DivergentHarmonics

Perhaps cool down a bit. You can always block a community that you don't want to see. Taking the nuke out on a whole instance (which is btw. about to install full democracy), just because you dont like a fringe group on there? That's just not the purpose of the defed tool. -- And TD is definitely fringe there and constantly mocked. Sh.itjust.works buddies are making a sport of it, just going there and trying to get thrown out as quickly as possible. They did not break the rules yet so there was no reason to kick them off. If cou want to start a discussion on the topic, you can do so at https://sh.itjust.works/c/agora

Took me a while :-)

Looks very good, like my setting in Boost. One can follow the line now to easily find the parent comment, what's bad about that? Also slightly more accessible for colour-blind people.
... The horizontal line on top of every comment could be a bit more pronounced perhaps. But yeah...

!angryupvote@sh.itjust.works

This is a test. Somehow the system won't let me answer the other comment. Perhaps a sign by the Universe? Hey, it has taken me hours to write that! Could you not tell me earlier. :-)

Well, thank you for taking the time. Perhaps i should strike that example from my post which i specifically wanted to direct towards an ND audience. The thing i wanted to say is rather that those structural issues will get adressed at some point, anyway. Just needed to vent a bit of frustration which i think is typical for many ND minds.

The admin of https://sh.itjust.works informed a few days ago when they had about 1000 users, that storage demand was considerable. People were posting 20 gigabytes per day.
@myersguy@lemmy.simpl.website

I'm pondering a (strong) suggestion to make a global namespace happen (as it should have been done from the beginning). It would not actually be too difficult. It would mean that communities/posts/users could be handled independently from the domain, thereby effectively virtualising domains, and putting communities/users into a distributed directory. All of it can be backward-compatible and transparent to the user. This would help solve several structural problems at once. First one would be the internal links, then possibility of server migration (without breaking links), resilience against loss of domains/servers (easy use federation as backup) and rogue-going server admins ...

I have seen this in so many places now that people come like "this is just not the way you do such a thing", so I'm thinking about making it a lenghty explanatory post first, for comments to be made, because i might have missed some points and the github discussion board is unsuitable for casual human interaction. Will have to read up on ActivityPub before i proceed ... and this is making me a bit sleepless atm ;-)

Yes i get that. And adding the -es makes it 3^rd^ person present. But could we just add a bit of haptic structure to it, perhaps "pottesses"? You see, fewer s-es and more upward pointing letters already makes it bearable.

Sounds about right. It will be sufficient to just look into people's faces generally, or perhaps de-focused. I think it really depends upon how closely related we are to the person. Friends will more likely have direct eye contact, i think. It is also sufficient to look into people's faces for short moments, when speaking to them directly. I trained this when i was younger, until it came naturally, but i'm sometimes still falling back into no-eyes mode. :)

The deep, longer lasting, look in the eyes is indeed reserved for romance, so don't overdo or it might be misunderstood!

Yes! I can't tell how difficult such a personal development would be for anyone else. I appear not to have that difficulty with reading cues so much, plus i took a very special path in life (part-time modern-day hermit), and being on my own, such things took years. And now i'm still switching forth and back between those states. 😅

Maybe i don't quite understand. I just hope that i didn't hurt your feelings with what i said, just because i was unaware of your strong feelings on this topic. If so, then we'd have a complicated situation which also involves slight differences in language and culture. I could not sincerely apologise, and such things might happen again.

Apologising would be wrong, but there are ways to sympathise with the other and at the same time staying at eye level.

Here is where i come from:
I have been on both sides. Being constantly hurt by people not being sensitive enough, and seeing that as their responsibility, hence making them responsible for my feelings. OTOH, falsely apologising too much, saying "sorry" when there was no need to, and therefore being self-degrading.

During my process i came to the conclusion that both is not right. There is no "crime of offending", so to say -- not even if an offence was intended (but that's the advanced "peaceful warrior" class). It is in fact my own "ego" that was (falsely) alarming me of being attacked. (The word "ego" is antiquated but shall suffice here.)
The others do as they do, so it is up to me to actually decide if i want to feel hurt or not. Therefore, it is indeed in the receivers responsibility (ability to respond!). Talking about adults of course; it's different with minors. --
I found out that i am free to choose if i want to feel offended or not. So i chose not to but instead try to get a better understanding of the sender. It became very hard to hurt my feelings because i can "shield" my receiver, to find it rather interesting to get to look into other people's sets. (Conflict situations play a valuable part when i do process/shadow work with others.) -- I also feel the need to apologise very rarely; mostly when i was really being ignorant, and i often remind others that there is nothing to apologise about when there was just some misunderstanding or such.

I read that comment chain again which you are referring to, and had to read it twice because there seemed to be a contradiction. So if you don't mind, i can tell what discrepancy there is. May this help solve the puzzle. Here is what i see happen:

• The sender does some action or says something, ignorant or unknowing of the fact that their action can hurt you. They had no intention to do so, and the receiver acknowledges that.
• Still, the receiver feels hurt.
• The receiver als acknowledges that the sender can not be forced to apologise because such an apology would be false. Demanding it could lead to the sender going offensive and telling the receiver to just "cope with it".

I solved this for myself by replacing the middle part. If there was no offence intended, then i can choose not to be hurt, but react in a different way. The best way to go is open communication if possible: "I know you didn't mean it and i'm not blaming you, but i must let you know that you just met a very sensitive point in me. I would like to tell you ..."

But! ... There is another desire here at play, and that appears to be the receiver's need that their feelings be addressed in a comforting way. An apology will not really have that effect anyway; that rather works toward building awareness in the sender. I think what the receiver desires is being helped back on their feet rather than the sender being knocked to the ground for revenge. Therefore, this is asking not for a feel of guilt -- but for compassion. 🙂