Reminder there’s !houseplants@mander.xyz. I’m not affiliated with the mods there, but the comm is really good; I remember posting some orchid for id there and the folks there were quick to lead me to the right direction. If image models are ruining houseplant comms, that one is an exception :)

On-topic: this will get rougher with time. And it isn’t just plants; it’s everything. You could already generate fictional but realistic images of everything, but those models make it faster and easier, so of course some disingenuous people use it for scams since it doesn’t require any sort of skill any more. Eventually I think people will wise up, and learn to not trust images or videos, but while this doesn’t happen…

And the same deal applies to text content. Even if the content is human-made, you shouldn’t be relying on a single source of info, to begin with; now with text generators you’ll get even more babble, so the odds your “single source” is inaccurate raise sharply. For example if you need info on how to care about your pet potato plant you should be seeing a half dozen sites, cross-checking info, and seeing if some of them feel off.

A good chunk of the pic is out of focus, but the centre is really sharp, and really easy to identify. I hope someone does it; dunno which lichen it is, but I’ve seen plenty of it here (Curitiba city; Cfb climate, South America).

How do you guys get the image visible on the post itself? I need to open it to see it, I must be doing something wrong

You need to insert the location of the image in the field “Image:”, when creating or editing the post. In the desktop:

In Jerboa:

In other phone applications it’s likely the same. If you just insert the picture in the body of the post, like you did, you won’t get it appearing before you open the post.

Your title suggests Lemmy is proprietary which it is not.

Lemmy and KBin are both open source. [implying: “OP suggests Lemmy and/or KBin are not open source”]

*sigh* in no moment the OOP even implies that.

On-topic: PieFed is packed with a bunch of interesting stuff, mentioned by another user in that thread: better resource usage, better mod tools, gallery view, the ability to combine comments from different comms, a multi-reddit-like feature… and, additionally:

• a button to mute all replies to your comment
• an “attitude” score, to detect people who are excessively combative
• filter posts based on keywords

I’m actually rather excited for it, because it seems to be progressing at a fast pace.

I don’t feel I behaved as properly as I maybe should have, but I was within the rules.

Nah. t’s clear that you were not being civil in that conversation: for example

• when asked for a definition, you gave your subjective takes on that economic system as if it was a definition
• “and yet they are” = “NO U”. It’s simply contradicting what someone else says, without adding new info.

Those things might not be overtly aggressive, but they rub people off the wrong way; that is not civil behaviour IMO.

YDI: you deserved it. YDM: you deserved more.

Given the whole content of the thread I feel like 5d for each would be fair - it’s long enough to not make it look like a slap on the wrist, but short enough to acknowledge “once the ban is over you’re welcome here, but please behave better”.

Perhaps leading by example would have prevented some of the escalation though. He might want to give himself a ban for being uncivil.

100% agree on that. It’s the mod’s responsibility to set up the civility standards in a community, and Wren themself set the bar really low. You need to be way more cool-headed in a comm you mod than one you don’t.

Ignorant does not mean stupid or asshole.

What matters here is that people will interpret “ignorant” as an insult, and you have other ways to convey the same (e.g. “uninformed”, “clueless”, etc.)

Note: I actually agree with your argumentation in the thread. The issue is tone. It’s because of that tone I think you deserved it.

As a user you were also behaving poorly there; in fact your interaction with the OP sounds like two children “waaaaah, I asked you first!!11one” at each other. I’m not also blind to the blatant straw man you set up right off the bat, and that Nay was actually spot on when they asked “What -is- communism to you?”. I might agree with the way you handled Nay as a mod, but frankly? If I saw both in one of my comms I’d be giving both the same short end of the stick.

Based on the information provided ITT and the OP, YDI; potentially YDM.

You went overboard with “that doesn’t make you look ignorant” because most people will interpret it as insulting, regardless of being true or false. On itself, that wouldn’t warrant a ban, only a mod warning; and that’s exactly what the mod did.

Then you kept going. Even after the mod warning. You deserved that 1d ban, and probably more. (To be frank I don’t even see a 1d ban as a punishment, it’s more like giving time for everyone to chill their heads.)

Don’t get me wrong; I’m no saint, and I’ve probably said the same shit you said a thousand times. But in those situations you need to learn when to back off.

EDIT: based on this message, YDM for sure. Yes, the mod is also behaving a bit like an arsehole, but you’re going full pass-aggro there.

Correspondence with European scripts:

• the OG Latin and block letter Cyrillic are like like katakana (sharp, stabby letters)
• Greek is like hiragana (loopy, adorable letters)
• the “weird” Latin we use today is like Burmese, except sideways (butts everywhere)
• cursive Cyrillic is like Mongolian, except the rain is over (the knives are poking into the ground)

Devanagari has no European equivalent because Devanagari is perfect, since it’s used to write Sanskrit and Sanskrit is the mother of all languages. Except of ULTRAFRENCH of course.

combining elements is not enough. A fundamental aspect of compositionality in human language is that it is productive. We do not just reuse a fixed set of combinations; we generate new ones, effortlessly.

I think this is a great take. And it has a nice implication against language purism:

If compositionality demands the gen of new elements, Language* demands compositionality, and any language* requires Language, then any language requires the gen of new elements. And yet purism is all about not using new elements - no neologisms, no borrowings, just take the language vocab “as is” and deal with it.

In other words, applying purism to a language means to not use said language. Language purists are thus fighting against the very thing they claim to defend.

*capital ⟨L⟩ for the human faculty; minuscule ⟨l⟩ for specific usages of it (like Arabic, Breton, Cherokee, etc.)

Back on non-human primates: I mentioned this in another thread, but IMO “we” (people in general) should stop seeing “is this language?” as a binary matter, and more like a gradient: “how close is this to language?”. What they’re doing is still not on the same level as we do, but it’s already beyond non-linguistic communication.

Thanks for the info. Then I’m glad to have insisted on the main topic, their take on it was sensible.

Without giving you spoilers: based on the novel, the 1st arc is really special. The other arcs (like the 2nd world) are still fun, still worth reading, but they don’t reach the same level as the 1st one.

Who was this written by, a Brit?

Nope. Likely an American.

When cooking, people in general like to use round numbers, like “200°C”, since a difference of 5°C in oven temperature is not a big deal.

And yet they went with some oddly specific 205°C. That only makes sense if they’re used to Fahrenheit, eyeballed a round value (like 400°F), converted it into Celsius (204.4°C), and then rounded it up to discard the decimal.

I’m also going to say they’re completely clueless when it comes to cooking - 200°C is the oven temperature. The chicken itself reaches a far lower temperature, in the 70~80°C range. By the time the chicken reached 200°C, it’s already dry and close to catching fire. (The self-ignition temperature for biological stuff is typically between 200°C and 250°C.)

Unless demanded by local legislation, that’s a clear PTB in my book.

So. You have a link about the usage of force by the dogs of some broligarchic junta. Clearly unnecessary, unless someone thinks people in wheelchair are such a violent threat that it demands such measures. The group was arrested mostly for “Crowding, Obstructing, and Incommoding” - i.e. some “quick, find some law that fits this situation, so we can get rid of those things! Heil Chrump!”.

Then you have a commenter (the_q) correctly pointing out shit won’t progress unless people actually fight back. And another (PancakesCantKillMe) clearly quoting something; I don’t even know (or care) who this Thomas Turbano guy is, but the second comment is clearly a quote.

So, let ask me the following: accordingly to the LW mods, is self-defence violence?

• If it is not, then those comments should not be removed as “advocating violence”.
• If it is, then they’re effectively promoting that people should lower themselves from human beings to punching bags of their local junta.

Don’t get me wrong - I don’t even think they’re doing this “intentionally”. I get LW mods are full of Good Intentions®, and for the sake of some idyllic vision of pacifism, where tyrants will magically stop being tyrants if you say them “tyranny bad! EDIT WOW THANKS FOR THE GOLD, KIND STRANGER!”. However Hell is full of good intentions.

This series is a fun twist on the “expelled from the party” formula - and since it’s relatively small stories interconnected by Ed and Tia’s travels, the plot doesn’t get old.

This chapter highlights something the ch15 did too: that even if people don’t remember the events of the first time Ed was in the party, some feelings are etched into their souls. In ch15 it was Tia afraid of losing someone “again”, here in ch24 it’s Doben getting pissed at Ed (the sidekick of the “fake hero” that unrightfully stole his position).

OK - sorry. My bad.

If you are the comment police please show your badge.

I wasted my time re-explaining the OP to you, because it’s clear that you lack the basic reading comprehension necessary to even know what people are talking about here. And because you don’t know it, but you were still willing to vomit your opinion and re-eat your own vomit, you were being nothing but a dead weight and a burden in this thread.

If this is “comment police” behaviour, I don’t know. Or care. I also don’t care if this hurts your precious fee-fees of entitlement so much you screech “waaaaaah, you is of comment polyce? wurr is you are badje???” My blocklist is full of dead weight like you, after I tell them to go fuck a cactus.

Go fuck a cactus.

Three through the thread. That said two are too many, when the second replies to a comment telling the first comment already misses the point. The focus is on things like:

[Alice] I like apples.
 ├ [Bob] Why do you hate bananas, Alice?
 │   └ [Alice] I like bananas. I just like apples better.
 │      └ [Charlie] ur contradict u are self lol. U liek apples or bananas?
 │         └ [Alice] I like both.
 ├ [Dan] Put some bleach on your apples.
 │   └ [Ed] Yeah, Alice should not be here.
 ├ [Fran] Eeeeeeew apples are disgusting lmaaaoo
 ├ [Gio] Bananas all the way. I don't like apples.
 ├ [Hector] I assooome Alice never ate bananas. 
...
 └ [Zed] BRAAAAAAINNNS! And bananas. No apple.

I picked a non-political example to avoid intrusive discussions. (But it does affect political discussions too.) You see this shit in real life, and in Twitter (ye olde “Twitter MC of the day” boils down to dogpiling), and in Reddit, and here. And yet it’s non-contributive; it’s a bunch of people saying the same shit, if you’re Alice this shit is aggravating, and if a newbie sees it they say “nope, I’m not going there”. All because the “hive mind” decided bananas >> other fruits > shit > apples.

(Or that you must use the 3-2-1 rule for backups. Or that “animes”, “mangas” and “pokemons” violate everything that is sacred. Or that a certain game mechanic is shit/good instead of being good/shit. You get the idea.)

We need some way to address this. That’s what OP is asking about.

About downvotes vs. toxic positivity: that link works nicely to provide us a definition. I think “toxic positivity” = “social unacceptable of people acknowledging negative emotions and/or attitudes” should work well enough, is that OK for you?

I don’t notice it. Even in instances like Beehaw and Blåhaj (both deactivated downvotes), I don’t see this popping up. In Beehaw for example you can pretty much rant to your heart’s contents; as long as it’s reasonable, and you aren’t being an arsehole to other users, it’s well-received.

As such, if any measure addressing dogpiling needs to tweak how downvotes work, I don’t think it’ll breed toxic positivity. I don’t think messing with the downvotes would be necessary for this, though.

I always tell myself I should hop into Piefed more often. And I never do it.

…at this rate I’m low-key wishing my instance shifts from Lemmy to Piefed.