196
Community Rules
You must post before you leave
Be nice. Assume others have good intent (within reason).
Block or ignore posts, comments, and users that irritate you in some way rather than engaging. Report if they are actually breaking community rules.
Use content warnings and/or mark as NSFW when appropriate. Most posts with content warnings likely need to be marked NSFW.
Most 196 posts are memes, shitposts, cute images, or even just recent things that happened, etc. There is no real theme, but try to avoid posts that are very inflammatory, offensive, very low quality, or very "off topic".
Bigotry is not allowed, this includes (but is not limited to): Homophobia, Transphobia, Racism, Sexism, Abelism, Classism, or discrimination based on things like Ethnicity, Nationality, Language, or Religion.
Avoid shilling for corporations, posting advertisements, or promoting exploitation of workers.
Proselytization, support, or defense of authoritarianism is not welcome. This includes but is not limited to: imperialism, nationalism, genocide denial, ethnic or racial supremacy, fascism, Nazism, Marxism-Leninism, Maoism, etc.
Avoid AI generated content.
Avoid misinformation.
Avoid incomprehensible posts.
No threats or personal attacks.
No spam.
Moderator Guidelines
Moderator Guidelines
- Don’t be mean to users. Be gentle or neutral.
- Most moderator actions which have a modlog message should include your username.
- When in doubt about whether or not a user is problematic, send them a DM.
- Don’t waste time debating/arguing with problematic users.
- Assume the best, but don’t tolerate sealioning/just asking questions/concern trolling.
- Ask another mod to take over cases you struggle with, if you get tired, or when things get personal.
- Ask the other mods for advice when things get complicated.
- Share everything you do in the mod matrix, both so several mods aren't unknowingly handling the same issues, but also so you can receive feedback on what you intend to do.
- Don't rush mod actions. If a case doesn't need to be handled right away, consider taking a short break before getting to it. This is to say, cool down and make room for feedback.
- Don’t perform too much moderation in the comments, except if you want a verdict to be public or to ask people to dial a convo down/stop. Single comment warnings are okay.
- Send users concise DMs about verdicts about them, such as bans etc, except in cases where it is clear we don’t want them at all, such as obvious transphobes. No need to notify someone they haven’t been banned of course.
- Explain to a user why their behavior is problematic and how it is distressing others rather than engage with whatever they are saying. Ask them to avoid this in the future and send them packing if they do not comply.
- First warn users, then temp ban them, then finally perma ban them when they break the rules or act inappropriately. Skip steps if necessary.
- Use neutral statements like “this statement can be considered transphobic” rather than “you are being transphobic”.
- No large decisions or actions without community input (polls or meta posts f.ex.).
- Large internal decisions (such as ousting a mod) might require a vote, needing more than 50% of the votes to pass. Also consider asking the community for feedback.
- Remember you are a voluntary moderator. You don’t get paid. Take a break when you need one. Perhaps ask another moderator to step in if necessary.
view the rest of the comments
Every dumbass voting this down is EXACTLY why we have Dumbass as president.
... don't you think a lot of Trump votes were defensive votes against Hilary/Harris? Telling people to vote against the worse candidate is morbid and devoid of hope.
Elections should be restructured so people aren't forced into 1-on-1 battles. People naturally have more diverse beliefs than a left/right spectrum. The current system was gamed into crisis. Time for an amendment
The system needs to be changed, absolutely.
Do you think that is going be easier with a Democrat in charge or Trump? Given that Trump has already done everything possible to destroy what little voter rights Americans do have. And may not be done.
At this point wouldn't be surprised if he made up some bullshit excuse to cancel the fall elevations all together.
A MAGA Idiot voting for Trump "defensively" against 5 Trans Athletes and non existent people eating cats and dogs un Ohio, are not voting defensivrly, they are stupid and voting stupidly because god for they actually not accept blatant and obvious lies.
Voting "defensively for trump" is like setting your house on fire... defensively!
Your Americentrism is repugnant. Please keep it in your country.
Pretty sure America is the most obvious place this would be referencing.
It has to be a FPTP country, and it has to be a country with so few possible parties that the choices are bad or worse. Not to mention it has to be a country with free and fair elections.
How many countries fit that bill?
Elections in the US are far removed from free and fair, especially now we're past Louisiana v. Callais and SCOTUS can and will veto any efforts by Congress to reform them.
SCoTUS has neither a military nor a law enforcement arm. With enough political will there is nothing they can do to stop court reform.
Ellie Mystal pointed out that was a risk of civil war: If congress were to strip SCOTUS of jurisdiction (no longer decides what is Constitutional or not) and the court then responds by saying that law is unconstitutional, the blue states side with Congress while the red states side with the Court, and we have a crisis that cannot be resolved by institutional procedure.
Personally, I'd like to see more of They've made their ruling, now let them enforce it. But as we recently saw with the Virginia redistricting referendum, their governor obeyed in advance.
That's possible, but the US doesn't have the institutional capacity for civil war. I think that while the possibility of violence is high, actual civil conflict is low.
Civil war will certainly not look like the first one with battle lines, though if we see an interstate conflict, we might see fights over strategic points. The experts I've read suggest there would be flash strikes coordinated the way that flash mobs are, only armed.
We certainly have enough firearms to make for a bloody mess.
Sure, but only paralysis or a split of the US military would leave the result in doubt. There just isn't any group or organization with the capacity to rival the military, or even law enforcement really.
You're assuming that the military would willingly be deployed in the US against civilians. While that has happened with various state National Guard reserves, it is not legal when it comes to the other branches.
This is not to say they won't given that plenty of flag officers have been replaced with MAGA loyalists, but doing so would destroy unit cohesion and would risk mutiny. More likely, so long as the US military remains professional (and not conscripts), they're likely to respond via malicious compliance, much the way parade discipline was lacking during Trump's birthday parade in 2025.
I'm not in the service, but I've heard from many veterans that an attempt to deploy the armed services against US civilians, or to engage in law enforcement action would cause far more problems than it would solve. This is why, when Trump has deployed the Marines on US soil, their duties have been limited to protecting federal buildings and not engaging with civilians, assisting ICE or controlling crowds.
I don't think the organizational capacity exists to be a threat to law enforcement or local or state government.
If there were, I suspect attitudes of the military toward domestic deployment would change.
If, for example, militias succeeded at kidnapping plots against several state governors like the michigan plot against slotkin. Anything that could cridibly be labeled civil war would invite intervention by the military.
Basically there is a huge hill to climb to get to something that could be called a civil war that seems deeply implausible.
Scroll up. You’re scaring the Aussies, Bri’ish, & Deutsche in this /c/.
Finding @uriel238@lemmy.blahaj.zone was talking about omnium California midterms took a secondary retort to press.
Ahistorical take, or rhetorical?
Aren't you Butch Ware, the Green Party vice presidential nominee and candidate for governor of California, and therefore an American?
Elsewhere in this thread, Gormadt told you to run for office. You said "I did", and linked to a news story about Butch Ware messing up the paperwork to run for California governor. So it seemed like you were saying you're Butch Ware, an American.
Lol wait is this actually Butch Ware? No shot...
It's an outrageous claim, but I am not in the habit of disagreeing with people about who they are. Though I may see fit to question perceived inconsistencies.