You can call wanting to avoid planetary extinction a "very specific desire" but it's very weird to pretend it being unmet wouldn't be a problem for everyone.
Are you one of those science denialists who pretends climate change isn't manmade, or will be solved by corporations before the 100 more years it would supposedly take to become a problem, or something?
I strongly suspect that’s a ‘them’ problem, not a ‘me’ problem, as it seems everyone else is having an equally hard time understanding what they’re actually trying to say.
No, it's that you're in a community full of mostly people like you, including the same issues.
I'm speaking coherently. I even rephrased my original point in my main post to where I thought I was making it too long, for the sake of making sure people could understand. People are basically just too upset about the part where I called out their censorship fetish, and not mentally able to think straight about something upsetting.
If you're really undecided about whether it's me or everyone else, keep re-reading or asking more questions until you understand what went wrong in your own first reading. That should really help you understand more of the world in general.
Ah, I see you edited your other comment so it no longer tries to equate banning with violence. Being manipulative in a Lemmy thread must feel badass when you have 62 IQ
If you read the full reply instead of the TLDR, and admit you were wrong, I might believe I was wrong and it was an honest mistake, but I'm absolutely sure you're not going to do that.
If you read the fully reply instead of the TLDR, and reply with a false counter-argument, you can probably find more success in wasting my time, feeling camaraderie with your fellow bullies, and confusing the undecided.
But I'm also pretty sure you're not going to do that, because it might be difficult to come up with a false counter-argument that doesn't feel shitty to post at this point. So instead, all you've done in the reply I'm replying to is repeat yourself, which is a pretty weak gaslighting attempt.
Free speech is nice in theory, but for true anarchist style freedom of speech to exist we would have to tolerate the intolerable.
No, you would have to stop.
If you think raping and bombing people is tolerable, but showing you pictures of it isn't, you are intolerable to me - and I am absolutely the one who's right, in that conflict.
If you think raping and bombing people is worse than showing you pictures of it, stop fucking around with bullshit and try tolerating the tolerable while not tolerating the intolerable.
If most of the human population is into rape and bombing, wipe out most of the human population until the front page is full of better posts, don't just shield yourself from posts and call it "not tolerating the intolerable"
If it's only a minority of the human population, outvote them to fill the front page with better posts
Use science and modern technology to make the world a better place instead of trying to deny the science, ruin the technology, and end the world
You come here complaining this doesn’t meet your made-up expectation of 100% uncensored full audience reach. Who ever said that’s what any of this was?
You, just now, right? I don't see anyone else accusing me of making those complaints or making that shit up, seems like that was just you in the sentence before you asked?
Since you seem to have such a strong opinion of what the world needs, why don’t you go fucking make it if there’s nothing out there that suffices for your grand vision?
I am. Why are you pretending I'm not, when that's exactly what my profile shows me doing?
Are you suggesting Project Zymogen and all of its follow-ups should be so easy and fast to finish, there shouldn't even be time for Lemmy to develop? I don't think that's what you're suggesting, because that would be extremely fucking insane, but the alternative is that you're just making shit up about me based on nothing and you don't even know what Project Zymogen is, which is about the same amount insane.
You ignored my questions, but I'll answer yours before asking again.
You can't be banned from nostr and you're not tethered to a single "instance" and Tor is supported a little better. As for "nostril," I bet spelling things wrong on purpose goes hard af when you have 62 IQ.
Now, what I asked before:
What were you trying to say before? What was that train of thought? Just cryptic gaslighting, right?
Again, I don't think it's in good faith, or "honest."
You probably know you have the "wings" flipped - the "left" wants "human rights," the "right" (you) are individuals who each only want rights for themselves, not all humans. These things can be conflated by being like "I want rights for me and my gay friends, another arm of the right wing hates gay people, that makes LGBT and supporters left wing, and that makes everyone who believes in human rights right wing because the gay haters are humans and that would give them rights, so I'm the left and if you believe the people who hate gays should have rights, that makes you the right, that's why the word for it is the right" and you could genuinely believe all that, in pure confusion. Or a million other ways. LGBT stuff is just one of a million things you could decide to base your "left-right" views on, while ignoring the overall directional difference of "human rights letting me be in charge of more stuff" vs "me in charge of more stuff because people who are less than my equal should be at my mercy"
But you DEFINITELY know some of the words people call "slurs" these days are pretty common words to use without being "far" in either direction. Once you added the word "far," you left less than zero wiggle room to entertain the possibility you're genuinely confused here. What's happening is you're blatantly lying, and doubling down, trying to gaslight me about it.
