CraigOhMyEggo

I heard Reddit seems to shadowban posts and comments it finds that link to Lemmy. I use both sites (I have my reasons) and was wondering if there was a way anyone could advise where I can link to Lemmy posts that are important/relevant in particular Reddit discussions without fear of getting the boot.

When I say honor, what I mean is the idea of every individual being called to answer to everyone else. You know, the kind of thing you see from the Klingons. "You are thirty and unmarried, you bring dishonor to us" or "shame on your family for eternity because you were arrested for terrorism" or "what a disgrace you are for not having the skillset of your parents". This goes deeper than that though, sometimes it's more subtle, for example you might run into old classmates and all they want to know is how your brother is doing, or people keep telling you that you should live up to your sister or they might put you in some kind of shadow.

People who defend honor will often say "it is the masses who have spoken, enough said" but do you consider this self-explanatory and why? Because I have many questions sometimes that get no answer that seem to undermine the very justification of honor, for example... what defines a member of an honor culture, is the internet seen as a valid method of manifesting an honor culture, does an honor culture that faces a schism and breaks off from another become a dishonorable honor culture or equally valid, who was the first person to believe in certain ideas from which the honor culture got its conclusions, how did said person justify their ideas, is it dishonorable to find loopholes in the rules of the honor culture, are you dishonored if you save the life of someone who is seppukuing, what if this person happens to be the emperor, etc.

As kids, we're told only people who go to college/university for politics/economics/law are qualifiable to make/run a country. As adults, we see no nation these "qualified" adults form actually work as a nation, with all manifesto-driven governments failing. Which to me validates the ambitions of all political theorist amateurs, especially as there are higher hopes now that anything an amateur might throw at the wall can stick. Here's my favorite from a friend.

Suppose there's this site I really like, and I like the fediverse, and I think it would be awesome if they joined the fediverse, to benefit everyone involved. Is it like how it was in the Zorro movie where they vote California into the US, Zorro swipes all the voting boxes with a Z, and everyone cheers, or is it not possible for just any random schmoe site to join?

They're semi-famous now, but it was actually a friend of mine who originally wrote them. They're a list of ten rules of thumb to go by when using the internet. They imply things like the potential drawbacks of assuming someone's other identities, how to caution against archive forgery, when the best time is to complain about mods, etc. and serve as a go-to for advice on interpersonal relations when indirect contact is at play. Written in the style of a Greek philosopher, they were written in a setting where people were committing massive collateral damage with their animosity/gullibility/skepticism and they have paved a better modus operandi than many contemporaries can. Confidently asserted but open to at least some change, what would you add?

How round robins work: How they work is a person starts a story by laying out the first sentence, and a reply comes up with the next sentence to the story, and whatever replies to that reply becomes the next sentence, and so on and so forth. So it's like if Twitch wrote a novel, though it's a classic game, one that serves as a remedy for writers' block that also happens to be fun.

First person to reply starts the story.