World News
A community for discussing events around the World
Rules:
-
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
-
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
-
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
-
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
-
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
-
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
-
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
-
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
Lemmy World Partners
News [email protected]
Politics [email protected]
World Politics [email protected]
Recommendations
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
- Consider including the article’s mediabiasfactcheck.com/ link
view the rest of the comments
Straight to the personal attacks? Not really a great argument, particularly when the rest of it amounts to "NUH UH!!".
I'm gonna need more than that. @[email protected] and I were having a pretty civil discussion, and I appreciate his points, though I personally disagree with them.
Read the room, man.
I'm sorry my comment didn't meet your standards. I'm tired of reading the same intellectually vapid nonsense every day. "Why can't these evil/ignorant/despicable fools just see the world the way I see it!?" You treat them the same way they treat us and expect them to have some kind of coming-to-jesus moment as a result. IMO, thinking this way requires the same level of cognitive dissonance as being a Trumpster. You need to read the room and see that your method doesn't solve the problem you want it to solve. It exacerbates it. Instead of crying out to the world, wishing everyone else would do the hard work of expanding their understanding of political theory, history, and philosophy, maybe do that work yourself first.
Can you look beyond the harshness in the tone of my paragraph and take the constructive criticism I'm offering? This is what you're asking them to do.
It's weird. You're asking me to accept constructive criticism, but a) you're not offering any and b) you're continuing with the ad hominem, and failing to offer an actual position despite it being very constructive feedback to your argument. You're calling it "intellectually vapid nonsense" but you're only offering logical fallacies. You're just noise and hypocrisy.
My "understanding of political theory, history and philosophy" is backed by a career in the DC and NYC political sphere, including the White House, several campaigns, and extensive work with NPOs/NGOs. I've met and worked with 5 US Presidents, and more than 230 congresscritters on both sides of the aisle, and have personal commendations from the CEO, COO, and CTO of the USA so I feel pretty confident that I've got a well developed perspective. You've seen my work. So please enlighten me.
If you'll notice in the previous postings, I was able to disagree with others while accepting their positions and without belittling them. Every assertion you're making now is disproved before you even typed it, so I'm not sure why you're rattling your cage. If you want to be a part of the discussion, and wish to bring about new information, I'm amenable to change my position, but your post is really just finger wagging and more of "NUH UH!!".
Did you seriously type this passive aggressive nonsense and put it into the world? Do you hear yourself? Do better.
It's actually not something I really knew about before, the WH gig, but these are actual positions that help to advise the President on specific matters related to their specialties. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chief_Technology_Officer_of_the_United_States (I can't seem to find the others right now, but if I do, I'll post them). I did some work on the Open Data Initiative that took it from policy to practical, and received some official recognition for it.