This post is not only to try finding the best Mastodon instance/server but I also wanted to express about the Mastodon instances. Most of Mastodon servers are apparently harsh about other instances that include things they don’t like and are quite serious about getting those Internet points putting how the place isn’t welcome for “bigotry” and is for everyone and so diverse, and I wouldn’t have any problems with this if this wasn’t frequently used by people who will try to shut you if they disagree enough with you and will try to present themselves as so virtuous. You’d expect that the free side of the Internet would have people that value freedom and should let anything that isn’t a crime or something that prejudice the instance itself or whatever space they’re in but it seems this vision is getting far from the reality with time.

  • BrooklynMan@lemmy.ml
    6·
    1 年前

    What actions are you talking about?

    your actions. I’ve said this twice now.

    It is not straightforward

    your failure to comprehend a simple statement, even after it’s been deconstructed for you, isn’t my responsibility. if you require such hand-holding through a basic conversation, why did you post here? or is it that the basic concept of personal responsibility for your actions is completely alien to you?

    • Milk@lemmy.sdf.orgOP
      15·
      1 年前

      Yes, I’m responsible for my actions and I should see the consequences if they’re equivalent to what I did. But what does it have to do with all this?

      Also, dropping “your actions have consequences” and refusing to explain further doesn’t explain much about what you wanted to say so I don’t understand how you expected me to understand a text without any meaning or connection to the discussion.

      • BrooklynMan@lemmy.ml
        5·
        1 年前

        Yes, I’m responsible for my actions

        you say this, but you add the qualifier:

        if they’re equivalent to what I did

        yet you seem to set yourself as the only arbiter of your actions in the spaces with rules defined by others. I ask what do you believe entitles you to this right - to act as you wish, disregarding the rules - and to face consequences as only you define them rather than defined by the owners of that space?

        Also, dropping “your actions have consequences” and refusing to explain further

        how have I refused anything when all i’ve done is ask questions which you have constantly refused to answer? I have broken down that statement several times, yet you now make false accusations that can easily be disproven by reviewing earlier comments.

        and, additionally, what makes you feel entitled that if you fail to comprehend these basic concepts as I have explained, I should continue to hand-hold you though this conversation? why is that my responsibility rather than yours to either keep up or to step aside when it has clearly surpassed you ability to comprehend?

        • Milk@lemmy.sdf.orgOP
          14·
          1 年前

          1. Yes, consequences shouldn’t be bigger than the actions. At least that’s the way most countries’ laws work, or do you think I should be decapitated if I steal a Nokia?

          2. You can drop any questions but you can’t expect people to understand it right away, essentially when the question makes no sense and/or have no connection with the discussed topic.

          • BrooklynMan@lemmy.ml
            5·
            1 年前

            Yes, consequences shouldn’t be bigger than the actions. At least that’s the way most countries’ laws work

            that’s an opinion, not a fact. just because it’s yours doesn’t make it any more or less valid that anyone else’s

            do you think I should be decapitated if I steal a Nokia?

            what I think about that is irrelevant to the discussion for it is both a false equivalence and a straw man.

            You can drop any questions but you can’t expect people to understand it right away, essentially when the question makes no sense and/or have no connection with the discussed topic.

            I suspect most people here do, in fact, understand, regardless of your refusal to answer them— in fact, I suspect they understand that, too.

            • Milk@lemmy.sdf.orgOP
              14·
              1 年前

              It’s not an opinion, that’s the system most countries’ laws use, where the criminal should pay an equivalent amount for the actions they made, be money, jail and even death in some cases but also other punishments that are not as frequently applied or known.

              • BrooklynMan@lemmy.ml
                4·
                1 年前

                it’s a fact that some countries have laws like that, but it’s your opinion that you should be treated that way everywhere you go and in every situation. and comparing the laws of some country and how some country treats a crime like theft to how a mastodon instance treats behavior of which it disapproves like bigotry is a false equivalence and a straw man.

                • Milk@lemmy.sdf.orgOP
                  14·
                  1 年前

                  If you will, I may state that is also the opinion of the majority of people. If you don’t expect or accept a country acting like a ass just because it can then why should you do the opposite for anything else? In fact very little things change from this specific comparison as it should remain this way. Both share basically the same characteristics except that one is virtual and a private place open to the public while there other is real and is public.

                  • BrooklynMan@lemmy.ml
                    4·
                    1 年前

                    If you will, I may state that is also the opinion of the majority of people.

                    what statement is that, exactly? and what is your source that it is the opinion of the “majority of the people” what people?

                    If you don’t expect or accept a country acting like a ass just because it can then why should you do the opposite for anything else?

                    we are not discussing countries, nor are we discussing how they act towards each other. e are discussing mastodon instances and their internal rues of conduct. as I said before, this is both a false equivalence and straw man.

                    Straw man

                    A straw man fallacy (sometimes written as strawman) is the informal fallacy of refuting an argument different from the one actually under discussion, while not recognizing or acknowledging the distinction.[1] One who engages in this fallacy is said to be "attacking a straw man”

                    False equivalence

                    A false equivalence or false equivalency is an informal fallacy in which an equivalence is drawn between two subjects based on flawed or false reasoning. This fallacy is categorized as a fallacy of inconsistency. Colloquially, a false equivalence is often called "comparing apples and oranges.”

                    moving on…

                    In fact very little things change from this specific comparison as it should remain this way. Both share basically the same characteristics except that one is virtual and a private place open to the public while their other is real and is public.

                    by ignoring the vast differences in context and scope to pick out what tiny similarities there may be, you are:

                    Cherry picking

                    Cherry picking, suppressing evidence, or the fallacy of incomplete evidence is the act of pointing to individual cases or data that seem to confirm a particular position while ignoring a significant portion of related and similar cases or data that may contradict that position. Cherry picking may be committed intentionally or unintentionally.

                    if you have to perform such mental gymnastics to make your point, you might just as well give up, as you’re convincing nobody.