There’s like 2 FAQs linked by OP, you could have looked at them…

https://www.stopkillinggames.com/faq

Not the whole comment, but the word would get removed. It also applies to any comments posted to communities hosted on the server.

So much for free speech, eh.

I hate to say this, but you’re exactly the reason why Youtube and other services feel safe and comfortable enshittifying their services.

Capitalistic? Lemmy.ml does it too.

This isn’t lemmy, this is a specific community. And your argument brings us back to the whole issue between mods and community members.

Being a dick to someone trying to make the place better

Members of a community do have a stake in the community, and in this case, are trying to keep the place from getting worse. It’s an open question who the dick is in the discussion, especially since it was an open call for feedback that then subsequently ignored every comment that disagreed with the idea. It very much came across as a call for ‘positive feedback only’.

‘Feedback’ does not mean ‘fix my idea for me’. Just because something isn’t your area of expertise doesn’t mean you can’t point out when there are flaws in something. It’s like getting served a dish that tastes horrible, then the restaurant says you can’t complain because you’re not offering a solution.

We should want analysis to be from the perspective of a typical fast food eating, reality tv watching, not-super-engaged American

Why? Lemmy is a worldwide site.

You’re missing the point of the comment you’re replying to, which is that the devs don’t understand decompilers RIGHT NOW, and it’s formatted in a tongue in cheek way similar to their current comment about VCS

Problem in this case is the specification is vague on what the ‘correct’ thing to display is.

It’s in the summary :) But anyway, here you go: https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/post/23828592

I think you messed up the link formatting :)

To be fair, she was 19 years old and brainwashed.

Might?

This Texas teen wanted an abortion. She now has twins.

Think you’ve put it pretty well there! I do think Bennet wants #2 though. He draws a clear line between op-eds and factual news, and was pretty clear that the latter should be evidence-based.

Yellow!

I get what you’re saying. The flip side, is that at the other extreme you get echo chambers, which is arguably where we’ve landed today in a lot of media. It’s a pretty tough question, and I don’t claim to have the answer, but I think it’s a good thing to be having this discussion instead of sweeping it under the rug.

Don’t forget to like, subscribe, and follow!

This article was brought to you by Shadow Raid Legends

That is absurd bullshit. Like I said, the NYT’s principles and history are that of collaborating with American elite interests since its founding.

That might be the author being biased since he learnt his trade at the NYT, I suppose. I don’t know enough about their past to comment on that.

Thanks for the links to the trans articles, some interesting reads there.

The whole framing of the article is that the “untruth” AG needs to be setting straight is overly sensitive political correctness from progressives, and analyzing everything he’s doing through that lens. Whether we have to be neutral and present progressives and “conservatives” on the same footing, or whether we should take a side and say the progressives are wrong.

I kinda read it differently. I’m not saying you’re wrong, since this is of course all pretty subjective. But at least the way I read it, Bennet is saying that the NYT has a duty to help both sides understand each other, and the way to do that would be by giving a voice to the right and centrists without necessarily endorsing any faction. I agree with it to some extent - as both sides have polarised and pulled away from each other, it’s gotten hard to be a neutral viewpoint in any number of topics without being roundly condemned by both sides.

is that not Bennet arguing that AG needs to enforce better the pro-fascist standard of truth?

That’s a tough one. Dogwhistles, weasel words, doublespeak are all things to watch out for. He’s condemning the NYT for changing the language Cotton used, but I’m not familiar enough with US politics to have an opinion if they changed the meaning or just polished the turd.

Regardless, I appreciate the different viewpoint you presented. As usual, there’s no black and white in these scenarios.

Right. I see there’s no logical discussion to be had here. Have a good day.