No, Nostr is looking more promising.

But it’s bookmarked.

U ?

I really appreciate that you care to come over and tell us your position, and this is key for me:

This isn’t really an issue as far as content and engagement is concerned thanks to federation, but it does mean we’re a very small fish that can be easily killed if we get defederated. We’re not big enough to survive under our own content steam, so if you do join, please try to keep this in mind.

Basically, you may be forced to moderate, and to ban really confrontational, in your face sort of posts that are derogatory to avoid defed… Which is fair.

I think I may come over to your instance and participate in some stuff, all in godo faith, all with no slurs or name-calling, as that is against my religion. ’

I’ll probably get a totally diff useranme, though. Be unrecognizable. I actually did this when coming over to EH (some wolfballers will remmeber my original name; like 1-2 people may remember my Discussions name… I don’t fully remember my discussions name, lol.)

Do you have any plans for yourself?

A great sign for the gang - just today my Gab here got a repost from Andrew Torba himself (who follows me, which is just wonderful).

I think we should play around with Nostr with the gang but… this is an auspicious start, my friends.

Lol these guys take the bait more easily than fish with brains the size of cashews.

This will be cited one day by an instance wanting to defederate as an example of our extreme bigotry.

God bless this man - I pray for his salvation.

I am confident in God’s mercy and I believe that we will ge the best results for him.

Lord, have mercy on your servant, Dave.

But the joke is claiming asylum.

Cubans and Venezuelans of specific backgrounds have good claims for asylum, but the average person arriving actually does not. They are what could be termed economic refugees. The fact that there is any process at all for Mexicans, El Salvadorans, Guatemalans, etc., to obtain asylum is silly…

There’s a better case that there are Germans and British people who need asylum for their rights to free speech being infringed upon by local tyrannical police.

There needs to be more funding for the courts to hear these cases quickly and for humane living conditions for these people with the burden shared among all states.

I appreciate you offering up this sort of suggestion - it is well intended, and it is the sort of thing that I would support fully since I think it is the the path of least resistance for making progress on this issue.

I do not want to come off as too overbearing - as I may have in the first half of the post - but I do feel strongly about this.

Thanks for a serious and good suggestion.

Also the laws need to be changed to make it easier to obtain work visas so they can work above board

Fully agreed here as well.

I think that we should actively be working to get Mexicans and central Americans to the US on good visas, and that visas should be awarded primarily to young people without criminal histories and who have graduated highschool which would incentivize prosocial behavior in those countries.

We do have some debt to central Americans since we have played insane games in those countries with the CIA for decades.

Not a bad campaign strategy - how else is he going to try to beat Trump?

The concept though, is pretty clear: the standing budgets of ICE and CBP are inadequate for what is occurring, but instead of increasing these during a crisis, they have spent over a $100 billion on the Ukraine war and are even spending billions through municipal and state budgets to accommodate illegal aliens instead of repatriating them.

Nostr looks very promising but I also feel it is one of those places that just functions better if you already have a group of people using it extensively.

We already have here so I have less inclination to try to just replicate all of our posting over there.

Imagine actually thinking it is the mascot’s fault, though, lol…

“Our mascot mouse looks too young so peds came here…”

OH, OK…

The fact taht the mascot changed is hilarious.

You almost can’t blame him - this is perhaps one of the only things that’ll work for him.

Love the signoff of -Ruud-

I will just say:

• It would be ironic that there is nobody screaming about defederation over this. Of course I must be charitable and note that these are not exactly super mainstream posts it seems… But also I am not going to click around and consume this material. I don’t want to accidentally click on some stuff and scar my brain (the first post I clicked on had a LINK to somewhere that I AM NOT CLICKING).

• I think everyone has a right to free speech and so if they want to make these insane arguments… Let them. I am not going to say we need to give a platform to them or anything, but I am a free speech extremist. I don’t think people doing creepy or bad philosophy should be banned.

Well said

You just got to keep pointing out to everyone that Europeans have no idea how to do democracy.

Which is why they are committing suicide before our eyes… They are stupid in the Dietrich Bonhoeffer sense of the word, and have no inclination to live because the world is a dark place through the foggy window of their soul.

lol

npub17wdrahfq4cxznawx3uwuukadp72t7ank4k79q7pevlwkehepmudq7uapg9

Smart addition

Just curious if there is more information about this

People are so desperate for attention and then want to play the freedom card when it blows up on them.

Bro ppl don’t want you at family friendly events.

Yeah I agree with all this…

The aluminum bit is interesting.

SMoking a cigarette outside then touching a baby … lol, that’s wild. it doesn’t make that much sense to me. It would mean tobacco is super lethal to babies, or those small chemicals placed in tobacco, and you don’t hear about

baby touched cigarette baby had to be rushed to the hospital

Ever, in the news.

OK I think we have just had some different experiences with this… And that is completely fine and valid. I do not dispute yours.

I knew a girl who struggled with a lot of gender issues that I did not understand because I was actually raised in a relatively liberal, upper middle class home. Of course, my father is a devout conservative, but so many people in my extended family have all manner of conflicting ideas, and discussion of these things was never barred…

So when she talked to me about how her family frowned on her for even being interested in sports or dressing "boyish"ly , I was shocked.

So, who knows.

The United States is a very big place.

I remember, as a conservative, even getting culture shock at the levels of conservatism among Texans (lol). So, I will say that… I just don’t know.

I think I am right for one segment of the society, and you are right for another. Which is another reason to prefer decentralization, IMO: let each area address its own issues, and to have a standard be one of largely tolerance.

By a very very very small amount of people maybe, those who were considered to be radicals. Not only did a majority of people believe that homosexuality should not be accepted or tolerated, this was a time where at least half of the population believed that homosexual relations should be illegal… And this didn’t change until quite recently.

I think it was far more widespread than you think. Yes, it’s absolutely the case that there were scary, intimidatingly conservative places in America in the 1970s… But it is also the case that people in Minnesota, Iowa, Missouri, Texas, etc. were all listening to what was being released from the coasts. Boomers & Gen X grew up knowing who all these stars overdosing on drugs and practicing alternative lifestyles were. Which is why things like Roe v Wade were possible…

You also see crazy numbers like this:

Gallup’s trend by age reveals that widespread experimentation with marijuana first occurred among adults aged 18 to 29 between 1969 and 1973, rising from 8% to 35%. It then continued to mount, reaching 56% by 1977, and remained at that level in 1985. Since then, however, marijuana use among young adults has progressively declined. At the same time, as the bulge of young adults who tried marijuana in the 1970s ages and replaces older Americans who never tried it, the rate of all Americans who have ever tried the drug has increased slightly.

Gallup

Check out these numbers

In the days when pre-marital sex was taboo, many couples had at least one powerful incentive to marry. This may have been the case in 1969 when Gallup found that premarital sex was frowned upon by two-thirds of Americans, while only 21% felt these relations were acceptable. That critical view dropped sharply by the early 1970s to 47%, and in 1985 Gallup found a majority of Americans on the other side, with 52% saying premarital sex was morally okay. Today, according to a May 10-14 Gallup poll, only 38% of U.S. adults say it is wrong for a man and a woman to have sexual relations before marriage, while 60% disagree.

Gallup

34% of people in 1983 said that homosexuality should be an acceptable moral lifestyle as well…

Again, Gallup…

1/3 people saying it is acceptable probably indicates a far greater amount of people thinking it is somehow cool - like how being in a biker gang is cool, or like how being a drugged out disco burnout or hippie was also cool.

The “hippie revolution” was pretty much dead at that point. And of course, “normies” always hated the hippies. They were considered to be radicals, they were probably seen in a less favourable way than people see “antifa” today. And at that time, the hippies were associated with murderers and cults (Jim Jones, Charles Manson).

… But its impact never left. 1/3 of people found homosexuality a morally acceptable lifestyle in 1983. Do you think it was anywhere close to that prior to the hippie revolution?

Compared to how things were before the 60s, yes. But that’s just because before the 60s, “free love” was unthinkable and recreational drugs simply did not exist in the eyes of the general public (outside of alcohol and tabacco). But we also shouldn’t forget that those things happened in very specific metropolian areas.

Kids in suburban America were smoking pot in the 1970s.

My sources show 56% of people having smoked pot by 1977.

lol well played

Right, there are reasons to suggest that it is not a good idea to include the 4skin.

Here I agree with you. But I know that fantasising all day long about violence and “finally getting revenge” while blaming “the opposite side for everything” will certainly not help. And this goes for both right wingers who are fantasysing about lining up and shooting all the trans people/leftists/sjw’s as well as all the extreme lefties who fantasise about “bringing out the guilitine” and executing all the rich people, racists and right wingers.

Fate allowed me to reply to your post on Bastille day in honor of the guillotine…

But let me say this… any sort of violence is always reprehensible, and even though I am guilty of laughing at it occasionally (which is uncouth and something I will address), I do condemn it…

I think it would be beneficial for the patient, rational people on all sides to always remind everyone we are all people, and that we shoudl decide things

• in respect of one another’s rights and autonomy
• through consensus
• recognizing that the other person is loved, cherished by their family
• recognizing that we fail as neighbors when we let people suffer

and that violence can only be done if it is defensive and meant to protect the innocent.

It is because of these same principles that I endorse free speech, unconditionally. I have no right to coerce anyone, right… I would never use violence towards such an end.

Pacifism, liberty, democracy… self-rule. These are all linked.

Indeed it does but after a day I got my energy back. This will probably even be a far better response…

What was “prestigious” about being a “homo” in the 90s? What is prestigious about being trans today? They are overwhelmingly hated all over the world for who they are, the push against that hate has been met with extreme scepticism by a lot of people.

As I had heard it described by a few people, it was considered cool in the 70s to have gay friends. Disco was at its peak, and people were still living in the wake of the hippie revolution. Recreational drugs were very widely used, as was all sorts of things like swinging… So, having gay friends was considered normal… and, by the 1990s, the mainstreaming of gay actors and gay themes in TV began to take off. There was the famous “I Kissed A Girl” track in 1995, but more importantly, Ellen and various other TV shows had gay subplots and main characters.

Obviously, you can bring up that significant swathes of the country still opposed it, but the power dealers in NYC, LA, etc., all were on board with it, and hence the fast progression towards the approval not just of homosexuality in general, but same sex marriage.

Also, what are you implying when you say “without making any commitments”? Isn’t one of the right’s main criticisms that the changes are too permanent/not reversable? Shouldn’t you be happy that they “aren’t commiting”?

Yes, it’s totally one of our main criticisms, and I absolutely congratulate the people who do not give themselves permanent damage. They certainly dodged a bullet.

But there is also something to say about people adopting ideas of convenience for virtue signaling.

I’m just saying it’s not as “unnatural” as you might think, or rather nature can be pretty fucked up and weird in it’s own right.

Right, there’s no lack of cruelty…

There’s so many ways to use the word natural. When we employ it simply as occurring in nature, we cannot come to moral conclusions about it…

But when we say “It’s natural for a child to love his parents,” we all know what is being communicated: the healthy, normal thing for a child is to have an attachment and affection for their parents. When children do not do this, which could be for a variety of reasons, it’s viewed as uneahtlhy and not normal…

Even though severe autism or other emotional disorders may occur in nature.

I think it’s pretty silly when people say “we are banning the nazis” when they are talking about you. I mean many do it to provoke you and piss you off while they know you are not actual nazis, but still, it’s pretty silly. But at the same time, I don’t really know how to address it, it’s just how people on the internet seem to act and you people certainly like to provoke, so you almost have to expect a reaction.

Thank you.

I’d also like you to know that, if I had my way, we would have not made any provocative posts at all and pot a moratorium on such content in order to establish trust, so that when it does come out there would be more people who had experienced us differently.

I actually think this position of my own is naive but I think that making the effort counts. I think, though, defederation would have been inevitable, and that we might even get the posts talking about how they are more dangerous NAZIS! because of the fact that they tried to infiltrate us by posting… like normal, moderate conservatives or some such.

[posting now to see if there is an error again]

I just had a huge crisis…

I never had a post disappear on me before… But after spendign 20 minutes writing a reply to you, my post disappeared…!

Absolute total loss 😅 😆 😂 ☹️ 🥴

Not even sure what to do at this point.

I’ll try to address this all again later.

It’s just so silly at this point, lol…

Two heterosexuals “banging” on a stage has been done… I thought it was uninteresting, gimmicky, silly. Uninspiring. Unartistic. Absolutely unnecessary. It’s not even entertaining.

This is just an eyesore more than anything else, and it is not even edgy.

Hate it, and I wouldn’t want to see it, but if fat Sam came over and said

“Is it because you’re offended?”

I’d also laugh.