Yeah, but that's an interesting thing to talk about I think.
My gf always creates characters looking as closely as possible to her. I do the exact opposite. What's funny is that.. she lacks self confidence and I do not. So it's not about that. I suppose it's something else that determines us that way. I have an idea, but I wanted others opinions.
Well, it depends. I'd skip games I'm mildly interested in, yes. And yes, it means most games. Well strangely enough it may depend on the game, LoL or other MOBAs, for example, I don't mind the gender of my character.
But yes, I may have in common with those people the tendency to skip some games, but it stops here. The main difference being I'm not going to annoy anyone or cry on steam boards because of my personal preferences.
Well, as a sociology teacher working with psychologists in my current research I get why they decide this.
Politicians like them can't rule over people even slighty aware of how political discourse and mass manipulation operate.
Well, after giving it a second thought, I suppose Lemmy may be small enough to avoid be targeted with both domestic and foreign efforts to favor Trump by having part of left demographics abstain.
If that's indeed the case, there's nothing I agree with in the suggested rule.
Voting/Abstention can be manufactured to a certain point. But if we take that away, it's a matter of strategy. I've always been an abstentionist.
(my two replies may display in the wrong order, this is the latest one)
Imho, voting is a right, not a duty. It's as stupid to try to convince people to vote than the other way round. What I was thinking about when I wrote my message is, well, the probability of a coordinated effort from right wing networks to turn left leaning demographics away from voting. This, I agree, would make some kind of anticipation measures useful.
What I fundamentally disagree on, and actually a bit more than "disagree", is the idea that abstention leads us where when are now. As a political science professor, I'll just say it goes against most, if not all, contemporary research findings.
(And yes, I can be a professor and have trouble writing correct English. To the brilliant mind who may want to phrase such witty comment, consider for a second that I may very well be from a non-English speaking country. Those still exist to this day)
I'm not sure what you're trying to prove here. Take any statement, put it in an absurd context, you get an absurd statement. Sure. But why?
"I disagree with capitalism and the elite hoarding all the wealth but I'm not sure I can do much about it alone"
"I disagree with Pineapple pizza and the cooks hoarding all the dough but I'm not sure I can do much about it alone"
Ok.
The difference is that I can share the underlying goal of what the mods are trying to achieve, while I wouldn't share the underlying goal of the war on terror.
But you already guessed that I'm sure. A few edgelord points cheaply scored. That's nice.
I fundamentally disagree with the underlying assumptions of this change, but understand its rationale, especially during an election year.
Sure, but I was thinking about like.. a full-fledged fascist.
I honestly don't know, but I'm afraid it won't end well at all.
Well yes, but.. Trump has become much more.. or much less, depending on how you see it, than an entertainer, I suppose.
Run for president. Don't think she'd be a good president, but she may be able to laminate Trump
Maybe. I'm not a native English writer so it may not have sounded like I wanted. I just find this curious, but I'm not in pain because of that.