Posting a picture of a slice of cheese without a NSFW tag and a content warning is bannable but calling violence against large groups of people isn't.
Holy hell that sounds like a parody community made by 4chan.
Yep and like 4chan Itβs full of Russian propaganda. Just look at how many of their posts reference Ukrainian Nazis.
Also talks about "Da West" as much as Putin does.
Cheese?
It appears to be a rule against posting food made from animal products. As someone who doesn't eat animal products myself, I don't particularly enjoy scrolling Reddit or Lemmy and seeing a picture of a meat dish, but it doesn't ruin my day I would never dream of demanding a content warning for it.
To my knowledge CWs are geared towards content that has the potential to trigger past trauma, and I can't understand how a food category could be so broadly traumatic to someone (outside of EDs I guess, which is obviously not the focus of this rule).
I suspect it's less of a trigger warning, and more of a means to reframe perceptions of food.
Like, if TV commercials just started putting little "viewers may find the following depictions of dead animals disturbing" stingers before a commercial of a family eating steaks, it might change perceptions over time.
Yeah, that's exactly what it is.
Homelander drinking a consenting woman's breast milk is disturbing and helps convince viewers he's a creep. Yet if he were to enjoy a nice glass of refreshing cow breast milk, that would be completely normal. Why? Because our society has made a very deliberate choice not to consider there being anything wrong with milking a cow.
Hexbear simply does not participate in that choice. On Hexbear, there is something disturbing about milking a cow, and that's because the admins want you to be disturbed by it. That has always been the default state of things.
The gif that's typically shared is after he's murdered her, and finds some in her office fridge. I wouldn't hold it up as a textbook definition of consent.
Unfortunately trigger warnings got watered down very quickly, to now also being used as an "anything someone might find the slightest discomfort in"
I just don't understand them. The users I mean.
We are a platform that welcomes anyone who wants to be here in good faith. With that said, we are also an intentionally leftist platform; conservative and reactionary ideologies will not be tolerated here.
They live in an idolgical bubble where contrary opinions are not tolerated, and dissent is shunned. The only voices they hear are leftist and extreme leftist voices shifting the Overton window of politics in their minds leading to radical beliefs.
It's important to have your beliefs challenged at times, they lack that. If you can try and listen to voices from opposing view points, maybe even share your own in a respectful manner.
(This isn't an issue particular to any side of politics, it also occurs in more right wing groups)
I guess I've been really surprised at their support for Palestine.
I thought that the left would be less supportive of the more conservative religion
I don't think they support Palestine as much as they oppose colonialism.
If that's true it seems very reductive.
They're trolls. Is most of the world supporting XYZ? We are suddenly against XYZ for reasons! Is someone giving actual real life reasons to support XYZ? We have to reply with emojis!
They're very gang oriented. Once one of them declares an opinion the rest of them must follow it and defend it no matter what.
Honestly this answer most adequately explains their behaviour.
Good. Fuck all fascists. The allies who fought in WWII were heroes, and the farmers who rape cows are villains. This is a consistent ideology.
Any pictures of food containing animal products, including but not limited to meat, cheese, or egg, must be tagged nsfw along with food discussion content warnings (CW: Food).
Animal Liberation is essential to any leftist movement, including platforms like Hexbear. Volunteers, comments, and posts, should not be anti-vegan, although users and volunteers are not required to be vegan.
Wow. Just wow. That is so far beyond leftist.
It's like if Fox News was to create a leftist website. It smells so fake.
I don't know, you see a cow being shot and cut up, it's NSFW. You put some parsley on it, it's now food.
Yeah. That's how that works
That's generally how human brains work. We're capable of switching empathy on and off, allowing us to both hunt and love animals, protect our group and fight the others, be careful not to hurt others and perform surgery... People are paradoxical creatures.
I love your name
The feelings are mutual.
That's so far left, it's behind
Maybe we should be putting people into cages and harvest and sell their organs.... I mean why not ? It's not like humans are different from animals Β―_ (γ) _/Β―
Well, I'm so glad you volunteered! ... No, really. Very glad. Right this way...
I believe they do, yes. It's done to out anti-trans people, making them easy to spot as they complain loudly about being forced to.
rare hexbear W
I mean, it's unverifiable and unenforceable. Personally, I wouldn't sign up for anything that requires identifying myself like that. I can just look at someone's comment history to see if they're strongly pro or anti tolerance. As it stands, this has as much value as as North Korea calling themselves democratic.
Unverifiable maybe, unenforceable, no. They simply ban anyone who refuses.
What if I just lie?
The point is not to make you reveal your gender, but to make you explicitly choose a gender, thus normalising the idea that gender should not be assumed. Transphobes will object to this and get banned. At least, that's the theory.
I just default to gender neutral terms if context clues don't suggest a specific one.
Just make a rule that transphobes and other bigots will be banned like everyone else.
Just make a rule that transphobes and other bigots will be banned like everyone else.
And how do the mods find the transphobes to ban them? They'll have to wait for an argument to happen and someone to complain about it. Waste of everyone's time. This way transphobes will get triggered when they try to sign up, throw a tantrum, and get banned. That's the plan; I have no idea whether it works in practice.
argument to happen and someone to complain about it.
Yes, that's how moderation works.
This way transphobes will get triggered
I don't think as many transphobes have a problem with identifying as their birth gender as you think. Also does nothing you stop the bad actors and concern trolling. Might as well have "Black Gay Man" as an option.
Fair. I don't know how well it works on that instance. I see it as schmuk bait - someone who throws a tantrum over it is not someone you want to let in.
what if I honestly dgaf and prefer that people call me whatever they want?
"Any" is probably fine. It tends to be my choice. That said, you're better off just not using Hexbear. Ya know, unless you're chill with things like genocide.
Then you put that I guess.
they/them I guess.
Until some random doxes people.
You'd think, after seeing bitching posts about privacy one after the other folks would be concerned.
Suddenly I like a hexbear policy!
Steps 2 and 3 involve denying several genocides and then calling for genocides based on skin color and global locality.
Are many of them from a single country?
I'm kinda amazed they're so unanimous in some of their political opinions.
You'd think that would make one question wether their beliefs truly are their own, or rather - our beliefs
Going by spelling and phrase choices, I'd say the majority of them are youngish Americans who're still naive enough to believe extreme left-wing/anarcho political systems aren't just as controlling of the populace as the political systems they despise. Either that or they crave big state control systems because the feel a lack of control in their own lives and want a political daddy to make the decisions for them.
I'm not convinced they're even human if I'm being completely honest. Learning language models aren't new in the propagandasphere.
Even a broken clock is right twice a day, I guess.
It's part of the signing up process. I've seen people without them, but it's very rare. There's probably a grace period.
What if my preferred pronouns are to not have any?
None/use name seems to be an option aswell
Shadow the Hedgehog.
How should people refer to you in the third person? It's okay to use one's name as the preferred pronoun.
please do not refer to me
A name is a noun, not a pronoun, but the site seems to allow "none/use name" as an option.
Foggy is confused π€
There are societies where not using one's name is rude. In general it's safe to just call one by name instead of dehumanize them with labels.
That is odd. I usually prefer when people talk with me instead of about me.
No one's talking about you
I'm sorry, I don't understand what you mean in relation to what I said.
Were talking pronouns as part of the sign up process.
It's likely meant to be seen as a witty remark, and not a statement. :)
Why is being witty the default stance, instead of an honest statement?
Because what you said doesn't make any sense if you were being serious.
Writing out a person's full name/tag every time you reference them is not practical (see my previous comment), so one wouldn't give this as reason against third person references in a serious discussion.
So it's easier to say thoim/shlu instead of ekky?
If the genesis of the entire issue with chosen pronouns is about basic respect, personal convinience can take a back seat and we can adress a person by name.
But then again, I'm often viewed as petty in my personal peeves.
Better to just not talk about someone and instead just talk with the person.
Really think hard about what you are saying. Next time you have a conversation, try mentioning no one else except the person you are talking to and yourself.
Oh, don't temp me.
It's been probably very clear by this point that English is not my native language but I can, with a degree of effort, have a conversation about a third person by naming said individual and use "person", "individual" and other similar terms to refer to the absent third party without need to resort to pronouns.
It takes some effort, the end result is a bit terse in english, but I can make it work.
But, to repeat myself, better to not talk about someone else but instead talk with said person.
Petty. But so satisfying.
Pronouns are there to make conversation easier and more straight forward. You can avoid using them, it's just uselessly silly to do so.
It's normal to refer to someone else during conversation, even essential. Why should we be avoiding this behavior as to eliminate pronouns in our speech? Whats the reasoning? Pronouns are a completely normal and essential part of our language, I'm having trouble understanding why you want to cleave the pool of potential conversation subjects to avoid them?
Remember that back there I specifically stated that I prefer having people talking with me rather than about me?
That's pretty much it. I dislike talking about others. I have full capacity and interest to talk about topics or specific subjects but I make my best effort to abstain from talking about others.
And I'm happy as it is. I feel no need to justify myself for being as I am and I take no ill will against those who dislike or don't understand why I act in the fashion I do.
I do not need to take part in every conversation in the world, be it personally or by proxy. And even if someone feels the deep need to - and I can't fathom why would that happen - quote me, it/he/she/they are not necessary to do so.
All of this stemmed from me making a remark about myself - a fully self contained issue - and look where we find ourselves now. And with no need for pronouns.
No one said anything about you until you made your strange comment.
I usually prefer when people talk with me instead of about me.
Sorry if you didn't want to know, but: you can't get rich that way.
Don't be sorry but I still don't want to be talked about.
I'm talking about qyron right now, qyron won't supply us with qyrons chosen pronoun and now I have to say qyron every damn time instead of a nice short common pronoun.
Qyron is making things unnecessarily difficult and shitty. Don't be like qyron.
Many people don't wish to be doxxed online. Nobody needs to share something private.
Ahh yes of course I can't believe I didn't think of that! If I knew their pronoun preference I could almost attribute that to their registered gender, and that almost lowers my possible targets down to a mere 4,000,000,000.
Phew that is some easy doxxin'
Yes! Now you get!
I have to add this here because you just wrote a gold opportunity for me to mock myself. Can we have signatures in Lemmy? I would make the following as mine. Perhaps a little reviewed for shorter form.
Here is qyron, the most obnoxious example of a person you can find, to the point where making anything and everything harder than necessary becomes a self defining characteristic.
This is an individual that takes pride and pleasure of torturing others just to make a moot point on any front.
Don't be like this personality. Nobody deserves to be like so.
Reminds me of a woman i know. She That woman could totally have written this. Basically, our conversation after months is still me trying to learn her that womans language. :-D
Sounds like a front for disliking trans people
Every person on the face of this planet deserves to be happy. Besides that, nothing to add.
I just checked and those rules are wild.
Posting a picture of a slice of cheese without a NSFW tag and a content warning is bannable but calling violence against large groups of people isn't.
Holy hell that sounds like a parody community made by 4chan.
Yep and like 4chan Itβs full of Russian propaganda. Just look at how many of their posts reference Ukrainian Nazis.
Also talks about "Da West" as much as Putin does.
Cheese?
It appears to be a rule against posting food made from animal products. As someone who doesn't eat animal products myself, I don't particularly enjoy scrolling Reddit or Lemmy and seeing a picture of a meat dish, but it doesn't ruin my day I would never dream of demanding a content warning for it.
To my knowledge CWs are geared towards content that has the potential to trigger past trauma, and I can't understand how a food category could be so broadly traumatic to someone (outside of EDs I guess, which is obviously not the focus of this rule).
I suspect it's less of a trigger warning, and more of a means to reframe perceptions of food.
Like, if TV commercials just started putting little "viewers may find the following depictions of dead animals disturbing" stingers before a commercial of a family eating steaks, it might change perceptions over time.
Yeah, that's exactly what it is.
Homelander drinking a consenting woman's breast milk is disturbing and helps convince viewers he's a creep. Yet if he were to enjoy a nice glass of refreshing cow breast milk, that would be completely normal. Why? Because our society has made a very deliberate choice not to consider there being anything wrong with milking a cow.
Hexbear simply does not participate in that choice. On Hexbear, there is something disturbing about milking a cow, and that's because the admins want you to be disturbed by it. That has always been the default state of things.
The gif that's typically shared is after he's murdered her, and finds some in her office fridge. I wouldn't hold it up as a textbook definition of consent.
Unfortunately trigger warnings got watered down very quickly, to now also being used as an "anything someone might find the slightest discomfort in"
I just don't understand them. The users I mean.
They live in an idolgical bubble where contrary opinions are not tolerated, and dissent is shunned. The only voices they hear are leftist and extreme leftist voices shifting the Overton window of politics in their minds leading to radical beliefs.
It's important to have your beliefs challenged at times, they lack that. If you can try and listen to voices from opposing view points, maybe even share your own in a respectful manner.
(This isn't an issue particular to any side of politics, it also occurs in more right wing groups)
I guess I've been really surprised at their support for Palestine.
I thought that the left would be less supportive of the more conservative religion
I don't think they support Palestine as much as they oppose colonialism.
If that's true it seems very reductive.
They're trolls. Is most of the world supporting XYZ? We are suddenly against XYZ for reasons! Is someone giving actual real life reasons to support XYZ? We have to reply with emojis!
They're very gang oriented. Once one of them declares an opinion the rest of them must follow it and defend it no matter what.
Honestly this answer most adequately explains their behaviour.
Good. Fuck all fascists. The allies who fought in WWII were heroes, and the farmers who rape cows are villains. This is a consistent ideology.
In their general rules:
Any pictures of food containing animal products, including but not limited to meat, cheese, or egg, must be tagged nsfw along with food discussion content warnings (CW: Food).
Animal Liberation is essential to any leftist movement, including platforms like Hexbear. Volunteers, comments, and posts, should not be anti-vegan, although users and volunteers are not required to be vegan.
Wow. Just wow. That is so far beyond leftist.
It's like if Fox News was to create a leftist website. It smells so fake.
Oh they would try if it could make more money.
I don't know, you see a cow being shot and cut up, it's NSFW. You put some parsley on it, it's now food.
Yeah. That's how that works
That's generally how human brains work. We're capable of switching empathy on and off, allowing us to both hunt and love animals, protect our group and fight the others, be careful not to hurt others and perform surgery... People are paradoxical creatures.
I love your name
The feelings are mutual.
That's so far left, it's behind
Maybe we should be putting people into cages and harvest and sell their organs.... I mean why not ? It's not like humans are different from animals Β―_ (γ) _/Β―
Well, I'm so glad you volunteered! ... No, really. Very glad. Right this way...
I am glad the animals volunteered too! :-)
I believe they do, yes. It's done to out anti-trans people, making them easy to spot as they complain loudly about being forced to.
rare hexbear W
I mean, it's unverifiable and unenforceable. Personally, I wouldn't sign up for anything that requires identifying myself like that. I can just look at someone's comment history to see if they're strongly pro or anti tolerance. As it stands, this has as much value as as North Korea calling themselves democratic.
Unverifiable maybe, unenforceable, no. They simply ban anyone who refuses.
What if I just lie?
The point is not to make you reveal your gender, but to make you explicitly choose a gender, thus normalising the idea that gender should not be assumed. Transphobes will object to this and get banned. At least, that's the theory.
I just default to gender neutral terms if context clues don't suggest a specific one.
Just make a rule that transphobes and other bigots will be banned like everyone else.
And how do the mods find the transphobes to ban them? They'll have to wait for an argument to happen and someone to complain about it. Waste of everyone's time. This way transphobes will get triggered when they try to sign up, throw a tantrum, and get banned. That's the plan; I have no idea whether it works in practice.
Yes, that's how moderation works.
I don't think as many transphobes have a problem with identifying as their birth gender as you think. Also does nothing you stop the bad actors and concern trolling. Might as well have "Black Gay Man" as an option.
Fair. I don't know how well it works on that instance. I see it as schmuk bait - someone who throws a tantrum over it is not someone you want to let in.
what if I honestly dgaf and prefer that people call me whatever they want?
"Any" is probably fine. It tends to be my choice. That said, you're better off just not using Hexbear. Ya know, unless you're chill with things like genocide.
Then you put that I guess.
they/them I guess.
Until some random doxes people.
You'd think, after seeing bitching posts about privacy one after the other folks would be concerned.
Suddenly I like a hexbear policy!
Steps 2 and 3 involve denying several genocides and then calling for genocides based on skin color and global locality.
Are many of them from a single country?
I'm kinda amazed they're so unanimous in some of their political opinions.
You'd think that would make one question wether their beliefs truly are their own, or rather - our beliefs
Going by spelling and phrase choices, I'd say the majority of them are youngish Americans who're still naive enough to believe extreme left-wing/anarcho political systems aren't just as controlling of the populace as the political systems they despise. Either that or they crave big state control systems because the feel a lack of control in their own lives and want a political daddy to make the decisions for them.
I'm not convinced they're even human if I'm being completely honest. Learning language models aren't new in the propagandasphere.
Even a broken clock is right twice a day, I guess.
It's part of the signing up process. I've seen people without them, but it's very rare. There's probably a grace period.
What if my preferred pronouns are to not have any?
None/use name seems to be an option aswell
Shadow the Hedgehog.
How should people refer to you in the third person? It's okay to use one's name as the preferred pronoun.
please do not refer to me
A name is a noun, not a pronoun, but the site seems to allow "none/use name" as an option.
Foggy is confused π€
There are societies where not using one's name is rude. In general it's safe to just call one by name instead of dehumanize them with labels.
That is odd. I usually prefer when people talk with me instead of about me.
No one's talking about you
I'm sorry, I don't understand what you mean in relation to what I said.
Were talking pronouns as part of the sign up process.
@qyron@sopuli.xyz says that @qyron@sopuli.xyz would rather like to be tagged and be part of the conversation, instead of having people talk behind @qyron@sopuli.xyz's back.
It's likely meant to be seen as a witty remark, and not a statement. :)
Why is being witty the default stance, instead of an honest statement?
Because what you said doesn't make any sense if you were being serious.
Writing out a person's full name/tag every time you reference them is not practical (see my previous comment), so one wouldn't give this as reason against third person references in a serious discussion.
So it's easier to say thoim/shlu instead of ekky?
If the genesis of the entire issue with chosen pronouns is about basic respect, personal convinience can take a back seat and we can adress a person by name.
But then again, I'm often viewed as petty in my personal peeves.
Better to just not talk about someone and instead just talk with the person.
Really think hard about what you are saying. Next time you have a conversation, try mentioning no one else except the person you are talking to and yourself.
Oh, don't temp me.
It's been probably very clear by this point that English is not my native language but I can, with a degree of effort, have a conversation about a third person by naming said individual and use "person", "individual" and other similar terms to refer to the absent third party without need to resort to pronouns.
It takes some effort, the end result is a bit terse in english, but I can make it work.
But, to repeat myself, better to not talk about someone else but instead talk with said person.
Petty. But so satisfying.
Pronouns are there to make conversation easier and more straight forward. You can avoid using them, it's just uselessly silly to do so.
It's normal to refer to someone else during conversation, even essential. Why should we be avoiding this behavior as to eliminate pronouns in our speech? Whats the reasoning? Pronouns are a completely normal and essential part of our language, I'm having trouble understanding why you want to cleave the pool of potential conversation subjects to avoid them?
Remember that back there I specifically stated that I prefer having people talking with me rather than about me?
That's pretty much it. I dislike talking about others. I have full capacity and interest to talk about topics or specific subjects but I make my best effort to abstain from talking about others.
And I'm happy as it is. I feel no need to justify myself for being as I am and I take no ill will against those who dislike or don't understand why I act in the fashion I do.
I do not need to take part in every conversation in the world, be it personally or by proxy. And even if someone feels the deep need to - and I can't fathom why would that happen - quote me, it/he/she/they are not necessary to do so.
All of this stemmed from me making a remark about myself - a fully self contained issue - and look where we find ourselves now. And with no need for pronouns.
No one said anything about you until you made your strange comment.
Id rather you just stop talking altogether
Sorry if you didn't want to know, but: you can't get rich that way.
Don't be sorry but I still don't want to be talked about.
I'm talking about qyron right now, qyron won't supply us with qyrons chosen pronoun and now I have to say qyron every damn time instead of a nice short common pronoun.
Qyron is making things unnecessarily difficult and shitty. Don't be like qyron.
Many people don't wish to be doxxed online. Nobody needs to share something private.
Ahh yes of course I can't believe I didn't think of that! If I knew their pronoun preference I could almost attribute that to their registered gender, and that almost lowers my possible targets down to a mere 4,000,000,000.
Phew that is some easy doxxin'
Yes! Now you get!
I have to add this here because you just wrote a gold opportunity for me to mock myself. Can we have signatures in Lemmy? I would make the following as mine. Perhaps a little reviewed for shorter form.
Here is qyron, the most obnoxious example of a person you can find, to the point where making anything and everything harder than necessary becomes a self defining characteristic.
This is an individual that takes pride and pleasure of torturing others just to make a moot point on any front.
Don't be like this personality. Nobody deserves to be like so.
Reminds me of a woman i know.
SheThat woman could totally have written this. Basically, our conversation after months is still me trying to learnherthat womans language. :-DSounds like a front for disliking trans people
Every person on the face of this planet deserves to be happy. Besides that, nothing to add.
Whatever you say.
You made a remark, I gave a clarification.
If it is not to your liking, tough.
Stop using pronouns bruh. Irmoz doesn't like them
I'll take that into consideration from now on.
They're a satire of failed marxist extremists that hate everyone and everything. Just block them and move on.
I don't paint with such a broad brush. I welcome differing opinions on my social media feed.