Isn’t this something that the fediverse was explicitly designed to support?
We’re making fun of them for making use of one of the foundational features of the platform?
If they don’t like it there, they can move again. And again. Or host their own instance.
Idk what this creepy vicarious butthurt is about, or why it has become so popular.
I mean this kind of a perfect example of doing the thing where you blow shit up over an extremely pedantic issue which is at best tangentially related to the core ethic, specifically because you view nuance itself as a threat. As far as purity tests dissolving into self parody, I’m not sure there’s a better example for veganism.
And I say this as a person who otherwise sympathizes with vegans, but often finds them insufferable. Self awareness is the vaccine to self parody.
If they choose to migrate to another instance, it will likely be a more extremist instance with poor moderation that has been significantly defederated.
In theory this is how it should work, but in practice the toxic people tend to move to general purpose more laissez-faire places like .world or .ml, which makes de-federating and cutting off 30% of all users a difficult decision for anyone trying to have a community.
The answer is less centralization, but that can’t be forced. beehaw.org (for example) made the decision to cut off .world and they are better for it. But they are a large-ish instance in their own right.
I didn’t say extremist I said toxic but really anyone who’s poorly socialized will go where they’re allowed, which in Lemmy terms means general catch-all instances with loose moderation like .world and .ml.
One study estimated 1% of cat owners feed their cat a vegan diet. Why do you think that might be? Are they all extremist animal abusers? Or is it possible you had an assumption that turned out to be wrong and now don’t know how to reconcile?
Sure you can ally yourself with the CCP and that might be totally legal (if they collect any personal data and send it overseas to China then that would be breaking the law but it’s unlikely) but that doesn’t mean it isn’t frowned upon.
I have opinions on a lot of things that don’t effect me at all. Palestinian genocide, Uighurs in sweatshops, child labor laws in other states, homeless people being harassed, the socioeconomic shift of Hong Kong losing independent legal rights.
I can respect their freedom to ally themselves to people who wish them direct harm, but I also have the freedom to express my disappointment in them.
Yes and no. The theory is that each instance is supposed to be more specialized, kind of like the old BBS that used to be rampant on the internet. If you are moving to an instance just because people disagree with you instead to have more discussion over a specific topic that is not really in line with the purpose of the fediverse.
Isn’t this something that the fediverse was explicitly designed to support?
We’re making fun of them for making use of one of the foundational features of the platform?
If they don’t like it there, they can move again. And again. Or host their own instance.
Idk what this creepy vicarious butthurt is about, or why it has become so popular.
Circle jerking against vegans is a pasttime of the Internet denizens
Yeah, but it’s a pretty pathetic passtime. At least find a good reason, rather than doing literally the thing you want them to do.
Like, insulting them for leaving is just as bad as them crying that their toxic behavior scares people away. It makes no sense.
I mean this kind of a perfect example of doing the thing where you blow shit up over an extremely pedantic issue which is at best tangentially related to the core ethic, specifically because you view nuance itself as a threat. As far as purity tests dissolving into self parody, I’m not sure there’s a better example for veganism.
And I say this as a person who otherwise sympathizes with vegans, but often finds them insufferable. Self awareness is the vaccine to self parody.
People do not understand vegans. As cats can be healthy on a plant-based diet with taurine which is supported by science yet people are saying we’re animal abusers spreading misinformation lol
Like a family camping trip, classic fun. Pitch a tent, start a fire, roast some vegans and sing kumbaya
Some people are not mature enough to handle the vegan perspective.
deleted by creator
Nah, eating and using animals is the extremist way of doing things.
In theory this is how it should work, but in practice the toxic people tend to move to general purpose more laissez-faire places like .world or .ml, which makes de-federating and cutting off 30% of all users a difficult decision for anyone trying to have a community.
The answer is less centralization, but that can’t be forced. beehaw.org (for example) made the decision to cut off .world and they are better for it. But they are a large-ish instance in their own right.
So if you dont agree with someone they are an extremist, got it.
You are aware vegan cats exist right? Like its already a thing, and its being studied.
https://news.uoguelph.ca/2021/03/u-of-g-researchers-first-to-study-health-effects-of-vegan-diets-on-cats/
Y’all are so confidently wrong about stuff its crazy, and then y’all pat yourselves in the back for all grouping up and agreeing together.
Just because a lot of people are on one side of a position does not make it the right position, you must be aware there is more to think about right?
I didn’t say extremist I said toxic but really anyone who’s poorly socialized will go where they’re allowed, which in Lemmy terms means general catch-all instances with loose moderation like .world and .ml.
One study estimated 1% of cat owners feed their cat a vegan diet. Why do you think that might be? Are they all extremist animal abusers? Or is it possible you had an assumption that turned out to be wrong and now don’t know how to reconcile?
ok, you already lost me
Yes, if you are not feeding your pet a proper diet and are allowing it to suffer, you are an animal abuser.
Sure you can ally yourself with the CCP and that might be totally legal (if they collect any personal data and send it overseas to China then that would be breaking the law but it’s unlikely) but that doesn’t mean it isn’t frowned upon.
That’s a stretch, but even assuming it’s true, why do you care enough about their community to frown upon it?
I have opinions on a lot of things that don’t effect me at all. Palestinian genocide, Uighurs in sweatshops, child labor laws in other states, homeless people being harassed, the socioeconomic shift of Hong Kong losing independent legal rights.
I can respect their freedom to ally themselves to people who wish them direct harm, but I also have the freedom to express my disappointment in them.
It’s just disguised metadrama. They joined the instances this instance doesn’t like.
And so they’re moving, and somehow y’all are… Upset about it??? Make it make sense
Yes and no. The theory is that each instance is supposed to be more specialized, kind of like the old BBS that used to be rampant on the internet. If you are moving to an instance just because people disagree with you instead to have more discussion over a specific topic that is not really in line with the purpose of the fediverse.