Ask Lemmy

I'm pretty sure my bickering about the election. I was very unpopular during that period. Now I'm just regular unpopular. 👍🏾

In all my days, the two most hated comments I dropped were:

1. Explaining that traveling specific speeds is not inherently less safe, but that context of conditions and location heavily change how safe we feel.

2. Attempting to give someone a free trip across the country so that I could have a body to assign one of her three cats to, since it was just after covid and finding any way to get a cat across the country was strangely difficult or exceptionally expensive. Apparently I'm a terrible person for not including a place to stay, or a return trip, or anything? Like.. I'm trying to save money getting a cat across the country, why would I then spend more money for someone I literally don't know? It was more of a 'please help get cat from a to b, I'll pay for it' Ended up dragging my wife with me for the third person because people were being weird and angry about it.

When I said that excessive profits are essentially stealing in the context of Steam: https://lemm.ee/post/37004161/13249135

I still stand by that comment very much. If a company makes a lot more than most other companies per employee, then quite obviously the profit margin is much higher than other companies. If the profit margin is much higher than other companies, then the price could be lowered. Steam is obviously the best and basically a monopoly which is why they can do that, but this is an example of how capitalism does not lead to the best efficiency.

I'm essentially advocating against more profit. I live a relatively poor life by choice. Almost everyone I meet calls me crazy, I rather work less than earn more money. I think one of our main problems as a species for sustainability is that everyone always wants more and more and is never satisfied. This applies individually and to companies/other organizations. As long as my basic needs like food and housing are covered, I'm happy.

I don't see any way of ordering my comments by vote totals so no idea.

I can't prove it nowadays, but I once remarked that society should find a way for homeless people to be separated by how they became homeless.

The context was that homelessness is a spectrum and that being indiscriminate when doing anything related to the homeless downplays the enormous gap between forms of it. I've been on both sides of it before; I've technically been "homeless" (I've had a roof over my head for as long as I can remember, but it was often couch-hopping), as well as have done things related to the homeless. Sometimes I ask about it, I expect by now it might range between "I'm a teetotaler whose house burnt down and I've been on the streets ever since" to "I keep getting a home but keep losing it in shady gambles". Surely homelessness is a case-by-case thing, right?

People are blind to these differences, however. To most outsiders, homelessness is just homelessness. From the outside, these things don't come to mind when people are protective, so if you mention wanting to do it case-by-case, you feel the wrath of the population who I have seen seemingly insist I'm being discriminatory over victims of a sensitive topic. I think maybe a few hundred or so people weighed in against me. It was not only what many might call the most particularly severe example but also one of the earliest. The tragically "funny" thing is that it's one of those things where most people immediately learn the reality of as soon as they become a victim of homelessness, actually interact with them, or even spend time in a psych ward like me because a lot of them turn themselves in because it means you'll get care, so it becomes one of those things that's said to be like a litmus test for if someone is genuinely associated with it versus someone who sees portrayals of it and tries to look like they are.

The post: A picture of bowing nurses in a hospital with the caption: "Chinese Doctors bow down to an 11-year-old boy with brain cancer who saved several lives by donating his organs.He wanted to give another people a second chance he never got"

The comment: "ok, let me position myself.. 3..2..1.. bow everyone!"

The point being that these idiots obviously either bowed just for the camera or had to organise to recreate the bowing moment, both of which are absurd.

Any time I point out that nuclear energy from new plants is really fucking expensive. Some people get mad at me for pointing out basic economics.

I corrected a commenter who clearly hadn't read the article the post was based on. 22 up/31 down. I was obviously a Russian bot, you see. XD

Did you read the article? Biden made many of Trump's tarrifs permanent and Harris, while critical of Trump's tarrifs, hasn't put forth her own plan or disowned the Biden strategy.

Edit: Fucksake, Lemmy. It says this in the article. I said nothing positive or negative about either candidate or their positions on tarrifs. 😆

In total downvotes, when I expressed support for a smoking ban. I can understand why some people would downvote that I guess.

Proportionally, calling out Hexbear for being authoritarian and rude on lemmy.ml.

I think this is mine, 187 people didn't like identifying Kamala as Bidens hand-picked successor

My most downvoted comment is me trolling during the US elections. My comment says that I won't vote, without giving the context of being unable to vote due to not being an US citizen. But it would be obvious to those paying attention to my instance. https://feddit.org/comment/2935779

Had to skim through a bit, but it appears to be this one:

https://lemmy.world/comment/9834772

I suggested that people could use throwaway temporary email accounts if they didn't want to risk using their real email to register for Sony's annoying forced PSN registration for their PC games.

I've shared a few hot takes here and there on Lemmy so I am surprised that this one ended up being my lowest (so far).

I don't know if I was downvoted for angering the Sony fans by notion that there could be security concerns with PSN, or people who disliked the suggestion that they didn't have to use their real emails to still register for an account, or both.

In Reddit, years ago, I was writing about protecting endangered whales. Apparently it was quite the pro whaling community that day. Never knew I could get more than -100 downvotes, but I far surpassed that

A comment describing car ownership as a lifestyle choice... on the fuck cars muni.

"This is the reaction to the other side's reaction. Now we push edgy again, and you guys get called 2018 dinosaurs."

It was basically a conversation about the culture wars and political correctness on Reddit. I think of things in cycles. The Reddit Human Resources crew thought they'd be in power forever because they're objectively "right."

Not the case.

I mistook a VLC update for enshittification. Can't remember what the update was about because I deleted the comment lol

This one: https://feddit.nl/post/1819542/1925630

The funny thing is, if you click on the context button and show all the comments, one agreeing with me has something like 120 upvotes, so I suppose I was just being too cheeky or something. Sometimes I wonder what proportion of people are using the downvote as a disagree button compared to as a "doesn't contribute to the discussion" button.

Mine, at 75 downvotes, was:

You know, if you use Linux you don’t have to jump through hoops like this (trivial though they may be). Wouldn’t it be nice to not have an adversarial, abusive relationship with your OS?

This was on a thread about some workaround to remove ads in Windows.

It was still very net positive in terms of upvote/downvote ratio, so Microsoft simps can suck it, LOL.

"context is important"

I was trying to help an angry redditor understand the discussion they were raging about.