WalrusDragonOnABike

There are other contributors (szsz has submitted a PR this week, for example), but its all reviewed by ernest AFAIK.

I prefer to think of it as a feature and would prefer if it didn’t get fixed.

Glad to hear the tables are remarkable, but how are we supposed to find them if we don’t know what they’re called? /j

Most of the time, it feels like people are just saying “yall are just mad cause I’m right” but using different words because its often obvious why: an unpopular opinion or believed to be objectively false. These comments already have plenty of replies explaining why their comment is bad in some way. The only cases where there should be confusion about why is is if you are posting in a community that gets the same comments all the time and so its spam and you don’t know it, or you said something that is being misinterpreted but for whatever reason you are unable to tell why and you haven’t gotten any replies already (but for some reason are paying close attention to your internet points).

One of the most common I downvote comments is including things like “Edit: why all the downvotes?” in topics that aren’t about the voting system (instinctually downvoted this topic, but un-downvoted), . But also just downvote things things are spammy, *phobic, defending genocides, etc.

Who?

Lucky you. No wonder you think BO is bad if you didn’t have to deal with much worse…

Pedos aren’t into young looking people, they are into young people. The whole point is that they aren’t an adult, aren’t mature in the head, etc.

Not really. Different pedos are attracted to different aspects of prepubescence, but a common part of it is attraction to the physical features. The age isn’t really relevant to that. There’s some who dislike children and want nothing to do with them; they just happen to have an attraction to those physical features typical of prepubscent children. OTOH, there’s some people who considered themselves pedophiles and also asexual.

Probably just RNG tear in the fabric of space-time. Definitely no causes.

Can’t be worse than someone with cologne sitting between you and a fan…

Been to middle school. Can’t say BO was a problem. Axe body spray OTOH? Definitely was.

Can confirm lack of experience with sex.

I’ve never once noticed someone’s body odor. On the other hand, some who just finished showering using a fruity shampoo reeks imo. Ditto for people who use perfume or cologne. And those often can also cause allergies for many people…

I wonder what they plan to do to the south…

Selling a photo isn’t really prostitution in the way people usually use it. No physical contact, no risk of STDs, no commitment to anons purchasing, it doesn’t count.

If you put a lot of time into it or doing it more long-term or they’re expecting you to be somewhere and you’re gonna be late, sure. If it’s a one-time thing that takes a very short amount of time, it’s insignificant enough to not matter whether or not you mention it. That’s not hiding anything more than not telling them you tied your shoes that day is hiding something.

Someone is free to only date people who don’t do office work, but its their job to communicate that requirement and what they’d consider crossing that line. You shouldn’t be expected to consult your partner before filling out some paperwork at work and there shouldn’t be some societal-wide expectation that you would inform them of the work.

They want everyone to be cis, so obviously everyone else wants people to be in their groups too!

I’ve never seen the image before, but the “threat of violence” was obviously a joke comment like the rallying call to “elect Biden so we can force feminize the cissy men.” In case you didn’t know, that’s also a joke. Its very different from threats to take a vehicle (whether a truck or a steamroller) to a pride event and use it on people, for example.

If you can’t understand context or jokes, maybe don’t make inflammatory remarks about an entire group of people based on one person’s comment with confidence without at least asking first. Nothing wrong with taking things too literally, but weaponizing your lack of understanding isn’t the answer. Of course a lot of people do make veiled threats (in minecraft) when they actually are encouraging violence, so we should be careful about language and surely there’s cases in the middle where it could go either way, in which case calling out the language without insinuating it was intentional or representative of a larger group could be appropriate unless there’s a clear pattern…

They aren’t. But people treat them like they are. I do care about people using constitutions as if they were moral documents. I’d be just as annoyed if someone used a constitution to defend something like freedom of press or freedom of speech. I don’t care about what the particular issue is: its the citing constitutions like they prescribes perfect morals that I care about.

Why is it so important to you that they don’t follow their laws?

I don’t care if they don’t have an election right now. Its fine with me if they don’t. My complaint is using “the constitution says so” to justify things like dictatorships as if its a real argument rather than simply begging the question. I don’t even like when people use it as if it were an argument for things like being pro-freedom of speech. Its simply deflection.

Twelve states were occupied by the confederacy and simply excluded from the US elections and the amendment process.

The person I replied to cited a constitution. My reply is about constitutions. Anything after that is a discussion about constitution where people keep bringing up Ukraine for some reason.