MLRL_Commie

joined 1 year ago
[–] MLRL_Commie@hexbear.net 6 points 1 hour ago

This has been the position I've been taking.

[–] MLRL_Commie@hexbear.net 31 points 9 hours ago (9 children)

The Guardian Claiming Delcy Rodriguez collaborated

I'm still entirely unsure of what went down in Venezuela. How does this seem to the news mega? I'm doubtful of unnamed sources, as always, but what does media claiming this mean for western strategy?

[–] MLRL_Commie@hexbear.net 14 points 20 hours ago

I am planning to just strap em to my chest and peddle lol. Those chairs seem scary and high up, making it more top heavy and I don't like that feeling.

[–] MLRL_Commie@hexbear.net 3 points 1 day ago

I'm neither, thankfully! Just gonna be on the safe side and not use it anymore.

[–] MLRL_Commie@hexbear.net 21 points 1 day ago

Wow yeah this is exactly how it feels. I hadn't been able to put that into words. It's the projection of the general "rules on how games work" back onto the society that created the rules.

[–] MLRL_Commie@hexbear.net 8 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Damn I really liked 'bonkers' and how it sounded. I always associated it with getting hit on the head (no idea if that's how it relates then to ableism or not) and always imagined a 'bonk' effect. Thought it was super harmless, but I learned something new today! Good post, thanks for the info!

Also super happy to find "dipshit" on the list of acceptable replacement words. That's one of my top ones that are at least still mean to use on fascists.

[–] MLRL_Commie@hexbear.net 11 points 3 days ago

Full agreement. Good proposal

[–] MLRL_Commie@hexbear.net 1 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

I think this is actually my disagreement, because I think capital in itself would do so, but capitalism as a system has systematized class collaboration between capitalists to prevent them doing this

[–] MLRL_Commie@hexbear.net 12 points 4 days ago (3 children)

Ian Wright is great. Vampires live longer than humans (but canonically are dead right?), just like capital. Good addition

[–] MLRL_Commie@hexbear.net 15 points 4 days ago (6 children)

I always find this one interesting. I think Capitalism as en entire system isn't necessarily cancerous in total. Marx probably didn't have the vision of cancer we have today, but I think his analogy about the vampire was still better. Capitalism as a system is hard to just call a cancer because it is productive, because its laborers are productive. Capital as cancer in the system is closer, but still not as good. So saying that capital is a vampire, and so capitalism is a society dominated by vampires, is a better analogy. It is dead, but can only keep itself moving and growing by consuming the living (labor). In doing so, it grows and gets more hungry, and continuously needs to balance a need to consume more versus to let the living (labor) produce (so that it can be consumed). Cancer has no such mechanism to protect itself and no desire to stay alive and growing. Capital is mindless but the system gives it interests and mechanisms to act within the system in its own interest.

I guess my point is that cancer as an analogy underestimates capital and the system in which capital functions as the organizer of labor.

Long rant, no real reason I wrote this out except I was kinda bored. Calling it cancer is fine too lol

[–] MLRL_Commie@hexbear.net 7 points 4 days ago

Well they're gonna try for sure. But I think China can resist it well

[–] MLRL_Commie@hexbear.net 17 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (1 children)

But honestly trump is right. The "independent committee" is so clearly political that the European governments could've easily forced Trump as the winner and it would've been so (or propagandized in favor of Trump to accomplish this). Now the libs act like it's really independent and get all pissy that Trump doesn't get it. Trump couldn't understand it if it were truly independent, but it's not anyways

 

Edit2: the ratio is amazing. I'm exhausted. This has quadrupled my hexbear time for the day and I will be limiting myself for a bit lol. I feel like we got somewhere in a couple of good threads thanks to Hellinkilla and ratboy. Good luck, comrades.

Edit: the rant wasn't clear enough. In Previous struggles users have expressed frustrations with how mods/admin decisions are made. I would like to discuss how they are made and hear from them. Mods have also stated before that they wish we could be better, I'd like to hear how and know how they think this should be approached.

Rant/effort post coming:

What's the follow up to the recent problems with how mods/admins have handled recent issues? Did I miss something? Can we get some explanations about how this site is structured and what roles we see for admins/mods generally?

history of struggle session, not necessary but gives context


We had a fairly large and fairly one-sided struggle session a couple weeks ago. Z_Poster was banned (and still is, as far as I know) and the emoji was added. Some users (thinking of @hellinkella, smong others) did some effort to really parse out where the pain points were and who was involved (largely Zionism inherent in some positions, Jewish exceptionalism). Only the emoji and banning occurred with no other promises/ideas from mods/admins.

There then followed a leak of mod logs where opinions were still very different than the userbase. I would encourage people not to open it or ask for it, please, and especially not to share it. But I think a significant amount of us did see messages that, regardless of context, gave an image of admins/mods that think the userbase hates them, disagreed with the userbase in significant ways, and which wants to steer us in a better direction. The mod chat was also absurdly active at the time, but there's been little talk about what WAS discussed, only discussions about what was missed, where more context is needed, and things that were not done in a timely manner. This was not further discussed. (Personally I'm super appreciative of you all, doing work I don't want to do on a website I enjoy thoroughly, and don't hate any of you--including previous ones I've argued with, but would like to see some changes which will follow below and hopefully other comrades will add to it/change it for the better).

We had an EM/POC post which was tangential to that, but where there seemed to be large support for the userbase with regards to the ideological differences between mods/admins and the broader userbase. There was also a banning for which apologies followed quickly, but which indicates the structural failure more generally. There were of course other topics covered, which I won't speak on here. I didn't see any solutions proposed and accepted, from any of the topics relevant to this post. (Please correct me if I read this thread wrong, don't want to speak for you, EM/POC comrades.)

Was there a follow up? Is that coming? Is the discussion behind the curtain of the mod chat? I understand you all have lives, so don't spend all your time working on this, but some knowledge of how you're working would be good. Otherwise it feels like purposeful pushing back of feedback/decisions so that we will forget the passionate feelings or give up. If that's the goal, it's a horrible strategy and should just be explicitly told. "3 months after a struggle session is the earliest we will make changes in processes" is better than nothing.

I would also recommend we have an open discussion about the direction of the site. It seems the mods/admins have indicated to have better ideas for what we can be (I remember this from the "dunk" discussions too), but have not made clear what their position in that is. Enforcers? A vanguard (with our input as leading determinant)? A different vanguard (against our input for but in our interests)? Theoreticians that have the ideas but want the users to take the lead? Knowing this would make clearer how to interact with you, and how to make our experiences better. Maybe we do need growth and improvement, but we haven't been clear about how, and talking down is how most have experienced that. I already love this place, so when I'm frustrated I don't think of leaving. But that's not universal

 

I'm no expert on Iran, so I was hoping some knowledgeable people here could give some context. I find it hard to figure out the speaker's exact strategy from the discussion. Any thoughts?

view more: next ›