cacheson

Not from my end, that's what I typed. Kbin and kglitch may be on different versions?

Nope. :/

Ah, I guess it does. What about for kbin magazines? !Animemes

Not sure if it works on kbin? !newcommunities

IRL, but not to scale

Alright, I've hit my limit for dealing with bad faith argument. Maybe you were genuinely trying to be decent, but in any case I'm done.

I was hoping to avoid getting deep enough into this that I have to break out the block quotes myself, but oh well. Here we are.

you shouldn’t make a straw man out of the position of people you disagree with or be uncivil.

I don't think I've been any less charitable than you and weirdwallace75, though. It's not like any of us are steel-manning each others points. And why would we? There's no benefit in this context. It'd just be a longer route to the conclusion that I jumped to early, that we fundamentally disagree and that an internet comments argument with strangers is not going to be sufficient to change any minds. If we were all friends, and frequently spent time discussing things in person, and trusted each other, then sure, maybe we could make some progress. But we're not, and we don't. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

It’s not clear what exactly you’re accusing me of. Mindlessly parroting other peoples’ views?

Sort of? See the definition of talking points. Not necessarily mindless, but certainly low-effort and static. Like, I've seen all of them before. Literally every single anti-gun talking point. They didn't get me to change my mind the first dozen times, so why would they now? They simply do not address the reasons that I am in favor of a well-armed society. As an anarchist, I care about how power is allocated. I want power to be widely distributed, not concentrated. And guns are tools of power.

If what I said is so weak and easily refuted it’s a little strange that the best rebuttal you can come up with is “you’re wrong”.

I didn't say that they were easily refuted. Just as I don't find the talking points convincing, I don't expect you to find the usual responses to them convincing either. We'd just get bogged down in side arguments. However, I also wasn't inclined to concede the point. Which leaves us at "you're wrong".

Why do you think you know what I’m concerned about?

Because you said it yourself? You likened planning for fascist violence to planning for the rapture.

I could be far left,
I could be far right,

You're not. I'm certain enough of it to bet money. Unless this has all been a very weird acting exercise.

none of that would have any bearing on something that comes down to the question of “is this an effective tool for the task”.

It does, though. Your worldview affects your perception of the problem, and your perception of the potential tools for dealing with it. It affects what you pay attention to, what you learn, and what you dismiss. We disagree both on the level of severity and on the effectiveness of each tool, due to our differences in worldview.

I’m a Utilitiarian

I'm not really talking about utilitarianism vs egoism or whatever else, though that could play a small part. I'm more referring to the totality of our worldviews, our mental models of how everything works.

I was hoping to avoid getting deep enough into this that I have to break out the block quotes myself, but oh well. Here we are.

you shouldn’t make a straw man out of the position of people you disagree with or be uncivil.

I don't think I've been any less charitable than you and weirdwallace75, though. It's not like any of us are steel-manning each others points. And why would we? There's no benefit in this context. It'd just be a longer route to the conclusion that I jumped to early, that we fundamentally disagree and that an internet comments argument with strangers is not going to be sufficient to change any minds. If we were all friends, and frequently spent time discussing things in person, and trusted each other, then sure, maybe we could make some progress. But we're not, and we don't. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

It’s not clear what exactly you’re accusing me of. Mindlessly parroting other peoples’ views?

Sort of? See the definition of talking points. Not necessarily mindless, but certainly low-effort and static. Like, I've seen all of them before. Literally every single anti-gun talking point. They didn't get me to change my mind the first dozen times, so why would they now? They simply do not address the reasons that I am in favor of a well-armed society. As an anarchist, I care about how power is allocated. I want power to be widely distributed, not concentrated. And guns are tools of power.

If what I said is so weak and easily refuted it’s a little strange that the best rebuttal you can come up with is “you’re wrong”.

I didn't say that they were easily refuted. Just as I don't find the talking points convincing, I don't expect you to find the usual responses to them convincing either. We'd just get bogged down in side arguments. However, I also wasn't inclined to concede the point. Which leaves us at "you're wrong".

Why do you think you know what I’m concerned about?

Because you said it yourself? You likened planning for fascist violence to planning for the rapture.

I could be far left,
I could be far right,

You're not. I'm certain enough of it to bet money. Unless this has all been a very weird acting exercise.

none of that would have any bearing on something that comes down to the question of “is this an effective tool for the task”.

It does, though. Your worldview affects your perception of the problem, and your perception of the potential tools for dealing with it. It affects what you pay attention to, what you learn, and what you dismiss. We disagree both on the level of severity and on the effectiveness of each tool, due to our differences in worldview.

I’m a Utilitiarian

I'm not really talking about utilitarianism vs egoism or whatever else, though that could play a small part. I'm more referring to the totality of our worldviews, our mental models of how everything works.

Y'all have it rough. When this happens to me, it's pretty much always:

1. I have a dream that there's a spider in my bed
2. I startle awake, and see that there is a spider in my bed
3. I stare at the spider until it fades out of existence

Source is New Game!

Source is New Game!

Hey now, anarchists don't deserve this slander. Moderation typically falls under freedom of association/disassociation, which we're strongly in favor of. The people you have a problem with are the ones that think you should be forced to listen to them, which is pretty contrary to the anarchist ethos.