I had already read that book prior to my teacher reading it aloud in class. She couldn’t read that chapter, so I volunteered to, having already had my trauma from the scene. We didn’t end up watching the movie, though.

I never got plastering logos for whatever brands you love to consume on everything you own. Like buying decals and stickers and shit to put all over your car, laptop, whatever else. Since when do we pay to advertise for brands…?

That’s your only contribution? Cool. Objections duly noted.

Proofreading your own work without a significant time gap is pretty useless. You’ll catch a few obvious errors, but approaching the same problem in the same mental space tends to lead to the same thought patterns, tends to lead to making or overlooking the same mistakes.

You’ll do a bit better reapproaching the subject a few days later. It’s almost, but not quite, like reading a new piece of writing. In my experience, comments are set and forget, unless you’re obsessive like me and enjoy rereading your old shit.

By far the most effective proofreading, though, is an Editor. There’s a reason it’s a paid position for anyone who makes a living writing. A completely different person will read the text more as-is, without accidentally interpreting it how they INTENDED it to be written. This will catch far more errors, but isn’t really practical for shit posting in social media. The closest you’ll get is someone calling out a typo or grammatical error.

As long as the intent of the message is clear, it passes the bar for acceptable social media content. We’re not writing PhD theses, we’re just having fun discussions. We’re not writing a paper meant to be readable to someone independently, we’re engaging in dialogue and can easily ask the other person to clarify.

TL;DR high-level proofreading and error correcting isn’t really as viable on social media as it is formal writing, nor is it really necessary as long as the message received is the message intended.

Get my resume together

Not who you replied to, but your arguments remind me of Peter Singer. Basically, that none of us live ethical lives because of exactly the first problem you mentioned. If we CAN donate to a cause we know will do good with the money, more good than we could do ourselves, then we MUST do so. Failing to do so is a moral failing.

It’s definitely an appealing argument, and I enjoy exploring the limits of such philosophies. To me, it’s about immediacy, guarantee, and proximity. I see something that has a shorter timeline as something that must be acted on with higher priority. Something that’s guaranteed is higher priority than a slim chance. And I’m more likely to help those closer to me than across the world.

We’re all limited in our capacity to know and to do. I don’t have to be perfect, I can accept that some of my actions are less moral than they could be. I just aim to be as above the line, so to speak, trying to bring more positive than negative. I think the comment you initially replied to is a pretty good heuristic to follow to do so.

It’s quite simply what’s on people’s minds right now. It was a major event, it outlines some of the systemic inequalities, and people are interested in the subject.

Well how about that. It’s also my birthday. Happy birthday, Leni

I will personally develop a toy that juuuuuust skirts the edges of their definitions called a dildon’t. I see a glorious market in my future.

Morality and religion are the same in society, broadly speaking. Any of the myriad interviews with a non-religious person being asked how they derive morality without religion is telling enough for that.

If you had asked me 10 years ago, it’d be a firm “atheist”. A year ago, “agnostic”. Today, I don’t identify with a religion, but I think there’s a lot of interesting things within them. Given a charitable interpretation of any of them’s texts, as well as looking at the parts where a large number of religious systems agree you can arrive at some pretty profound pieces of wisdom.

I don’t necessarily think these things tell us much about our origin, or what happens after death, or speak to any kind of deity. What they do speak a lot on is the human condition. What we value, what themes and motifs speak to us.

I don’t really like the terms “religion” and “religious”. To me, those are the organized, preachy kinds of almost-cults most of us here have problems with. I prefer referring to my own personal beliefs as spirituality. Where the two differ, in my mind, is that religion is found externally. Someone converts you, or you’re born into it. Spirituality is found through self-reflection. Some of the self reflection processes involves talking to and learning from others, but it ultimately comes back to a deeply individual assimilation of this new knowledge with the unique lived experiences you’ve had.

This is the way. Causing drama is what an attention seeker wants. Avoiding drama is what a person who has whatever we want to call the affliction wants. In all cases, the best case is to just accept the person at face value, avoid the drama, and keep living.

The person in question was very thorough about reviving older spelling conventions. I asked him about it once and he gave me a reply written in what he considered right. It was a LOT. Still, I’m impressed with his commitment to the bit.

Yeaaaah that upward mobility isn’t a feature of the system, it’s a bug, and they’re working on patching it constantly.

It’s never been easier to be a billionaire. It’s never been harder to be a millionaire.

Point being it’s a last resort. I’ve lost all other options, may as well at least get someone there to ID the body or somesuch.

One day, when I’m in actually GOOD shape, and have a bit more grey.

Joining a sword fighting gym. Absolutely fantastic community, and while I’m currently laying in a hot tub to soothe my absolutely dead legs, I’m definitively in the best shape I’ve been in in my adult life.

Implying management is human work?

Imminent threat of bodily harm and no route for escape. Calling the cops will get you an armed response. The only time an armed response is at all appropriate is if life could be lost otherwise. Any other time, it’s best not to bring a gun into the situation.

I was wondering if Firefly being the immediate de facto response to this had lived its life. It appears not.