I’m not sure that it’s possible to move posts but that would be funny. Maybe c/powerthoughts

We can’t keep everyone happy. I’ll agree that this post gave me pause. I think it’s better to error on the side of leaving things up.

Please report the post if you think it violates rules, and please specify which rules and why.

I’m sure Netanyahu also wants it to end right after he gets his sadistic goals.

As of mid 2024 the lowest estimate I found was >7000 Palestinian children dead, as compared to a highest estimate of <100 Israeli children dead. Any child dead is too many but it shows that this is not a war, it’s a slaughter.

I voted for Harris because any alternative is asinine, but we should expect that the arms shipments to Israel will continue unless we pressure our politicians.

This was reported for breaking rule 1,4,5.

1 The votes seem to agree that it’s not a shower thought. I’m slow to remove a post for this rule, I would rather let the votes do the work.

4 I’m not sure saying this about Putin is saying anything about any people group. You can be hugely supportive of people groups while thinking their leaders are responsible for, or capable of, horrible things. At various times nearly every country could be used as an example of this.

5 I’m not sure what community rule it’s breaking. It’s not a very positive post but people should be free to be negative online if they that’s how they feel. Lord knows that many comment threads are negative. I may feel differently if the the majority of posts suddenly became negative.

As always I’m open to feedback.

The concept of a shower thought is annoyingly abstract, so I error on the side of leaving posts up, but maybe this is a good chance to get the perspectives of others:

1. Is the problem, or part of the problem, that the post is a question?
2. Or maybe the post is not whimsical enough?
3. Do people think a shower thought can ever be a question?
4. Is it something else that makes this not a shower thought?

This post was reported for breaking community rules. Its not obvious to me what rules would be broken. dm me if you feel strongly about it and would like to clarify.

This post was reported for being a news article not a shower thought. Also it seems like several of the comments are concerned that it is political.

There isn’t a rule against posting a link. The article does seem relevant and OP’s thought isn’t taken from the article, it seems unique, like something you might think of in the shower after reading the article.

There isn’t a rule against political posts. Many posts have some component of politics to them.

Thank you all for being civil with each other. Thank you all for commenting and reporting when think something is pushing the limits on what should be considered a “shower thought”, it’s an abstract concept, so social pressure is helpful in shaping the community. I try to error on the side of being permissive.

As always, I am open to feedback.

Edit: spelling, ironically

Sounds like an unpleasant shower… I’m sorry

Thanks I had no idea what it was.

This comment was reported. I’m not seeing any issue but the reporter can dm me and point it out if I’m missing something.

I’m certainly having trouble making sense of them.

Well if it doesn’t happen again, that means Linux isn’t doing well.

‘it’ being a handoff of ownership

Motorola still has them

His audio tours are amazing, and free!

Thank you! And thank you for being a part of this community!

This post was reported. I think the objection would be to the second paragraph where it sounds like you are making a claim about the character of the person.

We want this to be an inviting place where people can share what they are passionate about. Everyone is free to attack each other’s opinions and stances. However, there are rules against attacking individuals and groups of people.

Not only is it against the rules but there are much more effective methods of arguing. Ad hominem attacks are poor at persuasion.

Do you mind rewriting the second paragraph to focus on the arguments made in the prior comment, rather than the character of the person?

Thank you, I really appreciate the effort to tone things down.

I want people to have the freedom be passionate in their comments and posts, and I think the community rules do a good job of allow the freedom to argue passionately. The rules do aim to avoid attacks against people themselves and groups of people.

So, while toning things down is not the primary goal, when things get aggressive it’s harder for everyone to avoid ad hominem attacks.

I dont have the ability to tag it NSFW. If you edit your original post you can tag it NSFW. source: https://lemmy.world/post/463392 If you editing your post, please consider replacing your example with something that steers well clear of people’s characteristics. See this section of the rules for more details: https://legal.lemmy.world/tos/#1-attacks-on-users-or-groups

This comment got reported. And while trolling is not allowed. Attacking an individual is also not allowed. So I’m not sure if attacking them for being a troll is allowed.

If you think a post is trolling (ie: just trying to stir up anger rather than trying to make an argument for something), please report it. If you think a poster is serial trolling please point it out in the report.

I’m open to feedback.

Swear words are fine. Attacking people’s weight (or age, sexuality, gender, etc) should be avoided.

I’ll admit that there is gray area in this rule. On Lemmy there are many instances of posts mocking celebrities for different characteristics but the posts seem to be permitted if the celebrities are largely disliked.

I’ll see if I can add a NSFW tag…