this post was submitted on 18 Apr 2025
263 points (96.1% liked)
Casual Conversation
3139 readers
149 users here now
Share a story, ask a question, or start a conversation about (almost) anything you desire. Maybe you'll make some friends in the process.
RULES (updated 01/22/25)
- Be respectful: no harassment, hate speech, bigotry, and/or trolling. To be concise, disrespect is defined by escalation.
- Encourage conversation in your OP. This means including heavily implicative subject matter when you can and also engaging in your thread when possible. You won't be punished for trying.
- Avoid controversial topics (politics or societal debates come to mind, though we are not saying not to talk about anything that resembles these). There's a guide in the protocol book offered as a mod model that can be used for that; it's vague until you realize it was made for things like the rule in question. At least four purple answers must apply to a "controversial" message for it to be allowed.
- Keep it clean and SFW: No illegal content or anything gross and inappropriate. A rule of thumb is if a recording of a conversation put on another platform would get someone a COPPA violation response, that exact exchange should be avoided when possible.
- No solicitation such as ads, promotional content, spam, surveys etc. The chart redirected to above applies to spam material as well, which is one of the reasons its wording is vague, as it applies to a few things. Again, a "spammy" message must be applicable to four purple answers before it's allowed.
- Respect privacy as well as truth: Don’t ask for or share any personal information or slander anyone. A rule of thumb is if something is enough info to go by that it "would be a copyright violation if the info was art" as another group put it, or that it alone can be used to narrow someone down to 150 physical humans (Dunbar's Number) or less, it's considered an excess breach of privacy. Slander is defined by intentional utilitarian misguidance at the expense (positive or negative) of a sentient entity. This often links back to or mixes with rule one, which implies, for example, that even something that is true can still amount to what slander is trying to achieve, and that will be looked down upon.
Casual conversation communities:
Related discussion-focused communities
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I'm admittedly not a cat person, however there seems to be quite a difference between a Maine Coon and a Sphynx. I agree though that long hair vs short hair of the same breed is negligible and doesn't need to be an entirely separate breed.
So we should make bald men a separate breed of human, and NFL lineman another?
There's another comment in this thread that points out how slippery a slope it becomes when you try to apply breeds to humans, but that is kind of the idea isn't it? You seem to accept it in the case of dogs. Either way, I don't really have a hard stance either way, was just more curious of your reasoning.
You assumed I accepted it at dogs just because I pointed out the irony of all cats just being of the house variety. To me dogs are dogs guess what wolfs are dogs too. You dirty ape. :)
I mean, nobody's saying dogs are different races, there's just dogs with different phenotypic traits. When they match a certain known pattern that's a "breed".
It's about as real as beer recipes matching certain styles. Race isn't a real thing, it's just sets of traits that people are used to seeing in certain populations.