No, I rinse them after hand-washing them.

“Do you have any sugar?”

I offered you sugar and cream when you ordered the coffee, and you just said “cream”. This is on you.

I don’t use the block feature, but I think the friction of manually having to apply it each time helps to reserve it for special cases, like harassment.

I disagree that this is a better experience for the user. I think it’s perverse and unhealthy and will only serve to isolate the user and reinforce them into error in situations where they are incorrect or antisocial.

I think you’ve missed how blocks work on the fedi. They don’t silence the blockee, just hide them from the blockeur.

What then, is the response to content that deserves hostility? Misinformation, propaganda, incivility, posting videos without a text synopsis?

You may want to edit your post body to include information you clarify later in comments, namely:

You don’t want to block users permanently, which is why the current block feature is unsuitable.

You don’t want to block users universally, that is, if someone downvotes you in one thread you still want to see their content in others.

You only want to stop seeing comment replies in a single thread (or subthread?) from users who have previously downvoted you in that thread.

Do I have that right? That wouldn’t be so bad, I think, though beats me how you’d implement it.

I too get irritated when users misuse the vote buttons, but to my mind the ranked-thread system doesn’t work without them. And in the end, they’re just numbers: No amount of votes has every made me delete an unpopular comment, either of my own or as a moderator.

eli 40

Have you tried complaining? It’s amazing. One of my favorite activities.

I haven’t found anything better than Jerboa. To me, the only flaw is that it will never, ever support piefed.

It’s the closest to the RIF experience.

I don’t know who a lot of celebrities are. Ariana Grande I know, but Gary Sinese? No clue what that dude is famous for or what he looks like.

Ugh, what a load of drivel. Article takes a lot of words to say only two things, and one of them is wrong. Combine that with the synecodochistic fallacy of conflating the fediverse as a whole with mastodon specifically, and it’s just a waste of time.

So, I’ll save you the read and summarize the author’s two observations:

• Bluesky was designed to be resilient, but their centralization onto a primary server made them succeptible to DDoS attack anyway.

• ActivityPub makes no mention of servers but the supermajority of Mastodon was unaffected by a DDoS attack on the biggest server — the author acts like this is a happy accident, an “emergent property”, rather than a core part of the fediverse ethos.

Article does not relate to the title in any way.

And can I say how much it really pisses me off that they got a grant to write this waste of time?

it’s an image of a slowpoke

depends on how much debt they’re servicing

There’s a variant of the card game War called Spoils of War, or Sow, that adds some strategy:

There can be up to five cards max in a player’s reserves. These cards can be pulled out in any battle and added to the player’s fighting card. Opponants have to option to do the same, and the original player can respond. This continues until all players can’t or won’t add any more and the highest total wins.

Aces beat all face cards but lose to all number cards. In a reserve battle, aces count for eleven.

In any regular battle, any player can choose to sacrifice two facedown cards to place the fighting card into her reserves. The sacrificed cards go to the winner of that battle. If all players do this, the sacrificed cards are claimed by the winner of the next battle.

If the two highest fighting cards in are tied (a “war” in the original game), or there’s a three-way circle of Ace beats Face beats Number beats Ace, or the totals in a reserve battle are tied, those players must place five face-down cards for the winner of the next battle to claim. Only those involved in the stand-off play the next battle.

The winning player of each battle may place all cards taken in that battle at the bottom of her deck in whatever order she chooses.

Overall, it adds a bit of strategic depth while still keeping a small footprint in tablespace and setup time.

I’m American, we don’t have those anymore.

But formerly, people like John Kasich, Tom Daschle, John McCain

I would not want to have to open the camera every time I got on the bus, for example.

Be twice as annoying back.

fourteen states void the votes of faithless elector and replace the elector

a larger number bar faithless electors but don’t have any enforcement mechanismor one only have one that affects the elector (but not the vote), making faithless electors illegal if not impossible in a majority of states

aand I’ll just point out right now that faithless elector laws don’t do anything to preserve the power of the state that passed them, only to preserve the power of the two dominant political parties

It doesn’t work at all if electors are barred from being “faithless” by law.