- mawarannahr
- May 21, 2019
-
Can't post for 24 hours!
|
I agree with all those calling for firmer enforcement of the rules. There are already forums for emoting about the news. Too many times it's like TV/IV. We know the Republicans are clowns and there is no shortage of places to basically post "lmao" or share epic memes.
Furthermore, reporting these posts has been unappreciated. If so many posts are breaking the rules, why should I have to be the one to stop reporting? If you're getting so many reports maybe it's because Koos Group's rules aren't being enforced well enough so there are a lot of posts that break them. (For context, after reporting 10 posts in 13 minutes, I am no longer allowed to report posts, -- yet I do so in good faith, without bias as to whether I agree with the posts, referencing the rules each time. This is ridiculous. I have bouts of IBS and so I have to spend a lot of time sitting on the john, where reading the forums is the best activity.)
|
#
¿
Nov 5, 2023 23:24
|
|
- Adbot
-
ADBOT LOVES YOU
|
|
|
#
¿
May 12, 2024 01:57
|
|
- mawarannahr
- May 21, 2019
-
Can't post for 24 hours!
|
I don't know if it matters to the argument at this point but i was actually exposed to research and practice about this specific issue and it turns out exposing people to gory context regarding a multitude of issues is actually one of the best ways to change people's minds about oppressive systems. I might wish this wasn't the case but it was shockingly effective throughout
The best way we ever saw to shock people out of complacency for police brutality was expressly trying to share and boost visibility of video of police killings, especially the infamous hotel Simon Says video and all those reels of police popping beloved family pets like it some kind of trophy shoot. The best way we had to slap people right off the fence about mass shootings and permissive gun laws was showing the bodies. Same poo poo happening in israel right now, and it's been pretty consistent with warcrimes footage in ukraine, I'm almost certain
it's actually one of the reasons why certain groups clutch pearls hard enough to turn them into diamonds over "displaying heartless gore" when it's definitely going to change people's minds over time if the way the events are reported isn't heavily sanitized and cordoned off. I don't know how much i like this as reality but gets you thinking about the deliberacy of groups that tried to stop us showing police killings to complacent fairweather "allies" while the police just kept killing and killing and killing and killing and i have a tendency to remember it when looking at poo poo like all this and trying to figure oh no i gotta go looking for the Bad Faith Bogeyman again cause gonna bet
I started with an interest in wanting to make the letters-from-birmingham rear end White Liberal compelled to actually see police violence and murder in action, to keep them from keeping that as an abstract concept in their minds rather than constant and state sanctioned terror. And i definitely want the realities of communal punishment and violent ethnic cleansing in palestine absolutely jammed in the faces of people day in and day out
so i guess i got 2 dogs in the fight till the cops plug them at least
SIDE NOTE: also found out that the absolute best way to increase sympathy and support for cops was if people saw videos of them dealing with belligerent sovereign citizens like this 100% catapulted them in the opposite direction of acab
yeah I read a pretty interesting book about this and it echoes what you say. It's not something I really want to debate but if it's a topic you're interested in, check it out. https://nyupress.org/9780814724361/death-makes-the-news/
excerpt:
quote:
With each new conflict in the Middle East, families of the fallen, activists, and politicians on both sides criticize the American news media for not showing their dead more often. This was the reaction, in the summer of 2014, for instance, when the U.S. press coverage of beach bombings in Gaza included images of dead Palestinians. In an interview with CNN’s Wolf Blitzer, the Israeli prime minister complained that Hamas was intentionally putting civilians in harm’s way so that news images of their deaths would elicit sympathy from Americans: “They use telegenically dead Palestinians for their cause,” he said, fearing that such images ignite antisemitism.
News images showing dead Palestinians have been welcomed by their families and larger communities, as was famously the case for the Muhammad al-Durrah incident in the Gaza Strip during the Second Intifada. In 2000, a freelancing cameraman filmed Jamal al-Durrah and Muhammad, his twelve-year-old son, seen holding onto each other as they crouch for cover behind a concrete cylinder during crossfire between Israeli soldiers and Palestinian security forces (figure 13.6). On the video, a burst of gunfire stirs a thick cloud of dust, and when the dust settles, the boy is seen slumped across his father’s legs (figure 13.7). When broadcast first on French television, the voiceover declared that the boy is shown dead. … This video coverage and related still images became a symbol of the Second Intifada, generating intense debate for about two decades, and counting.
…
News images of the boy and his father have been aptly described as acquiring the power of a battle flag. Arab countries issued postage stamps bearing the images, and artists made large murals of it. Much of the Arab and Muslim world has also viewed the picture as a symbol of martyrdom, and it inspired thousands to participate in online voting campaigns attempting to procure enough votes for the image to win a best picture of the year award.
Some seek to sequester all death as a private affair. To them, the postmortem picture seems to violate something universally sacred. They argue that privacy for the deceased is “primary,” even when responding to accounts of parents, community members, and activists who feel otherwise.37 Belittling the perspective of those intimately involved who want the public to see the loss of their loved ones, a critic warns, “Few seem to understand how [the dead’s] privacy is elementally important, more so than social change, political or ideological goal seeking.”38
Although they are popular, there are considerable problems with proclamations like this. In particular, it is inaccurate to claim that privacy is “elementally important,” given that this is a matter of personal and cultural preference. Relatedly, there is no consensus. Yet, a professor interested in the ethics of photojournalism recently crusaded against the publication of a postmortem photograph by similarly claiming that anything but a private death “undermines the integrity of the human being,” as if there is some universal imperative at stake.39 He concluded that the postmortem image is unethical because it does not, in his opinion, honor the “the dignity of the individual.”
These commentators demand privacy for the dead as if it is a one-size-fits-all ethical imperative, but there is nothing inherently unethical about death rituals that favor public participation. The ideal practices have varied tremendously over time, and today they continue to. In a relatively recent news image that has been accused of violating privacy, a public procession is shown following the Palestinian men who carry the bodies of young boys (figure 13.8). A rigid insistence on a private death would have to ignore the reality of a crowd gathering in the streets.
…
In addition, the absence of a picture can be upsetting to the family. As discussed above, there are many occasions when kin desperately want the world to see what they have lost. This was the case, for example, when Haitians pleaded with photojournalists to take pictures documenting earthquake victims. If the news media are obligated to avoid causing distress, sometimes they would be compelled to publish additional pictures documenting the dead.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 6, 2023 02:28
|
|
- mawarannahr
- May 21, 2019
-
Can't post for 24 hours!
|
2. For the love of everything good and holy, ban the topic of generic electorism. If you want to bring it up in the specific context of, say, voting stratigically or not in the House Speaker debate seems reasonable but the endless *days* of rehashing "voting doesn't matter" loving sucks and is boring as hell.
Corollary - minute by minute emoting at congressional votes, hearings etc. should be punishable as low content and uninteresting. You see a bunch of new posts on the bookmarks page then you have to wade through pages of worthless posts that say nothing before you can get to the good poo poo. Wait till it's over, think about it a little, and post your analysis.
on the other hand, the rule number probes are the funniest thing about d&d right now and i await the day they are quietly edited so that future people think ive been probed for threatening to hunt and eat someone
Someone else brought up that the numbers change -- it might be possible to just hash rule versions and post the first 7 characters of the hash of the rulers thread at that moment in time along with the rule number. This way you can know it changed; actually preserving the content of each rule thread update is left as an exercise for the reader.
mawarannahr fucked around with this message at 17:38 on Nov 7, 2023
|
|
#
¿
Nov 7, 2023 17:34
|
|
- mawarannahr
- May 21, 2019
-
Can't post for 24 hours!
|
I do wonder about whether the trolling rule should be changed in its wording. Firstly because posting falsely or pretentiously seems to be a part of the definition most of the time, rather than simply with the intent to upset, and also because of the perennial difficulty in distinguishing between a message meant to be inflammatory vs. one that simply is inflammatory due to their beliefs.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 7, 2023 21:48
|
|
#
¿
Nov 5, 2023 23:24
