Hungry Jacks (upside down Burger King) used to sell those types of veggie burgers. They were super unimpressive since they felt more like a “just give them an option” thing rather than something meant to be enjoyable. I’d be surprised if they didn’t just copy another Burger King menu item.
As an aside, I feel like one of the few people that enjoy the impossible burgers. I’d buy em all the time if not for the price. Which as an Omni, seems like they’re doing their job then.
Jesus that took me down a rabbit hole. I’ll likely see you in the new site/hopefully lemmy gets forked. What a disappointment the devs turned out to be.
That’s actually a great suggestion. I thought of it as “I need to pick a new home to move to” but looks super simple on voyager to switch between accounts. I technically still have my kbin with the same user (and also see kbin in the modlog a lot lol). Thanks for the tips and suggestions!!
I signed up before I understood lemmy. I was considering bitching to the fediverse community about it. It’s pretty unintuitive how this all works to an outsider. Given beehaws philosophy I was considering migrating there because of this thread tbh. I will consider it tho cheers.
The bear scenario is the perfect division inducing shitstorm.
It’s understandable what the memes portrays the danger that women face, daily. The fact that they frequently don’t feel comfortable or even just basic safety is definitely valid and worth discussion.
However, the bear vs man thing was just the worst vehicle to induce that discussion. On one side men who may not be the most well informed about women issues; will get immediately defensive at being compared to a large animal known for tearing people apart and eating them alive.
The members of the other side who see all the angry men getting defensive at them for expressing this view and think it’s purely because they aren’t empathetic to these issue, they “hate” women or they’re marginalising what is a real and daily danger.
Of course there are actual trolls, toxic arseholes and people who have 0 interest actual discourse or understanding but fuck them, I agree ban em.
It was never going to end in a productive, calm or rational discussion and frankly I think tarring the entire of lemmy for it is equally as unproductive. I’ve seen plenty of people initially aggressive to the meme, come around. I’ve seen more and more people make light jokes about the same meme without the accusatory tone. If you want discourse theres space to do so; it just has to be done better(imo). Preferably without snark or accusatory tones.
Same, once I blocked it and hexbear lemmy went back to being a better version of reddit again. Substantially less shitpost and bad faith baiting.
I entirely agree and appreciate the sentiment but this person has a history of this and just accusing anyone who makes that suggestion with whatever comes to mind. IRL I’m all for it but at some point as more and more people become aware of this poster pattern of behaviour it become disruptive to the community and the repeated negative pushback can’t be healthy or helping to the poster.
You realise this persons account is also older than yours right?
I wouldn’t bother. They frequently accuse people of creating alts to harass them. Despite the fact that the majority of said accounts are older than theirs.
Edited to remove a potentially unhealthy toxic sarcastic remark.
Whoo boy, it’s this poster again. People who disagree with Frickineh’s assessment should go through the OP post history and some of the replies. Though this will get you branded a “stalker” by the OP. It’s the extended family now? Last time they were on c/all it was a cop ex husband. That and the cat being “shot” saga, ya know, despite it looking nothing like a GSW. Still got a chunk of change in donations though.
Are your arrs buying amphetamines online again? Detox your homelab with these six easy steps.
It likely will because they’re cheating and not learning. Whatever they’re shortcutting by cheating, if it’s assumed knowledge down the line, they won’t have it because they cheated instead of learning. The morality of it aside, if you rely on cheating in academia you’re just screwing yourself over, in more ways than one.
I’ll take your word for it. At the institution I’m currently at and my former one this is academic misconduct as it isn’t your own work. I’m real suss on anyone claiming to have a phd while suggesting methods that essentially introduce a potential time bomb for your degree. May as well actually learn how to learn if you’re going to uni but hey that’s just my (apparently red hot) take.
I think getting them to show their work is appropriate and for any that can’t replicate their work explain to them the downfalls of cheating. The other comments here justifying likely haven’t ever been in an academic setting. Relying on cheating is setting yourself up for failure if you intend to continue studying at a tertiary level.
I don’t think a punishment is necessary for cheaters just a lecture. Let them know people can and have had their degrees rescinded years after the fact when their cheating was detected with newer methods.
Edit: downvotes for suggesting that cheating is bad lmao. Like I said cheating at uni is easily detected these days. Fuck the getting caught, you’re paying however much to get an education, you may as well actually learn.
Alright and then this can be it for me as I’m pretty sure we won’t reach a consensus.
What would you say of “people downvoting posts about football and basketball because they don’t care about it”? Or my posts that were on the emacs community, which has about 10 active users per month? Or etc
I would say the edge cases for this don’t justify the blanket guideline and if they did it could be worded (and likely similarly ignored) like reddit did. I would also say situations like the language one can be implement with a UI fix. Plenty of small communities both here and on reddit grew despite being “niche” or even just not popular.
You seem to understand that we’re are not talking about your case, but you still want to keep your downvote based on a flawed assumption.
No. You don’t seem to understand that you’re providing guidelines that are incompatible with voting. You want to talk about edge cases in which your guideline can function and makes sense. I’m providing you far more likely and apparent cases where it doesn’t. Your guideline means someone would be breaking them even if downvoting content that breaks the rules of conduct I.e using it directly as intended. I’d consider guidelines for not downvoting stuff solely because you don’t like it for “reasons” before your guideline. Which I’d argue being a lot of former redditors, Lemmy largely inherited.
The idea of even a guideline against shielding communities from negative engagement while affording all the benefits of positive engagement isn’t worth the odd niche community post being spared a couple downvotes from people who don’t know how to use it. If individual communities want to only display upvotes, then goes nuts since that makes way more sense. I doubt I was the first but I’d guess most votes are from people who share my numerous strong views on it. Anyway, as I alluded to before if you can’t understand my position after this many paragraphs then we probably better call it a day. Have a good one.
That’s fine and I’m saying that it is not a good idea to do so. I had figured my providing you with examples how intended voting behaviour can violate your proposed guideline would demonstrate that. Non English communities getting downvoted for… not being English is not intended or desired behaviour and deserves a more direct fix than a guideline.
No because that has nothing to do with why I downvoted the OP. Also, as I pointed out in an edit, my engagement with this post has likely driven it up in this specific instance anyway. Even if it doesn’t this went from being engaged by 2-3 people to a lot more real quick despite the OP largely neutral votes for the first hour, and now being -10 so clearly it doesn’t just drop the post off the face of the planet due to downvoting and probably other factors are considered.
Anyway, throughout this I’ve done my best to address every point you’ve brought up. Yet I’ve had multiple questions, some even asking for clarification, go ignored. So I think now is probably a good time for the old “agree to disagree”.
I mean if you want me to be specific then unfortunately I can do so. It’s more than I just disagree with you. It’s that I think your reasoning in the OP is very flawed and misrepresents the situation you are attempting to portray. Which felt dishonest initially but given your attempts to engage people who disagree I now assume misguided, sorry to say. Also I think people stating their views under the pretence of a question should be discouraged due to proximity behaviours like concern trolling (not implying that’s what you’ve been doing, just an example). Lastly, I super strongly oppose being shown content on a site like this that I can’t interact with. For your case it may make sense but I can super easily see it being abused by the cases in my example; where people can grandstand shitty politics(again as an example) but then the onus is on me for some reason to not engage with said content.
Fair, my point was not everyone downvoting things when they aren’t in a community is because they don’t like it. Good news, some instances have implemented “show upvotes only” so the displayed count is unaffected by downvotes. So you’ve already got a means/precedent to do so.
I appreciate the first part of your comment and the overall candour. However:
I’m on Voyager here and the gif displays as you’d expect and I can zoom on it as well. I think I was in Boost for a bit but I eventually settled on Voyager for it’s familiarity and features.