You get points for being an environmentalist but lose points for accusing any differing opinion of being the result of drug use. That cliche is often used on autistic people to attack them for thinking differently. You should try making your point without cliches.

Crysis. I first played it in the mid 10s having heard it was groundbreaking, and… eh. Military shooter where white people go to africa/middleeast and have gunfights in the most boring washed out brown environments imaginable. The suit abilities were kinda cool but I’ve just played that template so many times before, it’s not fun anymore and it wasn’t fun anymore 10 years ago. It was barely fun 15 years ago.

They are doing it because it gets people talking and thinking about climate collapse, and that leads to solutions.

The middle two are an enby and a trans woman

It’s naive to assume all moderators will make sensible decisions when you don’t know them.

For code I use chagpt for first pass questions. Then I try compiling it and see if gpt is telling the truth

Thanks for the response, that all sounds reasonable. One more question:

What happens if I attack someone’s actions and they feel personally attacked? For example, I might say that driving a petrol car, in 100% of cases, will contribute to a child’s chance of developing lung cancer. Another commenter who drives a car may then subjectively feel that they are being called a child murderer. I have stated an unbiased fact, but they have come to a completely logical conclusion and feel upset by that conclusion. So do we act as though I stated the emotional conclusion, or just the unbiased fact?

I’m concerned about the definitions of some of the terms in these rules

• What does it mean to be kind? Do you have to agree with everyone? Are you allowed to say the fuck word?

• What does it mean to attack other people? Are we talking ad hominem, or is making an argument with a stern tone of voice an attack?

• Where is the line between opinion and action drawn? Is it okay to attack people for driving cars? That’s not an opinion, it’s an action, and it kills people, but I have a feeling certain people would say no anyway

• What is a double post? Do you mean repost or crosspost?

I’m disabled. I can barely deal with normal amounts of noise. Banning cars and ads would go a long way to making me less disabled, but unfortunately I just have a lower tolerance for attention violence, and we live in a society of frequent attention violence.

Well I’m a Star Trek fan, and I’m optimistic that maybe the community between the stars is less narrow minded than the people on Earth today

Maybe climate change is the reason why. It’s a great filter that requires long term thinking and global cooperation to overcome. Maybe all the species similar to modern humanity end up polluting themselves back to the stone age and have to try again.

Oh, you mean like how I don’t believe in an objective reality beyond my senses because of absence of evidence. And how believing in reality because you don’t personally agree with the evidence against it is unsound.

You just described the subjective experience of joining every religion

there is a zero chance we’ve made contact with non Earth life

Yeah! Because heavier than air flight is impossible, and there’s no way aliens could hold enough helium to fly to another planet!

(Our ideas about what is possible change as our technology advances)

The BITE classification was invented in order to justify hatred of small religions, by taking a word that already had a meaning (cult) and attaching a second, pejorative meaning to it. It’s like if I write a fantasy novel with a species of evil creatures called jews. Jew is already a word, and it’s a horrific act of religious persecution to take a pre-existing word for marginalised religions and spin it into an unrelated negative.

No, cults are small religions, this is a big religion