this post was submitted on 21 Sep 2023
273 points (97.9% liked)

Asklemmy

43945 readers
597 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy 🔍

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

  1. Open-ended question
  2. Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
  3. Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
  4. Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
  5. An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Inspired by this Jon Bois video where body builders argue about the number of days in a week.

PLEASE be sure to include a link or screen cap.

Edit: thanks to 18107 for a li k to the original

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] booty@hexbear.net 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Self-opinionated

what the fuck does that even mean? are you just typing shit? this is why people call you names

[–] redballooon@lemm.ee 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)
[–] wtypstanaccount04@hexbear.net 5 points 1 year ago

So when you have opinions and you express those opinions. Sounds like you're pretty self-opinionated about certain topics because you've chosen to snarkily quote the dictionary.

[–] booty@hexbear.net 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

1 as in opinionated

so it's like "irregardless"

in other words, yes, you're just saying shit

[–] redballooon@lemm.ee 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Among the synonyms: dogmatic, stubborn.

I think that carries an overall appropriate meaning.

[–] booty@hexbear.net 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

you're also "self-opinionated" the only difference is that the opinions you're stubborn about are wrong

[–] redballooon@lemm.ee 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Look, I weakly challenged the original commenter on a basis which I actually observed in the real world.

Since then I only was challenged back in the forms of belittling and insults.

Not one word about why NATO would not be a defensive alliance. I left loooots of room for that in my initial response. But no, only insults, and now I am challenged because of the use of a nuanced english word that you people choose to not understand. This is ridiculous.

I was indifferent before, but after this experience I support defederating hexbear.

[–] booty@hexbear.net 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I was indifferent before, but after this experience I support defederating hexbear.

lmao

read a book you insufferable uninformed dweeb

[–] redballooon@lemm.ee 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

The last one I read about that told me indeed that NATO did the bombardment in Yugoslavia not for defense, but for a humanitarian clause that it also has in its preamble. I was surprised a bit that they have it in there, and how selective they choose to deploy that.

Nevertheless, in that situation there was foundation enough to understand the reasoning, and they did so only after the UN was not able to get together to effectively do something against concentration camps and genozidal tendencies by what was then Serbia.

Now the people who argue that NATO is an aggressive alliance have arguments like the Iraq war in their portfolio, which very clearly was not a nato operation.

Maybe kindly point me to a book that is worth reading, and I will put it on my list for consideration.

[–] booty@hexbear.net 4 points 1 year ago

Maybe kindly point me to a book that is worth reading

I'd start with anything by Chuck Tingle. Pounded In The Butt By My Own Butt is the classic.