this post was submitted on 16 Mar 2025
53 points (94.9% liked)
Casual Conversation
2776 readers
197 users here now
Share a story, ask a question, or start a conversation about (almost) anything you desire. Maybe you'll make some friends in the process.
RULES (updated 01/22/25)
- Be respectful: no harassment, hate speech, bigotry, and/or trolling. To be concise, disrespect is defined by escalation.
- Encourage conversation in your OP. This means including heavily implicative subject matter when you can and also engaging in your thread when possible. You won't be punished for trying.
- Avoid controversial topics (politics or societal debates come to mind, though we are not saying not to talk about anything that resembles these). There's a guide in the protocol book offered as a mod model that can be used for that; it's vague until you realize it was made for things like the rule in question. At least four purple answers must apply to a "controversial" message for it to be allowed.
- Keep it clean and SFW: No illegal content or anything gross and inappropriate. A rule of thumb is if a recording of a conversation put on another platform would get someone a COPPA violation response, that exact exchange should be avoided when possible.
- No solicitation such as ads, promotional content, spam, surveys etc. The chart redirected to above applies to spam material as well, which is one of the reasons its wording is vague, as it applies to a few things. Again, a "spammy" message must be applicable to four purple answers before it's allowed.
- Respect privacy as well as truth: Don’t ask for or share any personal information or slander anyone. A rule of thumb is if something is enough info to go by that it "would be a copyright violation if the info was art" as another group put it, or that it alone can be used to narrow someone down to 150 physical humans (Dunbar's Number) or less, it's considered an excess breach of privacy. Slander is defined by intentional utilitarian misguidance at the expense (positive or negative) of a sentient entity. This often links back to or mixes with rule one, which implies, for example, that even something that is true can still amount to what slander is trying to achieve, and that will be looked down upon.
Casual conversation communities:
Related discussion-focused communities
- !actual_discussion@lemmy.ca
- !askmenover30@lemm.ee
- !dads@feddit.uk
- !letstalkaboutgames@feddit.uk
- !movies@lemm.ee
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
This line of thought always leads me towards a silly sentence: logic is a sacred cow that as nothing sacred to it.
Most people take logic as granted. It is a basic element of human minds, thoughts and how those are externally expressed. But what is logical to one individual may be completely illogical to another.
Even if expressed in rigourously defined terms and expressions, the ideas a given logical sequence tries to convey and explain may be totally and completely flawed and irrelevant to another or simply wrong.
We are able to share concepts in its widest of forms but we can never truely and correctly express what we really think and understand to another because we are, in fact, even if in the most minute of ways, unique.
So, don't sell yourself short.
But logic isn't innate. It's a pattern. And human brains are basically very good at patterns.
But there are many, many, many patterns in life and logic is only one of them (and it isn't even particularly useful if you don't have some other patterns backing it up).