this post was submitted on 24 Aug 2024
33 points (94.6% liked)
Casual Conversation
1910 readers
271 users here now
Share a story, ask a question, or start a conversation about (almost) anything you desire. Maybe you'll make some friends in the process.
RULES (updated 01/22/25)
- Be respectful: no harassment, hate speech, bigotry, and/or trolling. To be concise, disrespect is defined by escalation.
- Encourage conversation in your OP. This means including heavily implicative subject matter when you can and also engaging in your thread when possible. You won't be punished for trying.
- Avoid controversial topics (politics or societal debates come to mind, though we are not saying not to talk about anything that resembles these). There's a guide in the protocol book offered as a mod model that can be used for that; it's vague until you realize it was made for things like the rule in question. At least four purple answers must apply to a "controversial" message for it to be allowed.
- Keep it clean and SFW: No illegal content or anything gross and inappropriate. A rule of thumb is if a recording of a conversation put on another platform would get someone a COPPA violation response, that exact exchange should be avoided when possible.
- No solicitation such as ads, promotional content, spam, surveys etc. The chart redirected to above applies to spam material as well, which is one of the reasons its wording is vague, as it applies to a few things. Again, a "spammy" message must be applicable to four purple answers before it's allowed.
- Respect privacy as well as truth: Don’t ask for or share any personal information or slander anyone. A rule of thumb is if something is enough info to go by that it "would be a copyright violation if the info was art" as another group put it, or that it alone can be used to narrow someone down to 150 physical humans (Dunbar's Number) or less, it's considered an excess breach of privacy. Slander is defined by intentional utilitarian misguidance at the expense (positive or negative) of a sentient entity. This often links back to or mixes with rule one, which implies, for example, that even something that is true can still amount to what slander is trying to achieve, and that will be looked down upon.
Casual conversation communities:
Related discussion-focused communities
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
If you’re in the US, absolutely this. My back was injured on the job, took the work comp doctors almost 6 months to figure that out, and when they did my employer fired me. Then worker’s comp tried to say they didn’t need to pay anything and tried to close my case.
Up until that point I had resisted getting a lawyer, naively trusting the system (I was young, and I had no back issues before so I honestly thought common sense would prevail). My lawyer’s fees were a percent of whatever the final settlement was (30% iirc but this was over a decade ago). It took more than 2 years from when I got injured to come to a settlement.
I do have chronic pain and have had to change or give up certain parts of my life. But once the worker’s comp case was closed I could finally choose my own doctors, and my pain is much more manageable because of it.
Probably not the triumphant story you were looking for, but you can get through this. It doesn’t seem like it now, I remember being in the thick of it. My pain was so bad I couldn’t sleep, and the worker’s comp doctor told me I “just needed to take some Tylenol.”
It won’t always be this way. Just remember that, and get a lawyer.