There will never be a place that is good for all people. That is simply utopian thinking, which is naive at best, reactionary at worst. The mods can attempt to attain it, but it will always be a process, falls up the hill to Golgotha.
However, with no specific examples and criticisms from which to draw from, there is nothing for the mods to work with here. There will simply be bans. Not out of paranoia, but a pettier emotion, annoyance. That's just the way it goes. If you have a specific interaction and grievance you should make it known.
Otherwise, this is a shit posting website. And that is all it and other anon forums can ever really be. If you want authenticity... Well, idk where to find that these days, but I know hippies are still a thing. They may be eccentric libertarian spiritualists, but they are nothing if not mostly authentic (even if they are authenticly selling you garbage).
Edit: Sorry if this doesn't help, Solidarity Forever.
There will never be a place that is good for all people. That is simply utopian thinking, which is naive at best, reactionary at worst.
TBH, I kinda need to believe it to be true to be able to believe in anything, personally. I have no actual connection to people IRL that would lead me to any kind of positive worldview otherwise, I think.
Idk. Slightly related, I really don't like Camus. He was just as much of a prick as Satre (if just as much of a sex pest) and most of his insights are too vague to be useful, or too specific to matter. However, he did have the absurdist banger, "We must imagine Sysiphus happy."
How is it slightly related? I think a better, more Marxist faith, is to believe that one day the work will be happy, not that the work won't exist. Still abit utopian, but a healthier, delusion. There will always be work that needs to be done to make things better for as many people as possible. Maybe eventually everyone.
However, an anon Internet forum run by volunteer mods almost certainly not the place to discover that process. Even Marx asked Engels for more drinking money, and these people do this shit for free. They're going to do their best, which probably isn't good enough, but they are clearly trying, which is better than Reddit.
He was just as much of a prick as Satre (if just as much of a sex pest)
Comparatively unimportant, but I am losing my mind at how this term is getting generalized. Sex pest refers to someone who pesters (harasses, nags) for sex. Sartre was a pedophile who worked with a groomer, which is far beyond "sex pest" in severity. I don't know much about Camus's biography, but he was probably also a pedo since literally all white French intellectuals were at that time.
However, an anon Internet forum run by volunteer mods almost certainly not the place to discover that process. Even Marx asked Engels for more drinking money, and these people do this shit for free. They’re going to do their best, which probably isn’t good enough, but they are clearly trying, which is better than Reddit.
Yeah, that's fair. I suppose that I elucidated more of my own position elsewhere here.
There will never be a place that is good for all people. That is simply utopian thinking, which is naive at best, reactionary at worst. The mods can attempt to attain it, but it will always be a process, falls up the hill to Golgotha.
However, with no specific examples and criticisms from which to draw from, there is nothing for the mods to work with here. There will simply be bans. Not out of paranoia, but a pettier emotion, annoyance. That's just the way it goes. If you have a specific interaction and grievance you should make it known.
Otherwise, this is a shit posting website. And that is all it and other anon forums can ever really be. If you want authenticity... Well, idk where to find that these days, but I know hippies are still a thing. They may be eccentric libertarian spiritualists, but they are nothing if not mostly authentic (even if they are authenticly selling you garbage).
Edit: Sorry if this doesn't help, Solidarity Forever.
TBH, I kinda need to believe it to be true to be able to believe in anything, personally. I have no actual connection to people IRL that would lead me to any kind of positive worldview otherwise, I think.
Idk. Slightly related, I really don't like Camus. He was just as much of a prick as Satre (if just as much of a sex pest) and most of his insights are too vague to be useful, or too specific to matter. However, he did have the absurdist banger, "We must imagine Sysiphus happy."
How is it slightly related? I think a better, more Marxist faith, is to believe that one day the work will be happy, not that the work won't exist. Still abit utopian, but a healthier, delusion. There will always be work that needs to be done to make things better for as many people as possible. Maybe eventually everyone.
However, an anon Internet forum run by volunteer mods almost certainly not the place to discover that process. Even Marx asked Engels for more drinking money, and these people do this shit for free. They're going to do their best, which probably isn't good enough, but they are clearly trying, which is better than Reddit.
Comparatively unimportant, but I am losing my mind at how this term is getting generalized. Sex pest refers to someone who pesters (harasses, nags) for sex. Sartre was a pedophile who worked with a groomer, which is far beyond "sex pest" in severity. I don't know much about Camus's biography, but he was probably also a pedo since literally all white French intellectuals were at that time.
Yeah, that's fair. I suppose that I elucidated more of my own position elsewhere here.
Camus wasn't a sex pest, I don't think. Just being horny all the time and having lots of sex isn't a sex pest.