It’s true that it’s their choice, but a lot of people grew up hearing the phrase “Do what you love and you’ll never work a day in your life!” so when they enter the workforce and find that they hate it, they look for a hobby they’re passionate about, and plan their career around it. But when they make it their job, they find that instead of the hobby making work more bearable, the work instead makes the hobby unbearable, and now they’ve got a job they hate and have lost one of their passions.

I’m sure there are some people who can love their hobby even as they are forced to wake up every day and do it regardless of whether or not they want to, but for me, anything I have to do every day becomes something I hate. The best career option for me is to work with something I was already indifferent toward, so it doesn’t matter if I start hating it.

I get so many people who react to my baked goods with “Wow, you should sell these!” I bake to unwind from work - what would I do to unwind if baking was my work? I already ruined thrift stores for myself by working at one for my first job - I know not to do it again.

I think they’re talking about “justified” madness. Realistic madness is just seeing things that aren’t there, or reacting extremely to mundane stimuli, but if you had somehow been given comprehension of some higher truth about the world that nobody else would ever believe, the actions you take as a result of that knowledge might seem crazy to those around you, even if they’re perfectly logical from your enlightened perspective.

I’ve seen this image floating around for a while, which breaks down the reasoning - or lack thereof in certain media - pretty well.

deleted by creator

My groups usually think of them as a powerful fey creature who sometimes just whisks people away for an indeterminate amount of time, only to bring them back later.

Voting is about choosing good candidates well before it gets pared down to 2 options. It’s about choosing a good local government, choosing good representatives, choosing good senators. If the only thing you care about is the President, then you’ll never have a good pool of options from which the parties will pick a presidential candidate. They’re not on our side - it’s our job to force their hand with a deck stacked with good candidates. But only the people who pay attention to politics well before election year get to have a say in stuff like that.

Okay, and how do you plan to get them into the hearts and minds of around 50% of the population in the next 2 months, when the vast majority haven’t even heard of her? It’s not enough to have someone who could be a good president, you also need to get people to vote for them. If you want most of the population to vote for someone, they need to be aware of them as a viable option years beforehand.

I agree that the 2 choices are pawns of the rich, but even if every person who knew about Claudia voted for her, she wouldn’t even get enough votes for her to make the news, much less win. We’re talking about tens of millions of people voting in unison for an election win to happen in this country. At this stage in the game, there are only 2 candidates with that kind of draw power. If you want to focus on the 2028 election (assuming there is one, since there clearly won’t be if Trump wins) to get a 3rd viable candidate on that ballot, that’s a noble plan, but by now this election’s potential winners are already down to 2.

Voting isn’t about closing your eyes and saying “I want someone good to win!” It’s about assessing which people might actually win, and voting for the one that best aligns with your views, however loosely. It’s about strategy. If you want to change that, you need to build national presence in the name of your preferred candidate, and you need to start years ahead of the elections. Big changes don’t happen at the ballot, they happen during the campaigning stage and beforehand. If your candidate isn’t on the news every day leading up to the election, most voters won’t even know they’re an option.

Yeah, people are acting like this is up to chance - rich people throw money at their problems, and so long as someone is willing to spend their time catching it instead of doing their job, it works. It’s going to work. The 5 year sentence is for poor people they want to get rid of, not for rich people they want to profit from.

As I said, yes, but also, let’s work together to stop the slapping…

I put my alarm far enough away that I need to get up to turn it off. By then I’m already out of bed, which is otherwise the hardest part for me by far.

To be fair, if we did raise minimum wage, they’d use it as an excuse to raise prices again. We still need to get higher minimum wage of course, but we also need get much tighter restrictions on corporations, or any financial ground we gain will be lost shortly thereafter under a million excuses to bleed the extra money out of us.

Reporting them for being toxic a dozen times has done jackshit, mods themselves agreeing with everything I’m saying here hasn’t either.

This is more the behavior I was talking about. You can’t force the mods to do anything, all you can do is try, and continue to do so even as it continues to yield no meaningful results. Just like those pointing out the tragedy happening in Gaza understand their incessant posting isn’t likely to change anything besides building solidarity with those who are suffering. But again, when people agree with the message behind a post, they aren’t going to join you in brigading against the person posting it, even if he may be posting it for unscrupulous reasons.

At the end of the day this post didn’t get anyone to vote for Trump, but it got people to think about Gaza just a little bit more, which is a good thing. If you want people to add their voices to yours crying out for OP’s ban, you need to draw attention to it in places where they actually did something people will get upset about.

You can’t change someone else’s behavior, you can only control your own. The results are the ends, but the means are more important.

The fact that I said you need to keep trying even as it doesn’t work clearly flew in one ear and out the other for you.

Reject bad behavior when you see it. That’s all you can do. In the same way that we need to draw attention to the holocaust over and over even though we know it likely won’t stop it, we need to point out bad behavior over and over again even if it doesn’t stop it. But don’t point out bad behavior when there’s none to be seen - that just weakens your argument.

You’re right, I’m not doing all I can to raise awareness of the ongoing tragedy. That’s my bad side - feel free to complain about it. I should be doing more.

It’s not an extreme obsession to think every day about an ongoing genocide. In fact, any less is unwarranted apathy. OP’s other traits are less benevolent, but they aren’t showcasing them here, so, again, they’re irrelevant. If OP had mentioned even once that someone should vote for Trump in this thread, I’d agree with you, but you’re the only one bringing it up here, so in this case, you’re the problem.

I’m not ignoring it, it just doesn’t make any sense to be annoyed that someone keeps bringing up the fact that people are dying every day for an unjust cause. It’s why I accused you of wanting to ignore it - because that’s the type of person that benefits from less reminders of the ongoing murders.

A post is separate from the user who posted it. This post is meant to point out the tragedy going on in Gaza. It doesn’t matter if OP was the one who posted it, or anyone else. Hell, it’s a clip from Twitter anyway; the words aren’t OP’s in any way - they’re just sharing them.

My point is that if you want to get mad at someone’s negative traits, that’s fine, but this post in this context isn’t negative. Your original complaint wasn’t about OP’s ragebaiting, or their habit of calling people Nazis for disagreeing with them, it was about their incessant posting about the ongoing genocide at Gaza, which - again - isn’t a bad thing.

Everyone has good sides and bad sides, and you chose to complain about OP’s good side, then attempted to justify your complaints by pointing out the fact that they have a bad side, which isn’t showcased here, and is thus irrelevant.