I used to love that sub. Then it started to be about legal responsibilities instead of morality… From there it really turned into a dumpster fire
The only time I’ve ever been banned on a forum because although I said the woman had the right to do what she did and the guy was clearly in the wrong, she needlessly escalated when empathy would’ve led to a better result for everyone
No explanation, just a temp ban. For advocating empathy and third path conflict resolution
The funniest posts are when commenters get angry OP disagrees with them or makes their own decisions. It’s like they think seeking advice creates a binding contract to follow that advice if it gets agreed with enough.
If you follow advice that you don’t agree with, you are an idiot, even if the advice is actually good. And disagreeing or arguing when you don’t agree is a good way to resolve it if you don’t see why someone would suggest that.
People should only go to that sub for entertainment. Or if you bring a real problem there, use it as a way to get a variety of different perspectives while keeping in mind some commenters might be literal teenagers (or even younger) with no life experience and half of the replies will be either projecting their own shit onto your situation, won’t understand what you wrote, or want to play Sherlock Holmes but their version relies on assumptions they pull out of their ass instead of genius level observational skills, logic, and most of all, the favour of sir Arthur Conan Doyle who can write him as smart or as dumb as his plot about a genius detective needs him to be. Oh, and assholes, the real assholes are in the comments.
And if you scroll down to the bottom of the thread, you get to see some really interesting world views. Or sometimes the rational ones when one of the more popular biases gets triggered.
I used to love that sub. Then it started to be about legal responsibilities instead of morality… From there it really turned into a dumpster fire
The only time I’ve ever been banned on a forum because although I said the woman had the right to do what she did and the guy was clearly in the wrong, she needlessly escalated when empathy would’ve led to a better result for everyone
No explanation, just a temp ban. For advocating empathy and third path conflict resolution
The funniest posts are when commenters get angry OP disagrees with them or makes their own decisions. It’s like they think seeking advice creates a binding contract to follow that advice if it gets agreed with enough.
If you follow advice that you don’t agree with, you are an idiot, even if the advice is actually good. And disagreeing or arguing when you don’t agree is a good way to resolve it if you don’t see why someone would suggest that.
People should only go to that sub for entertainment. Or if you bring a real problem there, use it as a way to get a variety of different perspectives while keeping in mind some commenters might be literal teenagers (or even younger) with no life experience and half of the replies will be either projecting their own shit onto your situation, won’t understand what you wrote, or want to play Sherlock Holmes but their version relies on assumptions they pull out of their ass instead of genius level observational skills, logic, and most of all, the favour of sir Arthur Conan Doyle who can write him as smart or as dumb as his plot about a genius detective needs him to be. Oh, and assholes, the real assholes are in the comments.
And if you scroll down to the bottom of the thread, you get to see some really interesting world views. Or sometimes the rational ones when one of the more popular biases gets triggered.