Yeah, it does

Weirdest

It’s 222-2222. I got an answering machine that can talk to you

Otherwise, you can reach me on 867-5309. Ask for Jenny

Downvotes aren’t how you address racists and bigots. Banning them is.

Downvoting is a tool that racists and bigots use when they’re trying to avoid getting banned though. On top of that, most targetted groups are minorities, which by definition, have small numbers. All off which means that the impact of downvotes hits vulnerable minorities harder than it hits bigots.

To you, this is some sort of hypothetical ideal that you’d like to see. In your mind, if things “worked the way they should”, downvoting would be a useful tool. But things don’t work the way the should. They work they way they are used, and in this case, that means they often hurt vulnerable groups more than they help them, despite how it ‘should be”

In your analogy, downvotes aren’t the tool. Social media is the tool. And turning off downvotes is how we use that tool to match our needs.

But you surely agree that both of your statements to be are at odds with each other.

You can’t simultaneously claim that an increase in diversity leads to a “reduction in richness” of a work, whilst also claiming that the work itself is the problem if it lacks diversity.

First, you are claiming that good works are diminished by after the fact alterations, but then you also claim that after the fact alterations are a bad idea, because the work was never good in the first place if it lacked diversity.

It more looks like you are finding post hoc validation to support something you already believe, rather than explaining the actual reasons you believe it, because those reasons contradict each other

Same with b.zone

My phone number. She bought us both pre-paid phone numbers over 20 years ago, and it’s the simplest number to remember because it has two sets of 3 matching numbers.

We broke up long ago, but I still have that phone number!

It’s also really easy to weaponise against minorities

You’ve just shifted the goal posts here.

First, you said it’s stealing richness from a story if you add more women to make up for the lack of representation in the original source material.

And when challenged on that, you’re now saying it wasn’t rich to begin with, and the story itself is broken if women are underrepresented.

It is disingenuously stealing from the richness of the story these films are supposedly depicting.

Strangely enough, as a woman, I see it generally adding to the richness…

Men doing all of the interesting stuff isn’t rich.

Hell, even I Robot, a movie that should have had a female lead, turned Calvin in to a supporting role to put a man in the lead.

If that were true, there wouldn’t be so much noise whenever an action movie with a female lead is released.

I was young, early teens in the mid to late 80s, so I remember the time but not particularly fondly.

Like a phone book?

We don’t use pennys, nickels, quarters or dimes where I’m from, and aside from the quarter, I have no idea how much value any of them have, so I probably wouldn’t give any meaning to it…

No p zombies here!

It means that the person you are talking to believes that you’re just making polite conversation because you’re uncomfortable with silence. They are letting you know that they would prefer you didn’t make conversation, because they prefer silence to idle chatter.

I have very good spatial awareness, but it’s non visual. I can navigate my way mentally through a spaxe and “feel” where the walls are without seeing them. I have a sense of how big something is compared to something else and where they are relative to each other in space, but all non visually.

And I can rotate objects in my mind and change my perspective around them, but all without any visual elements.

I can sense the mental cube, but I can’t see it. It has no colour, no texture etc. Imagine a sort of mental bat sonar?

I can think of words, I just don’t think I’m words. And when I think of a word I can run them together in a sentence. But they have no “sound”. They don’t have volume or pitch, they don’t sound like anyone, they’re just the idea of words. And because the words are after the fact, they don’t exist without me willing them in to existence. So no monologue in the way people describe it, and the idea of a conversation in my head doesn’t make sense. It would be more like writing a script for a conversation

Like most folk with aphantasia, I thought that people talking about “seeing things in their imagination” were just being dramatic and using common language. It never occurred to me that they could genuinely see things in their minds. And the whole thing where people would be upset when a character in a TV show or movie didn’t look like how they’d imagined they would look, never made sense to me. And shows where people could recall the details of peoples faces for police sketch artists…

Basically, moments like that started adding up over my life, and then about 10 years ago, I read an article from someone who had discovered they had aphantasia through a similar path, and it all just fell in to place.