I would recommend the invite tracking. Keep track of who invites bad actors, even higher order. If your friend’s friends suck, that should reflect a little on you. If no one has vouched for you, then you’re less trusted.

Unfortunately, stupid people will not be able to connect these dots. They live in an emotion driven fantasy land, and no amount of external evidence showing their in-group hurting them will change their mind.

The only things that change minds are in-group pressure, and trauma. So it’s possible that some trumper will have seven hours of screaming diarrhea and while curled up at death’s door realize the error of their ways, it seems a lot of people would rather die than be momentarily embarrassed.

I’m doing my part by avoiding microsoft products as much as possible. I don’t care if they make an amazing new Fallout game (they won’t). Fuck them.

There was a big thread a while ago where one subset of posters were like “you clearly CAN compare them this is stupid” and another subset was saying “but the point of the idiom is doing so is fruitless”. Not sure what’s so hard to grasp about using an inappropriate metric to judge something.

But then again maybe most people use the idiom in senseless ways.

Cool. Fuck Microsoft

When the legal system neither delivers justice not makes people whole after being harmed, people start getting ideas. Like taking up plumbing

There are people responsible for climate change. We should feed them to the fires. Perhaps it will appease the gods.

We shouldn’t let the heritage foundation just sit around malignantly growing.

I think sometimes about two of my old coworkers. Mid six figure salary, straight white guys. Didn’t go to even the most basic protests. They’d say they cared, but when it came down to showing up they just made excuses, stayed home, and played dota. They just didn’t care that much.

I don’t speak to either of them anymore. If they think about me at all, they probably think I’m just annoying for making them feel bad.

This doesn’t seem like something private organizations should be allowed to do.

What do you call the action of putting their grades together like this, without the sentences you put after it? (this is the most important question of this comment).

Why are you stuck on “cannot” when the point of the idiom is about the (repeat pun) fruitlessness of comparing things by inappropriate standards?

You clearly can come up with a way to score a math test by the standards of an art class, but that is not typically a useful endeavor.

I’ve never heard that expression before, but that’s pretty good.

I worked with several former teachers in my software career. They were all smart patient people. Software jobs making shit for rich people to get richer paid more than double for less work.

I knew another teacher who was on food stamps because her salary was so low.

Our society values stupid shit. It invests in stupid shit. We are lead by assholes and fools.

Are you confusing “can’t” and “can, but is fruitless” (pun intended)?

Like, if someone says to you “you can’t put nails in with a screwdriver”, are you going to say “You totally can. Just whack the nail with the handle. I don’t see the problem”.

Or, like, “You can’t eat crayons” do you respond “sure you can. chew it up and eat it. i don’t see the problem. it’s just like a cookie”

“This orange sucks. I can’t just bite into it and enjoy it like an apple.” That’s not a sensible assessment of the orange. That’s applying the desired attributes of an apple to an orange.

The most reasonable interpretation is that you cannot use the standards of apples on oranges, nor the other way around.

You wouldn’t fault an apple because it doesn’t have a thick skin that needs peeling.

Fine. Consider your point made. I’ll use some other metaphor or allusion to express “don’t willy-nilly change systems you don’t understand”. Many people just do that, out of ignorance, stupidity, or hubris. I’ve seen a lot of software people delete “useless” code that caused problems later.

I assumed it was a counter to the implicit idea that Israel is eternal and timeless and just a fact of life, rather than something that started in living memory

I’m reminded of that meme of the cartoon girl going “this sign won’t stop me because I can’t read”

I’ve had coworkers that changed some code, then just deleted the tests that started failing. Then they get annoyed their PR is blocked by more attentive coworkers.

If we switch the argument to being about diverting a watercourse, or regrading land, it suddenly falls apart because it becomes clear that these things do not exist for intelligent reasons.

This is not a compelling analogy. Many things in nature may not exist for an intelligent reason, but their presence matters in ways that may not be obvious. Diverting a waterway may cause tremendous damage to the ecosystem and other downstream (pun intended) things. That is an excellent example of why you should understand the current system before attempting to change it.

I don’t think it’s a bad idea to try and understand the world or to mitigate risks when making changes. I think chesterton’s fence is a shite argument because it implies that everything which exists has a planned purpose and favours the status quo which may be intoler

I don’t think the implied plan purpose is necessary for the argument to make sense. The point of the story is it’s not always clear what things are load bearing, nor what loads they bear.

If the chesteron origin is distracting to you, let’s discard it. I think we agree that changing a complex system without attempting to understand it first is foolish.