U.S. President Joe Biden on Thursday called China a "ticking time bomb" because of its economic challenges and said the country was in trouble because of weak growth.
Is creating echo chambers really desirable in our current political climate? Democracy is built on a foundation of free and open discourse, not in censoring opinions that we don't agree with. All that does is polarize and radicalize people even more.
Oh, it's not a matter of opinions; I just can't stand Hexbear's ugly emojis polluting my screen.
There's also them assuming that anyone disagreeing with them must be a pro-murica propaganda-guzzling librul, as well as contrarianly shilling for anything that is anti-DaWest™ (or was once communist, if we take some liberties with the term), but that's far less important 🤓
Our emojis are good. Talk to your instance admins about the fact that they are too big for you.
And I mean, if you're repeating western propaganda and ignoring us when we disprove it with thought terminating cliches, what else are we supposed to assume exactly?
ETA: Also "it isnt about opinions [excuse that isn't opinions]" but then you start complaining about opinions. SOUNDS like the second part is what you're really mad about.
I don't see the use of snarky remarks as any better. Nor the repeating of your own flavor of propaganda, quite honestly. What can I tell you, the enemy of my enemy isn't automatically my friend, although I may share their expressed values...
You can back out of an interaction that isn't going your way much more gracefully by simply remaining quiet.
Why engage in the first place? What's your deal? You reply to me but you don't want to convey a thought to me? Can you explain your behavior in the context of having any deliberate intent at all?
I'm not the one playing coy about what they're writing. I've been extremely upfront about everything I've wanted to say. Save your "NO U" for when it's in a context that makes it coherent.
Must I remind you of how that interaction went? That your narcissism in wanting every space you enter to cater to you is not only a "you" problem but fucking juvenile and entitled in the extreme?
You're the architect of your own situation. Maybe start with the attitude you come in with calling people trolls.
But the short answer is yes. We, inclusive of pretty much everyone you've ever met, expect you to engage in good faith. If you can't then don't cry about 'trolls' treating you mean. You deserve it. And may the experience be so negative for you that it inspires a change in your behavior.
If anything, it cements my opinion that red-fascists are no better than the kind folks at exploding-heads (to your credit, you seem genuinely pro-LGBT [which makes it more baffling to see you supporting Xi and Vlady, but I digress], that puts you above them) 🤓
Our ideals are probably still too oppositional for that, but I do appreciate liberals who don't pretend they have any substantial disagreement with fascists.
But you haven't said yes, I decided to accommodate you before you could answer, my friend. Ensuring that you're able to understand what I write is important, I care about you.
You folks boast about being able to read the librul minds better than one; do your magic, use those mentalist abilities to extract the true essence of the words /s 🤓👀❤
Or an alternative theory is that we genuinely do know better than you having exposed ourselves to more channels of information than you have. And in your self sequestration of calling people 'trolls' and refusing to engage with anything outside your bubble you've left yourself unable to clear the dissonance of seeing something that doesn't make sense to you. And yet even in the face of saying out loud that you don't understand something you have no curiosity. This is the very essence of the
I'm not familiar with the group you referenced earlier as a means of insulting comparison to me, but is "are you triggered?" something you'd expect a member of that community to say?
Only dweebs hide behind subtext, dweeb. Being more verbose and backhanded doesn't make you different than them.
You're very upset at being asked to engage in good faith and you're having a tantrum. In order to flip the script you do exactly what they do. You act exactly the same as them when you get upset.
Google "When you scratch a liberal, a fascist bleeds" and let the number of results be evidence that I'm not just making this up to insult you. You're basic.
Hey, it's not my fault if your methods are similar enough to those of a bunch of far-right loons for them to be compared. I genuinely invite you to go take a look at their instance, see for yourself (and expect the worse).
Edit:
You’re very upset at being asked to engage in good faith and you’re having a tantrum. In order to flip the script you do exactly what they do. You act exactly the same as them when you get upset.
Google “When you scratch a liberal, a fascist bleeds” and let the number of results be evidence that I’m not just making this up to insult you. You’re basic.
(...) them assuming that anyone disagreeing with them must be a pro-murica propaganda-guzzling librul
The fuck do you know about the methods of people you refuse to engage with at the very beginning? All you know is that you're upset and you associate being treated rudely by the only political opponents you've ever encountered in your sheltered, heavily propagandized western overton window. You think I don't know what right wing cesspools look like? You think I should respect the word of someone who proudly proclaims their ignorance and lack of curiosity to tell me the nature of either a right wing or a left wing community?
I was tempted to post this in the dunk tank despite it being at the end of a long ultimately pointless slapfight but since you're already digging this deep in the shit mother fucking look at this one https://hexbear.net/comment/3713816
Do you have any idea what the hell is going on with that extremely truncated copypasta she keeps giving me? I feel like I'm arguing with peewee's playhouse over here!
We know where you get your opinions because they are the opinions being repeated to us the same as you. When your distended belly shoots propaganda past your lips when you speak, there's no real use in claiming that you didn't guzzle it beforehand. The only difference is that we recognize it for what it is because unlike you we've bothered to look at sources outside of the western consent manufacturing bubble.
When liberals disagree with leftists, they start acting exactly like the reactionaries they pretend they're not aligned with. "Anyone who disagrees with them MUST be a racist" says the conservative after being called on racism.
There's also them assuming that anyone disagreeing with them must be a pro-murica propaganda-guzzling librul
Says the liberal after being called on being a western chauvinist.
It's funny that you must mention reactionaries and conservatives since you folks sound just like the cesspool that is exploding-heads. Just more numerous and organized (smarter has yet to be proven, since you fail just as much to hide your bile behind a veneer of respectability).
It's not so much the size than the spam that I find annoying. It makes comment sections look like a 2003 blog. A size control feature would be welcome though; but what I'd really like is a "Show Custom Emojis" setting, like we have for scores or avatars.
"Anti-China chauvinist views" now? Beside accusing you lot of contrarianly shilling for anything that's against your "enemies", I haven't even mentioned a specific country (nor had China in mind at the time of writing, as a matter of fact)😊
I'll be totally honest with you, I actually envy your power of mind-reading through a screen. You guys are even better at it than this African sorcerer that accurately stated all of my financial and romantic problems, and offered me the lottery's winning numbers in exchange for my phone not so long ago.
Oh, and I nearly forgot:
(...) them assuming that anyone disagreeing with them must be a pro-murica propaganda-guzzling librul
It's not about an echo chamber. There are some instances that say the same few things without being reasonable. They're just political slogans and myths with little bearing on reality. If they were reasonable, sure. It'd be fine. They will take things out of context and when you provide context that goes against it they find something else to attack and act like it never happened. It's not useful and just makes it harder to see other things.
I've seen people from lemmygrad and hexbear provide sources, even western ones, over and over and be completely ignored by the person they're talking to, often with a thought terminating cliche. You got this backwards.
There are users from all instances that do that. The fact some do it is not evidence of anything, one way or the other. However, I was arguing with someone from one of the two about Xi Jinping being from the political class, not the working class, and their "evidence" otherwise was that he lived in a cave when he was a child. They ignored the fact the reason he lived in a cave was because his father was a politician who lost political favor, and it wasn't some random cave, it was a building constructed of a cave.
It's all willful ignorance of fact if you can't find fault with any government. If you support anything, you should be looking for how to criticize it, not how to tell other people that there aren't issues. How else would you improve it. I don't trust anyone who won't admit any fault in the thing they're defending, and especially anyone who chooses to tie their identity to that thing.
Just calling out the thought terminating cliche is, ironically, a thought terminating cliche as well. I didn't only include that in my comment, you just (expectedly) ignored the rest. The fact you had nothing meaningful to say is enough. My comment was much more then pointing out your point of origin (as in instance). Your comment was nothing.
Just calling out the thought terminating cliche is, ironically, a thought terminating cliche as well.
Okay dummy in a completely flat world without any context you're TECHNICALLY correct but in this world we're talking about you calling people whose opinions and references challenge your worldview bots so stfu you lazy dishonest dipshit
It's gratifying that you're upset at getting (rightfully) bullied because that means it's working and your behavior will eventually adjust. Either by shutting up or by engaging in good faith. Either way we win.
What the fuck kind of delusions are you having? This is not an argument. This is a thread about calling you out for your bullshit of defending people who claim everyone who disagrees with them is a bot and your own flavor of that, calling people "biased". If anything you should have gotten more shit for the rest of the pontificating nonsense you wrapped around a strawman. Your dumb smug ass replied with the shit I posted mocking you over in my last comment. You deserve to be bullied until you can act like you're a member of a proper community and this is the bullying you're receiving. There is no hidden ball. Stop acting like a fucking child and I absolutely promise you that you'll get treated differently. Don't whine about fucking up and getting called on it. Fucking liberals. Unbelievable.
Ah so like with every other logical fallacy it's impossible for liberals to be guilty of the fallacy fallacy but all of us tankies are always guilty of every fallacy at once (yes even the ones that contradict one another)
You are rubber and we are glue, for everything we say bounces off you and rebounds back to us
Where did I say I couldn't commit a fallacy? It's just in this case the "fallacy" I made wasn't any part of the argument, just pointing out that he's saying that the group he belongs to is better than others, which literally everyone will say so isn't worth assuming it's correct without evidence. There was plenty of other things in the comment that were ignored.
It's always pointing to some part of a comment and attacking that with you guys. You never defend anything because being on offense makes you look authoritative and superior, without having to put in any of the legwork that requires.
The entire principle of reasonability lies on accepting that other interpretations of facts exist. Removing those who question the prevailing interpretation is harmful for democracy, harmful for journalism, and harmful for freedom of speech.
Sure, there are other interpretations. There's also ignoring facts as they stand. That's as harmful as anything else.
Sometimes it's not useful to hear certain opinions. I don't care about the opinion that thinks the covid vaccine makes you magnetic, which they subsequently can't verify. It's not useful and most likely harmful. It makes my experience worse while providing nothing. If I can choose to not have that opinion heard, I will. It is not helping me get a better understanding of the world and is only making my experience worse.
If it's conducive to having a better understanding of reality probably.
The "covid vaccine makes you magnetic" opinion that I used in the example does not. Their beliefs are based in fairy tales and they don't care to question it, or if they do they somehow convince themselves that when it doesn't agree with they're beliefs that they're somehow still right.
Is creating echo chambers really desirable in our current political climate? Democracy is built on a foundation of free and open discourse, not in censoring opinions that we don't agree with. All that does is polarize and radicalize people even more.
Lmao ok settler how about you replace a few lead pipes in the ghettos you've enclosed the First Nations in before talking about democracy.
Maybe return 1 square meter of land?
Oh, it's not a matter of opinions; I just can't stand Hexbear's ugly emojis polluting my screen.
There's also them assuming that anyone disagreeing with them must be a pro-murica propaganda-guzzling librul, as well as contrarianly shilling for anything that is anti-DaWest™ (or was once communist, if we take some liberties with the term), but that's far less important 🤓
Our emojis are good. Talk to your instance admins about the fact that they are too big for you.
And I mean, if you're repeating western propaganda and ignoring us when we disprove it with thought terminating cliches, what else are we supposed to assume exactly?
ETA: Also "it isnt about opinions [excuse that isn't opinions]" but then you start complaining about opinions. SOUNDS like the second part is what you're really mad about.
You're still spamming them too much to my taste. Don't care about the size.
I don't.
Glad that you at least half-understood that I "hid" my true reasons behind a bit of irony (I really can't stand your emojis though).
Then why are you annoyed at seeing us do it to others when they are doing that?
I don't see the use of snarky remarks as any better. Nor the repeating of your own flavor of propaganda, quite honestly. What can I tell you, the enemy of my enemy isn't automatically my friend, although I may share their expressed values...
There you go with your "I hate seeing evidence that I've been lied to about foreign affairs" again
Please explain these words you've posted without comment or context or attribution
It's a quote, right? You put it in a quote thing?
Speak. Use words
I thought you folks were enlightened and could read the liberal minds just fine. You got that champ, surely don't need me to explain anything.
You can back out of an interaction that isn't going your way much more gracefully by simply remaining quiet.
Why engage in the first place? What's your deal? You reply to me but you don't want to convey a thought to me? Can you explain your behavior in the context of having any deliberate intent at all?
I'll throw that back at you. Must I remind that this all started from me expressing my wish to not see your instance's content?
I'm not the one playing coy about what they're writing. I've been extremely upfront about everything I've wanted to say. Save your "NO U" for when it's in a context that makes it coherent.
Must I remind you of how that interaction went? That your narcissism in wanting every space you enter to cater to you is not only a "you" problem but fucking juvenile and entitled in the extreme?
If I wanted every space I entered to cater to me, I'd have already opened a thread to call for defederation on my home instance, which I didn't.
Do you really expect me to engage trolls in good faith?
You're the architect of your own situation. Maybe start with the attitude you come in with calling people trolls.
But the short answer is yes. We, inclusive of pretty much everyone you've ever met, expect you to engage in good faith. If you can't then don't cry about 'trolls' treating you mean. You deserve it. And may the experience be so negative for you that it inspires a change in your behavior.
If anything, it cements my opinion that red-fascists are no better than the kind folks at exploding-heads (to your credit, you seem genuinely pro-LGBT [which makes it more baffling to see you supporting Xi and Vlady, but I digress], that puts you above them) 🤓
Really giving away that the only thing you find objectionable about fascists is that they are mean to you personally.
Indeed /s 😌
Glad you're atleast honest about it.
Always.
We shake hands?
Our ideals are probably still too oppositional for that, but I do appreciate liberals who don't pretend they have any substantial disagreement with fascists.
In fact, I do have substantial disagreement with fascists, I just include red-fash as well 😊
The fact that they are mean to you personally is not a substantial disagreement, that's just you being self important.
I wonder where did I complain about anyone being mean to me.
https://hexbear.net/comment/3713650
Should I have put an /s or an emoji after that "indeed"? Don't move, it will take two seconds.
"I said yes, and he believed me, what an idiot!"
But you haven't said yes, I decided to accommodate you before you could answer, my friend. Ensuring that you're able to understand what I write is important, I care about you.
Edit: /s 😌🤓👀
Your post is incoherent, though I can still detect the liberal smugness.
Want some too? I'll happily oblige:
Who are you quoting?
Myself, earlier in this thread. Collapse the first two comments under the top one, or scroll a bit toward the middle of the page.
Why?
As a way to show that this point is continuously proven. Why else?
What point?
This one:
What of it?
Exactly what's written.
The sentence fragment?
You folks boast about being able to read the librul minds better than one; do your magic, use those mentalist abilities to extract the true essence of the words /s 🤓👀❤
What?
Read the thread, it's not that difficult...
Why?
Why not.
?
John Cena?
Literally incoherent.
You realize it only now??!
No.
Oof, you had me worried for a minute.
Or an alternative theory is that we genuinely do know better than you having exposed ourselves to more channels of information than you have. And in your self sequestration of calling people 'trolls' and refusing to engage with anything outside your bubble you've left yourself unable to clear the dissonance of seeing something that doesn't make sense to you. And yet even in the face of saying out loud that you don't understand something you have no curiosity. This is the very essence of the
Your mind is cement? You're the last to notice.
Who's making assumptions about who, dipshit? You're the one who has no curiosity and no desire to engage. You straight up said so, amnesiac.
You seem angry. Back off from the screen and take a deep breath.
I'm not familiar with the group you referenced earlier as a means of insulting comparison to me, but is "are you triggered?" something you'd expect a member of that community to say?
It's an observation, you're not supposed to feel insulted.
Only dweebs hide behind subtext, dweeb. Being more verbose and backhanded doesn't make you different than them.
You're very upset at being asked to engage in good faith and you're having a tantrum. In order to flip the script you do exactly what they do. You act exactly the same as them when you get upset.
Google "When you scratch a liberal, a fascist bleeds" and let the number of results be evidence that I'm not just making this up to insult you. You're basic.
Hey, it's not my fault if your methods are similar enough to those of a bunch of far-right loons for them to be compared. I genuinely invite you to go take a look at their instance, see for yourself (and expect the worse).
Edit:
The fuck do you know about the methods of people you refuse to engage with at the very beginning? All you know is that you're upset and you associate being treated rudely by the only political opponents you've ever encountered in your sheltered, heavily propagandized western overton window. You think I don't know what right wing cesspools look like? You think I should respect the word of someone who proudly proclaims their ignorance and lack of curiosity to tell me the nature of either a right wing or a left wing community?
Either speak to me or keep it in your concrete block
I do. It just so happens that repeating the same thing again and again is valid, as it remains relevant.
We in the business call that kind of thing a thought terminating cliche. Since we're talking about ways you and reactionaries are peas in a pod.
You're calling for it 😂
Yeah that continues to have no impact on me. Glad you're laughing at your own joke though.
In exchange, enjoy this picture of a pig shitting on its own oversized balls
Oh, it's Putin resting on Xi's balls! Already said it, but I actually love this one.
And I'm glad that you've regained your calm. Shall we continue to play?
Absolutely deranged
Already exhausted?
No I'm just extremely weirded out by you acting like you're jigsaw the clown
Plus I said everything I had to say like three times
Here's a different one:
Reply to my reply with what you wish you said the first time. Fuck you want from me?
Reply to your reply with what I already told you like two hours ago, acktshully.
Oh, yikes, that's super homophobic
How so? I never implied there was anything sexual between them.
I was tempted to post this in the dunk tank despite it being at the end of a long ultimately pointless slapfight but since you're already digging this deep in the shit mother fucking look at this one https://hexbear.net/comment/3713816
Bahaha, he thought he sounded so cool with that one. I understand why these people always start talking like anime villains.
Do you have any idea what the hell is going on with that extremely truncated copypasta she keeps giving me? I feel like I'm arguing with peewee's playhouse over here!
Nah, he's doing it to me too. Not sure what he's on about.
His womb is on the loose inside his bellyIt's not funny anymore now that I found out her pronouns
@brain_in_a_box Let's be serious just a second, then we can resume the asinine bickering: I'm a she. Thank you. You may troll again.
My bad.
Just noticed your edits. For what it's worth, I appreciate the consistency.
You really can't even say your pronouns without trying to get some insults in.
Were we, myself included, doing anything else than indulging in trolling now?
I honestly couldn't tell what you were doing.
Thank you, that means I do my job well.
err, no. Anyone can be totally incoherent.
Precisely.
spoiler
Removed by mod
spoiler
🌽
🧈 🥵
🇨🇳 🇷🇺 😍
🌽
🧈 🥵
🍆❓
I have not heard that saying before
Oh it's not a saying, I was just riffing on the original definition of hysteria.
Check this out if you want to read some wild shit https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wandering_womb
Ahhh, got it.
Okay, I must admit: this Putin on Xi's balls emoji is quite cool actually.
Well at least you've learned to insult Xi without being racist against Chinese people, that's some real progress
We know where you get your opinions because they are the opinions being repeated to us the same as you. When your distended belly shoots propaganda past your lips when you speak, there's no real use in claiming that you didn't guzzle it beforehand. The only difference is that we recognize it for what it is because unlike you we've bothered to look at sources outside of the western consent manufacturing bubble.
When liberals disagree with leftists, they start acting exactly like the reactionaries they pretend they're not aligned with. "Anyone who disagrees with them MUST be a racist" says the conservative after being called on racism.
Says the liberal after being called on being a western chauvinist.
It's funny that you must mention reactionaries and conservatives since you folks sound just like the cesspool that is exploding-heads. Just more numerous and organized (smarter has yet to be proven, since you fail just as much to hide your bile behind a veneer of respectability).
So... It's Lemmy's problem for not exposing control over emoji size? Sounds like a feature that should be pretty easy to add.
It's not so much the size than the spam that I find annoying. It makes comment sections look like a 2003 blog. A size control feature would be welcome though; but what I'd really like is a "Show Custom Emojis" setting, like we have for scores or avatars.
Bro you are way past historically uneducated. Hexbear been with us for a few hundred years.
You have literally the exact opinions as every lib. We don’t care we have heard it before
Don't fight, there'll be enough for everyone; here's for you:
So it’s just a coincidence that your anti-China chauvinist views align with the libs 1:1?
"Anti-China chauvinist views" now? Beside accusing you lot of contrarianly shilling for anything that's against your "enemies", I haven't even mentioned a specific country (nor had China in mind at the time of writing, as a matter of fact)😊
Take this shit back to reddit, we all know exactly what you are getting at and you are the exact same lib as we used to be 10 years ago
I'll be totally honest with you, I actually envy your power of mind-reading through a screen. You guys are even better at it than this African sorcerer that accurately stated all of my financial and romantic problems, and offered me the lottery's winning numbers in exchange for my phone not so long ago.
Oh, and I nearly forgot:
That is a hell of a word salad you just made.
It's not about an echo chamber. There are some instances that say the same few things without being reasonable. They're just political slogans and myths with little bearing on reality. If they were reasonable, sure. It'd be fine. They will take things out of context and when you provide context that goes against it they find something else to attack and act like it never happened. It's not useful and just makes it harder to see other things.
I've seen people from lemmygrad and hexbear provide sources, even western ones, over and over and be completely ignored by the person they're talking to, often with a thought terminating cliche. You got this backwards.
And I'm sure you're not biased at all...
There are users from all instances that do that. The fact some do it is not evidence of anything, one way or the other. However, I was arguing with someone from one of the two about Xi Jinping being from the political class, not the working class, and their "evidence" otherwise was that he lived in a cave when he was a child. They ignored the fact the reason he lived in a cave was because his father was a politician who lost political favor, and it wasn't some random cave, it was a building constructed of a cave.
It's all willful ignorance of fact if you can't find fault with any government. If you support anything, you should be looking for how to criticize it, not how to tell other people that there aren't issues. How else would you improve it. I don't trust anyone who won't admit any fault in the thing they're defending, and especially anyone who chooses to tie their identity to that thing.
Leading off with a thought terminating cliche when confronted by your ideological cohorts' dependence on thought terminating cliches is quite a flex
Just calling out the thought terminating cliche is, ironically, a thought terminating cliche as well. I didn't only include that in my comment, you just (expectedly) ignored the rest. The fact you had nothing meaningful to say is enough. My comment was much more then pointing out your point of origin (as in instance). Your comment was nothing.
Okay dummy in a completely flat world without any context you're TECHNICALLY correct but in this world we're talking about you calling people whose opinions and references challenge your worldview bots so stfu you lazy dishonest dipshit
It's gratifying that you're upset at getting (rightfully) bullied because that means it's working and your behavior will eventually adjust. Either by shutting up or by engaging in good faith. Either way we win.
Can't argue with anything I said so you just insult. Expected, once again, but disappointing.
Engage in what in good faith? You haven't made any arguments. You only say "fallacy!" and act superior, without earning it.
What the fuck kind of delusions are you having? This is not an argument. This is a thread about calling you out for your bullshit of defending people who claim everyone who disagrees with them is a bot and your own flavor of that, calling people "biased". If anything you should have gotten more shit for the rest of the pontificating nonsense you wrapped around a strawman. Your dumb smug ass replied with the shit I posted mocking you over in my last comment. You deserve to be bullied until you can act like you're a member of a proper community and this is the bullying you're receiving. There is no hidden ball. Stop acting like a fucking child and I absolutely promise you that you'll get treated differently. Don't whine about fucking up and getting called on it. Fucking liberals. Unbelievable.
Ah so like with every other logical fallacy it's impossible for liberals to be guilty of the fallacy fallacy but all of us tankies are always guilty of every fallacy at once (yes even the ones that contradict one another)
You are rubber and we are glue, for everything we say bounces off you and rebounds back to us
What flawless playground logic you employ
Where did I say I couldn't commit a fallacy? It's just in this case the "fallacy" I made wasn't any part of the argument, just pointing out that he's saying that the group he belongs to is better than others, which literally everyone will say so isn't worth assuming it's correct without evidence. There was plenty of other things in the comment that were ignored.
It's always pointing to some part of a comment and attacking that with you guys. You never defend anything because being on offense makes you look authoritative and superior, without having to put in any of the legwork that requires.
The entire principle of reasonability lies on accepting that other interpretations of facts exist. Removing those who question the prevailing interpretation is harmful for democracy, harmful for journalism, and harmful for freedom of speech.
Sure, there are other interpretations. There's also ignoring facts as they stand. That's as harmful as anything else.
Sometimes it's not useful to hear certain opinions. I don't care about the opinion that thinks the covid vaccine makes you magnetic, which they subsequently can't verify. It's not useful and most likely harmful. It makes my experience worse while providing nothing. If I can choose to not have that opinion heard, I will. It is not helping me get a better understanding of the world and is only making my experience worse.
How do you define the usefulness of opinions?
If it's conducive to having a better understanding of reality probably.
The "covid vaccine makes you magnetic" opinion that I used in the example does not. Their beliefs are based in fairy tales and they don't care to question it, or if they do they somehow convince themselves that when it doesn't agree with they're beliefs that they're somehow still right.
How do you say this 7th grade government class nerd shit and not feel deep embarrassment