quarkw's recent activity
-
Comment on A daily tea routine partially protects people from heavy metals, study finds in ~food
-
Comment on Midweek Movie Free Talk in ~movies
quarkw Link ParentThis is probably not really what you were looking for, but I recently found out from a friend that there's a website/app that gives the best times to go to the bathroom during a movie. Most of the...This is probably not really what you were looking for, but I recently found out from a friend that there's a website/app that gives the best times to go to the bathroom during a movie.
Most of the info is on their app, not the website, and from my quick peek it does seem to also give the length of the end credits on some movies.
-
Comment on Weekly US politics news and updates thread - week of February 17 in ~society
quarkw Link ParentMaybe I didn't make it clear in the context of our broader discussion about toxic rhetoric, but this is not the kind of dark humor I was talking about. It's not at all related to the particular...It's more "hey sure won't get anything done on that farm if we don't have our meds, lol, gods I hope it doesn't happen"
Maybe I didn't make it clear in the context of our broader discussion about toxic rhetoric, but this is not the kind of dark humor I was talking about. It's not at all related to the particular type of dark humor I pointed out that has a hateful component and thrives on 4chan. There's nothing wrong with this humor. It's not toxic or offensive.
If it requires hour long therapy sessions to convince people not to respond that way, that's an unreasonable expectation of most people.
I don't know why you keep bringing this up, as if it's something I'm advocating that you do. It's not.
When what is meant is that you cannot, should not make the white cis men and women "majority" feel bad and who cares how bad everyone else feels, they should just be nicer, again.
I'm not sure why there's such an allergic reaction to not making a certain demographic feel bad. They did make up nearly 70% of the vote in 2024. At the very least it's a very pragmatic thing to do.
I don't truck with being compared to racist/homophobic/antisemitic, everything, 4chan because I think a lady with a really bad take finally realizes she didn't get cheaper cheese. I don't want her to die, to suffer, to be harmed, to be sent to camps, to have her education or family ripped away. Those things aren't the same.
I didn't say they were the same. And I wasn't talking about jokes about cheese lady in particular. I have no idea who cheese lady is. I'm pointing out flaws that we as people have, especially in groups. It doesn't mean those flaws manifest in the same way. There's nothing on the level of the hatred that goes on at 4chan but there is bigotry that gets masked by jokes on the left.
And my intention of pointing these out is not to insult you. It's so that we can acknowledge them and use that knowledge to better ourselves. We should always be looking to improve and grow.
-
Comment on Weekly US politics news and updates thread - week of February 17 in ~society
quarkw Link ParentI agree this is really important to do, and is part of the solution I don't see why we can't do both Strong disagree here. There are other ways to keep moral up. You're going to balk at this...Guys calling out their male friends on misogyny, for example, stops the social acceptability of sexist comments which begins the process of change. A "not cool bro" moves mountains. That's the sort of place we should start
I agree this is really important to do, and is part of the solution
not "don't vent too toxic online among strangers."
I don't see why we can't do both
If we don't find joy,
evenespecially in dark humor, we'll lose the will to keep fighting.Strong disagree here. There are other ways to keep moral up. You're going to balk at this comparison but edgy and dark humor is the exact reason why places like 4chan are the cesspools of the internet. Dark and edgy humor is fine for the people who are in on joking about the hateful parts of those jokes. But it gives an alibi to the people who join in and say the hateful parts non-ironically.
Btw, cheese slice lady isn't interested in absolutely any conversation about her vote
Again, my argument for being less toxic has nothing to do with converting cheese slice lady. Cheese slice lady isn't the only person who sees comments on her video. It's a broader cultural issue and how your political slice is seen by the general apolitical public.
I don't think whoever posted
More unemployable people whining about their free handouts being taken away. We are done paying for "we wuz kangs" and weirdo musicals in Ireland.
would even entertain my "lecture". Why would I direct my lecture at them?
Also like I said, this is constructive criticism. They're on the other side of the aisle, politically speaking, from me. Accept or reject my constructive criticism; why would I direct it towards them? Do you want me advocating and strategizing for the republicans?
-
Comment on Weekly US politics news and updates thread - week of February 17 in ~society
quarkw Link ParentYou're right, that's my mistake. We're having a conversation in a public forum, so when I say "you" a lot of the time it's in the general sense and for the benefit of those who may be reading but...I was never arguing that. But that's where that miscommunication happened.
You're right, that's my mistake.
I think our disconnect is that I know how to change people's minds. You keep explaining it
We're having a conversation in a public forum, so when I say "you" a lot of the time it's in the general sense and for the benefit of those who may be reading but are not actively participating in the thread.
There's not a learnable lesson when we already know it. But I cannot make him empathize with me if those identity pieces are key ... And that's why the onus should be on people with those shared identities.
I haven't seen any evidence that people are practicing these "already known" lessons, so whether it's already known is moot. And yeah, if you can't connect with and relate and have some kind of shared identity on some level, then you'll have trouble changing someone's mind.
The friends of those people making horrible Facebook comments. The family members, the people colleagues with similar experiences that makes it easy to relate to.
That would be ideal, but the current political environment doesn't really foster talking about politics with friends and family. That kind of plays into one of the reasons why I am vilifying rhetoric that you disagree as being toxic. Because I think that kind of behavior might seem benign, but I think it fosters an environment which inhibits those kinds of discussions from actually happening.
But continuing to roast the lady the whole said she voted for Trump because of the cost of pre-sliced name brand cracker cut cheese? I don't give her views but I love a good "could someone check on the cheese lady and see how her grocery bill is?" comment. If that's too toxic then I'll just have to settle for being put in whatever work farm camp RFK Jr sets up for ADHD people.
I think we'll just have to agree to disagree here.
-
Comment on Weekly US politics news and updates thread - week of February 17 in ~society
quarkw Link ParentYou can absolutely vent without being toxic. Someone around you being a Trump voter shouldn't change that. I think we're having some core misunderstanding of each other and I'm not sure where...You can absolutely vent without being toxic. Someone around you being a Trump voter shouldn't change that.
I think we're having some core misunderstanding of each other and I'm not sure where exactly. I think you're still on the original point of this thread, and I've moved onto a slightly different topic.
This thread started with how to get Trump voters to listen, and I think that's why you're talking about reaching out to and educating people. Which is a different point from what I've been discussing for the bulk of the thread but I'll address that.
It's great that you do that. If you got the impression that I think you're opposed to that, there was some miscommunication that happened somewhere.
As for setting a boundary that people need to acknowledge harm done, I agree, but why not make it as easy as possible for those people to do that? It doesn't need to be the first thing they say. It can be easier for it to be a journey. And it's not the first nor the last step of that journey.
I watched a number of videos but no, not an hour long, I watched most of what happened before the other guy got involved and did not find him open to the very positive and thoughtful responses he got.
Pulling from a previous comment up the thread: I linked the conversation that those two farmers had. In that video the younger farmer did end up admitting he was wrong, and IMO showed that he was working to educate himself and be open to learning new things about how politics affect other people.
We didn't lose because we didn't reach out to the right. Dems did that, extensively.
I'm not saying that the left isn't reaching out to the right. I'm saying the dems are reaching out in a way that isn't working.
Trump is popular because he's an amazing salesman. You may not buy into what he's selling but a lot of people do. The dems are terrible at selling. They need to get better.
And that brings me back to that longer form conversation I linked to. If you watch it, the older farmer is constantly giving the younger farmer easy outs. He'll ask a somewhat challenging question and then immediately follow up with: "If you're not comfortable answering, that's ok". He's making the journey easy. That's part of what an effective salesman does. If who you're talking to feels trapped or cornered or like they have no way out, they'll either get themselves out and remove themselves from the conversation or become defensive.
Before you said you "did not find him open to the very positive and thoughtful responses he got". From that conversation, it's clear that he has the capability to be open. But for whatever reason those previous responses didn't get to him. Why did he listen to this older guy? Is it because they're both white men? That probably helped, but I think that distracts from the learnable lesson from this.
To get someone to change their mind it's easier if you get on their side somehow first and establish a connection. Why should this guy listen to other random people? This guy connected first: "Oh hey, we're both farmers. Our community has been lied to and misled by fox news and right wing talk radio." And then he gives the younger guy some agency and gives him the offer to reach out.
-
Comment on Weekly US politics news and updates thread - week of February 17 in ~society
quarkw Link ParentWhat I'm asking of people is not to talk people out of a cult mentality. It's to be mindful of your own toxicity and try and avoid it. I didn't say you couldn't vent. I'm saying not to be toxic....What I'm asking of people is not to talk people out of a cult mentality. It's to be mindful of your own toxicity and try and avoid it.
I didn't say you couldn't vent. I'm saying not to be toxic.
Also, from your rhetoric of being slapped in the face, we're talking about appealing to different demographics. You're arguing that it's not worth appealing to anyone because some people might be impossible to reach.
constant berating to be nicer
Am I berating? If I am, I'm sorry. But can you really characterize my comments as berating and then say that the left doesn't have any problem with toxicity?
-
Comment on Weekly US politics news and updates thread - week of February 17 in ~society
quarkw Link ParentThere's a far cry between what I'm asking for and being a therapist, IMO. I feel it's disingenuous to equate the two. I'm giving constructive criticism. I want the dems to beat the republicans, so...There's a far cry between what I'm asking for and being a therapist, IMO. I feel it's disingenuous to equate the two.
I'm giving constructive criticism. I want the dems to beat the republicans, so of course I'm not giving constructive criticism towards the right.
There's lots of reasons the dems lost this time around. A lot of it is out of our control. I'm trying to address the things that we can control. And it seems like every time I do that I'm met with pushback, with things like "we shouldn't have to do that" or "it's not fair". That may be true, but if we don't improve, how will we win?
-
Comment on Weekly US politics news and updates thread - week of February 17 in ~society
quarkw (edited )Link ParentThis is pretty baseless conjecture IMO. Did you listen to the hour long conversation that they had? I don't think it's infantilizing to recognize that people are emotional and full of biases and...That farmer would probably really only listen to the older white male farmer who responded to him. He wasn't listening to anyone else, no matter how hard they tried. He certainly didn't listen to any number of the wide variety of people ahead of time.
This is pretty baseless conjecture IMO. Did you listen to the hour long conversation that they had?
I don't think it's infantilizing to recognize that people are emotional and full of biases and heuristics that can escape logic and rationality without them being aware of it. We're all susceptible to it.
I think most of your most recent comment doesn't at all address what my last comment was focusing on. Let's discount any one-on-one discourse. I'll take a concrete example: Let's say there's an article shared on bsky about a trump voter who ends up on the short end of one of his policies.
It's pretty common to see enthusiastic proclamations of FAFO on these kinds of articles. This is what I'm talking about. This kind of response is toxic, unproductive, and comes from the exact tribalistic human nature that results in conservatives espousing things like "libtards" or reveling in "owning the libs". It's the other side of the exact same coin. Go ahead and justify it as joking or whatever you want. That's exactly what the other side does too. It doesn't make it better.
-
Comment on Weekly US politics news and updates thread - week of February 17 in ~society
quarkw Link ParentYou're right. Sorry, I did do that a bit. I think that happened partially because I was responding on mobile and on the app it's difficult to reference a comment while you're replying to it. I...I think you ignored everything else I said in favor of the same sort of "if you can't say anything nice, don't say anything at all" rhetoric that we consistently hear
You're right. Sorry, I did do that a bit. I think that happened partially because I was responding on mobile and on the app it's difficult to reference a comment while you're replying to it. I think we're largely on the same page and are doing a bit of talking past each other. I think the missing part that I haven't said is that yes, some people are not worth engaging with at all.
a few days ago they were calling for my friend's deportation to a concentration camp, or they're currently calling me a liar who doesn't need meds for being concerned about RFK's proposals, why do I have to sway them and not the millions of non-voters instead? How many times do we reach a hand out only to have it bitten?
It sounds like these two people you're talking about are potentially MAGA diehards?
Yes we should be swaying the non-voters and those closer to the middle.
Trump voters aren't a monolith. There's more similarities between a non-voter and someone who voted for Trump because they've been misled but think he's deplorable than with someone who is diehard MAGA.
As I said, most people aren't actually saying FAFO to trump voters, some are, but most aren't, they're saying FAFO to other people that agree them.
You're right. Most people aren't having personal conversations across the aisle. This being said among people who agree doesn't make it better. It makes it worse. It is out in the open where it's directed at anyone who voted for Trump, not a single person who you're having a conversation with. Even if it's in a private setting, are you absolutely sure no one in your group is a quiet Trump voter?
You have three rough groups in the US, politically. Two in-groups: straight dem and straight republican voters. And a third, who identify as independent even if they might vote mostly on one side or the other.
Like you said, stuff like FAFO, is a form of self-soothing. It's a form of self soothing that's harmful. You're perhaps building some camaraderie within the in-group, but it's a horrible look from the outside. How is that behavior conducive to swaying people in the middle, who aren't in the in-group?
-
Comment on Weekly US politics news and updates thread - week of February 17 in ~society
quarkw Link ParentI don’t think this is the magical solution all on its own, but even if it was, I don’t see how any of that validates pushback to this idea of being more sympathetic and compassionate? And to me...I don’t think this is the magical solution all on its own, but even if it was, I don’t see how any of that validates pushback to this idea of being more sympathetic and compassionate?
And to me this idea encapsulates: if you don’t have the emotional bandwidth to be kind, don’t engage.
-
Comment on Weekly US politics news and updates thread - week of February 17 in ~society
quarkw Link ParentBeing mean because they were first doesn’t strike me as setting a boundary. It’s an excuse to hurt because you’re hurt, which is a classic way that bullying gets spread. I’m sorry about the...Being mean because they were first doesn’t strike me as setting a boundary. It’s an excuse to hurt because you’re hurt, which is a classic way that bullying gets spread.
I’m sorry about the vitriol and hate that you receive. I can’t make up for it, and if you don’t have the emotional bandwidth to graciously reply to those that find out the consequences of their vote (although my call for sympathy and graciousness extends to a lot more situations than just that), that’s more than ok. In that case I’m not asking you to be gracious or sympathetic. I’m asking you not to engage, and to take care of yourself.
Being angry releases dopamine and feels good. It’s why people get addicted to Fox News. It affects everyone on social media. And it’s not saying there aren’t valid reasons to be angry. Just be cognizant of the beast that’s being fed and how your brain is, and may have already been rewired.
-
Comment on Weekly US politics news and updates thread - week of February 17 in ~society
quarkw Link ParentI think I’m misunderstanding what you mean here. Is it self-care to throw FAFO in Trump voter’s faces when they realize Trump’s admin is hurting them? A lot of Trump voters didn’t identify with...It's not about sacrificing pride, but about self-respect and the willingness to take care of yourself in a bad situation.
I think I’m misunderstanding what you mean here. Is it self-care to throw FAFO in Trump voter’s faces when they realize Trump’s admin is hurting them? A lot of Trump voters didn’t identify with MAGA, and I don’t think that should matter anyways for being compassionate.
I think it would be healthier and more effective to say: “Hey, that really sucks that you’re being affected”, and encourage them to find out other ways they could be negatively affected, and how others, including people in their community are being negatively affected.
-
Comment on Weekly US politics news and updates thread - week of February 17 in ~society
quarkw (edited )Link ParentYou’re absolutely right! By saying that, he makes it very easy for him to switch sides. Why would you make it hard for someone to switch sides? Make it easy, and after they’ve switched it’ll be...You’re absolutely right!
By saying that, he makes it very easy for him to switch sides. Why would you make it hard for someone to switch sides? Make it easy, and after they’ve switched it’ll be easier to admit that they messed up. This guy has incredible emotional intelligence.
And like you said this applies to a lot of people. It’s human nature to get defensive when accused of being wrong. It probably applies to you and me. My pants would be on fire if i said I’ve never reacted defensively and emotionally, or dug my heels in when I was wrong.
-
Comment on Weekly US politics news and updates thread - week of February 17 in ~society
quarkw (edited )Link ParentYou're definitely right, but I think that view misses a crucial point on why these people didn't "learn the first time around". And like you mentioned, that response does nothing, and could...You're definitely right, but I think that view misses a crucial point on why these people didn't "learn the first time around". And like you mentioned, that response does nothing, and could actually be harmful, in actually effecting change.
Lots of people are politically distrustful and ignorant, and a lot of those people voted for Trump. They don't feel like government makes a difference in their life (and in many cases they're wrong), and so they don't tune in to politics and even actively avoid it. And they also don't talk with family/friends about politics because the risk of blowing up friendships because they have a view that might not be PC is just not worth the risk. These people didn't learn from the 1st trump administration because for many of them, they didn't feel any negative effects during the first admin. That's changing because the administration is enacting project 2025 somewhat clumsily. There were people who were looking up if Joe Biden had dropped out on election day.
You can criticize these people for being, perhaps willfully, ignorant. You can make fun of them. But how do you reach out to them? How do you educate them?
This kind of ties into what I've been talking about on other threads here. How do you reach people who have insulated themselves from discussions about politics? There's a big lack of online media (mostly podcasts IMO) that is casual, and touches on politics from a left-leaning perspective. Think stuff like Joe Rogan. Some of this can probably be attributed to moneyed interests and influence, but I honestly think most of it comes down to a lot of the purity testing that goes on in the left. If you don't stand inline 100% with the left, then you get vilified and morally criticized for it. With that kind of culture, how can casual political talk exist?
This follow up video with the two farmers from that original video having a longer in-depth conversation gives some insights into what might have led a right-leaning independent American to vote for Trump in 2024, and what made them realize Trump was the wrong person to vote for. It'll help you understand the challenges of reaching these voters. The conversation starts about an hour in and is an hour long but I strongly recommend listening to it.
-
Comment on Weekly US politics news and updates thread - week of February 17 in ~society
quarkw LinkSaw this and thought it was worth sharing here: https://bsky.app/profile/misspunklesmom.bsky.social/post/3lihbvuoflc2x From the linked video itself (it's pretty short and I think worth watching) I...Saw this and thought it was worth sharing here:
https://bsky.app/profile/misspunklesmom.bsky.social/post/3lihbvuoflc2xHe says what we've been shouting that MAGA just wouldn't hear but he says it in a way that some of them will hear. He's a rural farmer who speaks how they speak.
@hcrichardson.bsky.social
I posted 4 you to watch bec I think he's the missing link in our messaging. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O4CRk0J7ZPoFrom the linked video itself (it's pretty short and I think worth watching)
All I'm here to tell you is that you were lied to. I'm not asking you to admit you were wrong, I'm not telling you FAFOed, because I don't want you to lose your farm, and if there's anything I can do to help you not lose your farm I'd be happy to do it
I think the OP got it wrong. It's not that he "speaks how they speak". There's a sympathy that he has that is very extremely rare among the left, especially if you look at social media, when it comes to people who have been misled by disinformation.
-
Comment on Peeves, opinions, and hot takes about style in ~humanities.languages
quarkw Link ParentIf you have an iPhone double space turns into a period and a space. I believe that's the default on MacOS as well, although I have it disabled since I'm also a programmer. I do put punctuation...If you have an iPhone double space turns into a period and a space. I believe that's the default on MacOS as well, although I have it disabled since I'm also a programmer.
I do put punctuation inside quotations because that's what I learned, but when I learned it it never felt right for exactly the reason you said. I'm accustomed to it now so it feels right, although I don't believe putting punctuation outside feels wrong to me; so I might attempt switching over. Like your double-spacing, it might be a hard habit to break.
As a side note, I thought this thread was going to be about fashion when I clicked into it 😂
-
Comment on What insights do you have as to why and how the US right is accepting blatant corruption and why the government cuts are so extreme and unrelated to stated goals? in ~society
quarkw Link ParentIt's not actually super clear if Trump's approval is declining if you look at the aggregate. Don't cite individual polls/pollsters, as there's going to be natural noise and it can be easy to...It's not actually super clear if Trump's approval is declining if you look at the aggregate. Don't cite individual polls/pollsters, as there's going to be natural noise and it can be easy to accidentally misrepresent individual data points.
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/favorability/donald-trump/
Edit:
I didn't realize favorability and approval are two different things?
Seems like there is an increase in disapproval since inauguration -
Comment on How nine popular YouTubers helped US President Donald Trump win a second term in ~society
quarkw Link ParentTo be clear I don't think outright lying and deceiving is the way either. I think our wires got a bit crossed there. But thanks for the thoughtful conversation. We could probably go back and forth...To be clear I don't think outright lying and deceiving is the way either. I think our wires got a bit crossed there.
But thanks for the thoughtful conversation. We could probably go back and forth forever, but after the past few days, this small back and forth has given me some hope for the world, so keep on doing you!
-
Comment on How nine popular YouTubers helped US President Donald Trump win a second term in ~society
quarkw Link ParentThis to me, although is not the shitslinging that you've mentioned, has the same energy of calling anyone who disagrees on any of these topics as dumb. And I think the big obfuscator is that I...Left or right, we do need to break down the issues into subtleties. In this instance, It's not that you're a moron for disagreeing with anyone. But if you spread hate, then yes: you are immoral (almost by definition) and are not worth acknowledging. "Your body my choice", all the transphobia, and the rise of racism is indeed spreading hate. you should definitely understand this by 6th grade, so education level is irrelevant unless the instigators are literally 10.
This to me, although is not the shitslinging that you've mentioned, has the same energy of calling anyone who disagrees on any of these topics as dumb. And I think the big obfuscator is that I think a lot of these people don't necessarily have corrupt morals, but are deeply misunderstood. There are of course, some people who are morally bankrupt. But to put forward my shitty analogy of the day, it's as if a lot of people have a compass that is properly calibrated to point north, but are being misled by a magnet of disinformation. And avoiding misinformation or information that is designed to feed your emotions for engagement is incredibly difficult. I'd be lying if I haven't fallen for ragebait disinformation recently.
And while the specific things you mentioned are clearcut morally, I don't think most people give credit to how nuanced related topics can be.
And that's what I avoid on the internet (hence why I'm here trying to introspect and sympathize, and not on Twitter/Bluesky)
I sympathize with this so much, and waver between just avoiding those parts of the internet altogether, or trying to detoxify them but it feels like a drop in the ocean. I think there's so much to gain from amplifying and manufacturing toxic voices so that people shout past each other to distract from the real issues, and it feels impossible to fight.
try millenia. It's much more basic and comes down to people in-grouping and fighting different groups.
I agree, that a lot of problems come down to our human psychology and tribal tendencies. If that's something that we can't change, should we just shrug our shoulders at instances of it and say we can't do anything about it?
So the question isn't "men going right". It's "Men not voting". As I said, Shultz is a polarizer: he's not turning men to his viewpoints, he's appealing to and energizing men who already had those thoughts deep down.
And that's why I (and I believe Cuban) brought up this podcast. It gives apolitical (mostly) men some info on politics. I'm not here to argue the slant of those politics because I'm not arguing that Schultz's podcast in particular is important.
And for the term "polarizer," it assumes that there's a center point that can be identified and anyone who falls to either side of that falls deeper into whatever side of the centerpoint they are. But what determines that centerpoint? Does that centerpoint even exist? Why haven't we seen so many of these apolitical podcasts that polarize men to the left? Some of it can be explained by things like amplification and funding by Russia, but I don't think that's the only reason. Why haven't we seen these pop up for the left? What's stopping the left from financially supporting these types of podcasts that push people left?
There's going to be zero energy if another Bernie-esque candidate gets screwed over
I think this solidifies that we're on the same page, even if we disagree how to get there. Which brings me back to your first statement.
It's hard to say. I did introspect, my conclusion and main worry is whether we do things "the wrong way", all for the sake of gathering votes. I'm not sure if it's the ethical approach.
And it's hard to say how to approach things ethically. I think what should be the main issue (class) is hard to focus on when minority rights are facing active attacks of legislation.
I would argue that the "most wrong way" to do things is in a way that never gets us to our goal.
Ultimately I think too many people are struggling, which makes it hard for them to focus on minorities' rights if they're not personally affected. If you're struggling and you're able to maintain that focus, that's amazing and fantastic! But I don't think we can condemn those that don't have that capability. By prioritizing class first we can give those people the breathing room they need to put their attention on those topics, so we can give minorities the protections that they need and deserve.
Just a caution to be skeptical of the commentary and interpretation by pop-sci journalists (or really anyone, including me) on the impacts and significance of studies
And here are a few studies showing that ground coffee can remove heavy metals from water
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/249917010_Adsorption_of_Heavy_Metals_by_Exhausted_Coffee_Grounds_as_a_Potential_Treatment_Method_for_Waste_Water
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/301678474_Lead_Removal_from_Water_by_Adsorption_on_Spent_Coffee_Grounds#:~:text=Spent%20coffee,Arabica%20variety.