I wonder why they would kill old videos instead of just removing those 10-hour plus loops of the same song over and over again that nobody watches. You'd think those giant loop videos would be taking up far more space.
AceTKen
Funnily enough, "not so smart joke" is the same descriptor I have for no-discussion downvoters.
My liver may be flower-scented, but I tend to not paint situations in broad-stoke terms like "woke" that are used to dismiss valid arguments.
You can't disprove a label (especially a vague one that someone else applies to you), however you can very much disprove points.
Hey I'm just writing the rules down, not telling you you shouldn't be annoyed by them.
It really is the embodiment of that old joke about people never wanting to hear other people's opinions, and only wanting to hear their own opinion parroted back to them by someone passably eloquent.
We were kidding at some point?
-
Every thread against people not strictly aligning with Leftist politics will be boiled down to: “There are three types of people: reasonable people who agree with me, crazy fascists on the other side, and lily-livered wimps who can’t pick a side (and are also secretly fascists who just won't admit it)!”
-
Anyone with passable writing skills will be downvoted because creating cogent arguments against them is hard, and heaven forbid anyone see a smart argument that doesn't align with your views perfectly.
-
In a similar vein, people will use the downvote as a "fuck you" button without commenting or adding any value to the conversation whatsoever.
(Edit: Yes, yes. You're all hilarious. I may not have a button to hit, but fuck you too.)
The internet existed for a long time prior to monetization of it. People used to do things because they were good ideas, fun, or helpful.
Revenue streams made things worse.
With 400 permutations of "Fuck this clown" and "how can I block mentions of him" in the comments.
Unfortunately, shitty billionaires make the news. Get rid of billionaires and they won't be in the news.
I'll bite. Most of what I see here in this thread against Centrism or Independents is bad strawman arguments consisting of: “There are three types of people: reasonable people who agree with me, crazy fascists, and lily-livered wimps who can’t pick a side (and are also fascists)!”
If someone says that they are “centrist” they are not telling you that they base all of their opinions on being dead center in the middle of any two positions. That would be stupid.
They are telling you that they agree with neither major party on everything, and find that both parties have views that they don’t agree with. It’s pretty easy to come to that conclusion because the US two-party system packs in an almost incoherent mishmash of beliefs into exactly two sides.
There is absolutely no contradiction in being for police reform, and against riots lasting for days. There is no contradiction in being for gun rights, while also wanting massive limits on them. There is no contradiction in wanting functional government services and universal healthcare, and thinking that free markets are effective to an extent. There is no contradiction in wanting a more balanced budget, and government services to be funded properly.
The idea that there are only two (or maybe 2.5 depending on where you live) sides in politics is a strange delusion created by your two party system.
The reason the meme creator is running into situations like this is because they don’t witness the Centrist also vehemently argue with right-wing policies frequently.
They only see them argue with them and therefore have a skewed view of Centrists / Independents and their politics. If you are left wing, and argue for left-wing policies in every case, that means you will also be argued with by somebody who believes political nuance and not just waving a party flag.
Remember, the right wing also shits on centrists because they think they are secretly left-wing since they argue with their stupider points as well.
So no, these people are not secretly right-wing and just don’t have the balls to say it. That is a horrendous take no matter where you fall on the political spectrum and only serves to limit conversation.
Now you go.
Near Kingston! Maybe I just wasn't paying attention?
So to combat use cases like this, why not just add a repeat option? There would be no break if it cached the beginning again.
Also just download the audio you want and loop it yourself. It would take roughly 2 minutes and use way less bandwidth.