

THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION TO THIS MATTER! /j
All of this user’s content is licensed under CC BY 4.0.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION TO THIS MATTER! /j
Lemmy is mostly men […]
Has there been a recent survey?
[…] We should not believe absolutely anyone, regardless of gender, making any accusation. […]
Do you make a distinction between “accusation” and “testimony”?
[…] We trust [people] based on credibility and evidence. […]
I don’t think this is necessarily the case. For example, one could choose to give someone a chance despite their past wrongs.
[…] someone who has been declared a rapist by a court of law and has been convicted of many serious crimes should never be president of a country […]
IMO, I don’t think this is a good idea. My concern is that it may give one’s opposition an incentive to find a way to falsely convict them of a crime (or maybe create a new criminal offense) in order to remove them from the running for office.
The burden of proof for a criminal rape suit is really high […]
How do you mean?
[…] Classical centrist arguments […]
How are you defining centrism?
[…] Its always do you have a source, can you explain, etc, never adding to the discussion. […]
Do you not think adding sources and context is adding to the discussion?
Get the fuck out of here centrist
What exactly did you not like about my comment?
How to say you’ve got a big schlong without saying you’ve got a giant schlong /j
[…] never any red meat at all.
Why not?
I honestly sort of just sit on the toilet like this normally (not on a public toilet). It’s comfortable for me to sort of lean all the way forward and hug my legs while I’m sitting there.
“Chai Tea: FIGHT ME ABOUT IT” by Hank Green [1]
It’s not a phobia […]
For the sake of argument, Merriam-Webster defines the “phobia” suffix as:
intolerance or aversion for [1]
as well as
exaggerated fear of [1]
That being said, one can define a words however they wish — imo, all that matters is that those engaged in a conversation together all use the same definitions. If you would like to reserve the “phobia” suffix to represent only “exaggerated fear of”, what would you propose in its stead to represent “intolerance or aversion for”?
Chromium? More like copium. /j
[…] I hope it’s really coming🤞
A change regarding Peertube federation with Lemmy certainly does appear to be coming in Lemmy 1.0 [1], but it’s currently unknown to me if it does actually fix the issue.
#5509 fixes this, it will be released as part of Lemmy 1.0
I can’t wait until Lemmy’s Peertube integration is released [1]. Then, iiuc, this comment section should be able to happen directly on The Linux Experiment’s videos within Lemmy.
I’m not really sure what the point of this is. Why not just create communities on Lemmy for those listed topics?
What bother’s me about these sorts of posts is they don’t give people a consumption goal. Blindly telling everyone to consume less isn’t exactly fair. Say, for example, there’s person A who consumes 1 unit of red meat per month, and person B who consumes 100 units of red meat per month. If you say to everyone “consume 1 unit of red meat less per month”, well, now person A consumes 0 units of red meat per month, and person B consumes 99 units of red meat per month. Is that fair? Say, you tell everyone “halve your consumption of red meat per month”, well, now person A consumes 0.5 units of red meat per month, and person B consumes 50 units of red meat per month. Is that fair? Now, say, you tell everyone “you should try to eat at most 2 units of meat per month”, well now person A may happily stay at 1 unit knowing that they’re already below the target maximum, they may choose to decrease of their own accord, or they may feel validated to increase to 2 units of red meat per month, and person B will feel pressured to dramatically, and (importantly, imo) proportionally, reduce their consumption. Blindly saying that everyone should reduce their consumption in such an even manner disproportionately imparts blame, as there are likely those who are much more in need of reduction than others. It may even be that a very small minority of very large consumers are responsible for the majority of the overall consumption, so the “average” person may not even need to change their diet much, if at all, in order to meet a target maximum.
Hm, while a witness’s testimony may be evidence, iiuc, it would only be one piece of evidence. I think what’s important is whether the evidence in question can be considered sufficient.