Seasoned_Greetings

I mean, he could still lie. He'd just have to afford one more question

Girls want guys who are happy on their own first. Nobody wants to be responsible for someone else's entire happiness.

That's why they tell you to get a hobby with a community, it's to be happy on your own. It isn't so you can meet girls who like the same things you do (although that can happen), it's so that girls can be attracted to the fact that you go get what you want and enjoy your life.

It's hard if you're depressed and it feels pointless at first. Do it anyway, and don't do it to meet women. Do it to be happier.

When you drop the bitterness of being an incel and fill your life with friends and hobbies, you'll immediately become more attractive.

Because there are two doors and only one question. If you ask a known question unrelated to the door you find out who the liar is but lose your opportunity to ask them which is the correct door.

That assumes the other guy holds to his principles in the face of death. If I were the dm, the act of tearing the other guy's head off and then threatening to do the same to the other one unless granted another question would at least grant advantage on an intimidation check

The way I look at it is, the more echo chambers you are in and out of, the more complete of a picture you can get as a whole.

Yes, Lemmy is a certain kind of echo chamber. But you can't really be part of an online community these days that doesn't tend toward becoming one.

You just have to diversify to keep the thread. And Lemmy is a very important part of that diversification for me.

We can change anything, and if it makes society a better place then we actually have a moral obligation to try

The problem is that "better" in the context of society is usually subjective. We're talking about a form of censorship, for which change in a positive direction is very complicated at best.

Lawmakers in the US want people to think that ISPs taking responsibility for pirates on their network is a change for a "better" society, for example. Or that net neutrality is unfair to businesses and would result in a "better" society if abolished.

The truth is that it's a ploy to gather unprecedented amounts of data on citizens hiding behind a "won't they think of the children" moral take.

There is no meaningful barrier to porn without changing what makes the internet the internet. There are only old tech illiterate law makers virtue signaling about their children while those children run circles around arbitrary shit like this

A counter argument implies an argument, which you have not made. You're just here declaring to everyone that it's your right to be an asshole. Is that supposed to be a point?

Besides that, according to you, nobody owes you an argument. We can just do what we want. Don't like it? Then don't ask me questions and I won't give you answers that hurt 👍

Nah. You didn't "forget" to add several paragraphs. You wanted to clarify your first two sentences in a way that doesn't make you look like the asshole I called you out for being. Pretty big difference.

But whatever you say

Likewise

You're the one insisting on your own righteousness on a post about tolerance. There's no discussion with you, because it will always end like this.