That’s Lemmy.world for ya! Stick around 🙂

I totally understand! Peace and love homie.

I understand what you’re saying.

On another note, are you Ukrainian by any chance brother? I really feel for you and I can tell that the draft is reality and not a joke for you if that’s the case. I hope I wasn’t rude and that you stay safe.

It seems to me you have more of an issue with the concept of the draft, which ok, is a fine position to take. Nothing wrong with having a stance on that. Some people are pacifists and radically opposed to any type of armed conflict or draft service. But there are valid arguments for the draft too, so you can’t just write them off by painting Zelenski into some type of tyrannical despot.

But that’s neither here or there. The country is already in the midst of a full fledged war and elections don’t typically occur in time of war.

I’ve found that it’s best to be precise when articulating a position. When you paint things in broad strokes (ie Zelenskis cabinet as authoritarian) you are inviting unnecessary argumentation from other sides. If your thesis is that the draft is authoritarian then argue your point why you think that is. For instance, I do contend that the draft was executed in Russia under Putin is a manifestation of an authoritarian exercise because there is no justification for the war. Russian soldiers are not going to the meat grinder to defend their homeland. It’s a completely different take. I can also provide counter arguments as to why the notion of the draft is not authoritarian when it’s implemented in the service of defense.

Your statement sounds like: “being banned from left leaning lemmy.world is so common we don’t even bother talking about it over here at lml”. Ok, I guess? Not much for me to contend with there.

I don’t want to take the bait about your Ukraine stance, because it’s a peculiar insertion at this point but ok. Suffice it to say it seems like you already agree with the de facto LML stance: west is evil. I push back against statements on l.world every day and I’m not worried about being banned. I push back one time on one thread on lml and the rest is history.

I do take umbrage with your stance on Ukraine, however (bait taken): That the US is a giant military industrial complex pulling the puppet strings from the shadows and sending Ukrainians to the slaughter. This is also a typical LML position that I hear often and seems to fall apart pretty quickly when examined a little better. This position seems to divorce Ukrainians of any agency in determining their future. Are they not entitled to defending the sovereignty of their nation? Who are you (or I) to tell them under what circumstances they should be allowed to push back against an invading force such as Russia? They are a sovereign nation that agreed to the Budapest memorandum and regardless who supplies them with weapons they can determine for themselves their destiny. It isn’t for us to adjudicate from some kind of moral high ground which parts of Ukraine should be sliced off to the highest bidder even if the bullets they fire are made in capitalist imperialist evil America.

I’m curious if you’ve ever pushed back against the grain of lml or if perhaps your opinions already align? lemmy.world is a big tent so you’ll get a bigger diversity of users. LML skews heavily in one narrow direction so they have to contend with more outfielders and by default need to cater to their own insularity.

It’s possible that your experience has been positive so far. The reach of this post alone which started this thread shows how much of an existential challenge LML is. How many threads are there on LML about being banned from lemmy.world? This one is like the 3rd or 4th i’ve seen (just from this month!) about being banned from LML.

While I will be the first to admit that name calling and being incapable to engage with arguments is typical for social media platforms, I can also testify that it is the only treatment I’ve ever received from LML users. And the goal is pretty clear: you’re with us or you’re not. When you haven’t forged your own independent conclusions through reflection and any deeper examination but rather through mimicry and simulated discourse your only option is fall back to in-groups or out-groups.

As an LML user the game quickly becomes: how fast can I “otherise” my interlocutor so that I don’t have to respond to their points because that would require looking in the mirror and not liking what I might see.

I don’t mind being banned from the ml instance. The issue is their users come to all the other instances and use the same old strategies to stifle any speech by engaging extremely hyperbolic language and name-calling. The goal is to have a chilling effect on any discourse where their opinions are scrutinized in the slightest.

They can’t engage with any topics or offer counter arguments. Every response is:

“I don’t know how to respond to your argument. You must be a _____________[insert ‘racist’ or ‘genocide defending’ or ‘fascist’ or my new favorite ‘zionist’]”

Yes, because those prejudices aren’t grounded. The numbers reveal a whole other story when it comes to men/women interaction. Women have to use the biggest kid gloves to even broach this topic to men bc my god…the inherent fragility

Edit: listen guys. Trying to substitute another minority for the man in the hypothetical is not the dunk you think. I feel like Lemmy is the ultimate male echo chamber sometimes.

• Over 1 in 3 women (35.6%) in the US have experienced rape, physical violence, and/or stalking by an intimate partner in their lifetime.

• Nearly 1 in 3 college women (29%) say they’ve been in an abusive dating relationship .

• 52% of college women report knowing a friend who’s experienced violent and abusive dating behaviors including physical, sexual, digital, verbal, or other controlling abuse.

Everyone knows at least one woman (unless you’re on Lemmy of course) who was abused, raped, or the subject of physical violence by a male partner at one point in their lives. Try to understand why the hypothetical exists, not if meets your logical criteria

This here is the biggest woosh that supports the whole thesis of the hypothetical. It was never meant to be a logical hypothetical. It’s intended to elucincidate a prevailing feeling among women about what they perceive as safer. The fact that this still has to be explained after so many days is…I don’t know.

Well that’s good!

Shouldn’t it be sans serif though? Low effort.

Ever since I picked it up I never had any use for Arcmap. It covers all my needs and it’s free!

QGis gang ftw

Interesting. I find myself participating more often here instead of Reddit. I’m not sure if it’s because the disinformation is more superficial or the user base is more monological in its thinking.

Welcome friend! Your AARP subscription is being processed and bingo is at 7:30. 🥲

I hear you though.

Sometimes. I see a lot more monological thinking here because the average Lemmy user skews extensively towards one side. I don’t mind the lack of comments but they don’t seem to crack more nuanced layers that I used to see on Reddit (by the way: not necessarily layers that I agreed with). It could also be a consequence of me getting old and starting to outgrow this category of social media. I don’t know.

Yeah. Hard to say. It’s interesting to see other perspectives. Thanks.

I think the advantage of larger user bases (not always) is that the more nuanced discussions often bubble to the top. That is impossible here because the user base is so small. That’s why it’s a flatline of ACAB, extreme leftie eat the rich, etc. There is a big void in the middle left by that in-depth conversation: Nothing seems to get past that surface layer analysis. If we want to talk about Oct 7 well be prepared to hear about the Peele commission and apartheid state. On and on. Unless of course maybe I’m getting old and all social media is converging into vacuous and hollow content. Were da 30+ at??

This

Sorry!!! Couldn’t help it. But I agree. There is s something to be said about not reducing to the median