonder if it sounds familiar to any "video game" forum General Managers...

[Taco Bell Tower]

https://www.resetera.com/threads/do-you-get-unsettled-afraid-by-antropomorphic-animals-not-a-stealth-furry-thread.747763/#post-109693057

I'm afraid to tell other furries this.

NepNep

You told this one. Get out of the fandom.

[NekoFever]

https://www.resetera.com/threads/do-you-get-unsettled-afraid-by-antropomorphic-animals-not-a-stealth-furry-thread.747763/#post-109693057

I'm afraid to tell other furries this.

NepNep

You told this one. Get out of the fandom.

I like anthropomorphic characters, just not the ones with human sexual characteristics tacked onto them.

Someone ban this bigot.

[NekoFever]

Perhaps if it's poorly done / done in a bad style. Presentation can make all the difference. Like the furry characters from OP are stylistically unappealing, but Diane Foxington from The Bad Guys is gorgeous:

 

[jooseloose]

https://www.resetera.com/threads/do-you-get-unsettled-afraid-by-antropomorphic-animals-not-a-stealth-furry-thread.747763/#post-109693057

I'm afraid to tell other furries this.

NepNep

You told this one. Get out of the fandom.

How long before New closes the thread and deletes the poll results.

[HaughtyFrank]

He said “Mind tricks don’t work on me, only money.” Jabba the Hutt did something similar. You may be reading into it a bit much.

he literally says 'i'm a toydarian, mind tricks don't work on me'. i'm not reading into shit lol. star wars is just racist like that.

edit: also just so we're clear, jabba the hutt? also kind of a racist cariacature.

https://www.resetera.com/threads/qui-gon-jinn-already-showed-himself-unscrupulous-enough-to-cheat-in-a-dice-game-why-didnt-he-just-steal-the-fucking-hyperdrive-from-watto.747679/post-109680625

Wait, what?

[Snoopy]

Visawife is back from the rubber room  -


https://www.resetera.com/threads/had-to-purge-my-youtube-subs-after-some-of-the-creators-revealed-some-right-wing-leanings.695359/page-6#post-109703614

[The Actual Ldcommando]

His bought wife must have suffered a lot without him having his idiot forum to occupy his time.

[DocWager]

His was probably trafficked into to marry his miserable ass.

[Boredfrom]

He started posting again some days ago, and he made the OT for a video game a week ago or so.

[JoeBoy101]

1690715940[/url]']
https://www.resetera.com/threads/do-you-get-unsettled-afraid-by-antropomorphic-animals-not-a-stealth-furry-thread.747763/#post-109693057

I'm afraid to tell other furries this.

NepNep

You told this one. Get out of the fandom.

Got to say it again…

Minorities, POC, specific groups of people are not monoliths, but NepNep is allowed to speak for them all if she feels the need, or brand all of them as one.

[HaughtyFrank]

https://www.resetera.com/threads/crazy-car-flip-in-san-francisco.745822/post-109652461

Two people in San Francisco violently beat down a guy, steal his car and then crash it down a hill which could have killed someone. All caught on video.
DA files no charges.

Even RE finds that mighty suspect but don't worry, there are still some heroes left

No charges? Fucking outrageous. As someone who lives in the bay area... starting to think some of the criticism about how we treat crime here is warranted. It's on video! Why are witnesses so required for charges when there's VIDEO.

Fox News is gonna have this dominate their news cycle next week, are they?

"Ugh, not Fox news reporting things that actually happened"

Yea our current DA sucks and not because of this. She is a “tough on crime” cop sympathizer

"Actually the problem is that the DA is too hard on crime"

[NekoFever]

https://www.resetera.com/threads/recommendations-of-fantasy-stories-where-the-protagonist-attends-an-academy.747871/

He ain’t slick

[books]

Imagine putting on your fursuit and then banging out an essay on capitalism.

[Eric Cartman]

Better than most of marvels recent output

[Eric Cartman]

Im pretty ignorant about this topic, but isnt China the biggest responsible of carbon dioxide emition? so how is the opinion of western people gonna change China politics about this issue ? isnt this how they make most of their wealth?

If I'm correct about this, China is currently the world's most prominent producer but their output still does not actually come close to the total amount of carbon dioxide that the United States and Europe have emitted as a result of industrializing first. This is very much a problem of the West's making.

well there's your problem

[benji]

Visawife is back from the rubber room  -
https://www.resetera.com/threads/had-to-purge-my-youtube-subs-after-some-of-the-creators-revealed-some-right-wing-leanings.695359/page-6#post-109703614

Is Jeremy Jahns problematic? I kinda like his reviews.

I know he had a blackface episode years back. Recently he reviewed Sound of Freedom.

A little suspicious...

Blackface was enough problematic.

In that Sound Of Freedom review, Jeremy Jahns found the film informative, sings praises of Jim Caviezel (not just his performance), had done his research and he believes the organisation the film is based on actually did save victims of trafficking when that is far from the truth. He even says "if these guys don't do it, no one else will", so he's fully believed in the right wing saviour myth about Tim Ballard.

His link goes to a YouTube video from Rebecca Watson, a self-declared skeptic who believes conspiracy theories and psuedoscience/junk science among who knows what else.

It does need it, but they keep shooting themselves in the foot by voting for Republicans who fuck them over at every turn.

It's frustrating. The Dems (but really only the progressive ones) only have tough answers and long-term solutions to help get Appalachia out of their economic hardships and the Republicans can just offer the short term solutions and whisper sweet nothings all day. Former is a hard sell and the latter gets you through another day.

They're so impoverished and uneducated that they can't even fathom the grass being greener on the other side of the fence.

You shouldn’t discard people because they have some conservative views or some right leaning positions, you should discard them if they’re racists/bigots/shitlords/dickwads

Living in an echo chamber helps no one, be it on the left or right side of the political spectrum. And I say that as a lifelong socialist.

This is a ridiculous statement to make because it's attributing the benefits of hearing different arguments (or knowing what your enemy is saying) to following content creators who happen to be right wing pieces of shit outside their content (or even with it).

I agree it's good to know what the rights current position is on subjects and what their tactics are in those arguments but that in no way applies to the threads premise of not wanting to follow a film critic because he supports Ben Shapiro etc.

You also can get a balanced review of what the other side is saying by not actually watching them. There are plenty of fair left wing channels that cover politics and represent the arguments being made by the right without spin and then counter them accordingly.

Honestly your post just comes across like fence sitting.

[TylenolJones]

Is this whataboutism?

OFFICIAL STAFF COMMUNICATION

We all need to stop trying to shame each other for what social media platform they choose to use.

Despite what people might think, none of these social media platforms are innocent when it comes to causing harm to marginalized people in the real world. Twitter has helped give rise to the alt right and gamergate, Facebook has had an indirect hand in advancing the Rohingya genocide, TikTok has had a hand in helping cover up the Uhygur genocide, Instagram has done untold damage to the mental health of young women, Youtube has help to radicalize countless people toward bigotry and violence through the use of its algorithm, and all of them have had a hand in the rise of figures like Andrew Tate, Jordan Peterson, and Donald Trump.

None of these platforms or companies are innocent or pure or good. Choosing to use any of these platforms is choosing to use a platform that has had a hand harming the innocent. Standing up on a soapbox and attacking others for their choice in social media platform is silly, petty, and ignores the real harm done by all of them. All you accomplish in doing so is feeling better about yourself and starting a pointless fight with others.

We can be better than this. Life is short and for some it can be hard to find a community with which to belong. Social media platforms can allow for these communities to grow and flourish, giving people a connection they might not have been able to make in the real world. Whichever one of these you use, there's real problems but there are also real benefits.

Besides, it's not like anyone is talking about using TruthSocial or Parler.

https://www.resetera.com/threads/elon-musk-tw𝕏tt𝕏r-dr𝕏m𝕏-𝕏t-let’s-keep-it-here-parody-🔵-official-ꕤ.649272/page-878#post-109688908

Inmates not taking it well. 

You're right. Life's too short to worry about who's running your platform! Let's all move back to NeoGAF.

So seems like there is a limit where a social networking platform is not allowed here. Whats the line between YouTube and Parler? Is it based on userbase size, or the ideology promoted by the owners? Or something else?.

Really think this staff post misses the mark. There's only one platform where cisgender is considered a 'slur'

[Boredfrom]

Whats the line between YouTube and Parler?

Making questions were you already now the answer. 

But is funny how BDumbs is suddenly Kumbaya for those “damn algorithms driven” social media.