There isn't a lot of high culture to sample here ... it's mostly old castle and monastery ruins and maybe some local forest related tradition. Depends on where you go, some cities have annual fairs at certain times of the year (my city has one around start of september thats always a tourist attraction)
Background
My girlfriend [19F] and I [19M] have been dating for slightly over 2 years now and she had previous experiences which caused her to have issues with trust. Even though she (obviously) trusts me a lot more than she does her friends, she does not completely trust me, although week by we...
You could be describing my ex. She might love you, if she is saying the truth, but she is not in love with you anymore, those the "suffocating" comments. I would be she has already been with someone else. — Rui F Ribeiro16 secs ago
I have written a question which I didn't post yet. I'm afraid people could recognize themselves behing the usual Alice/Bob/... pseudonyms, and that would spell disaster. What can I do?
I'm afraid if it's about people that you know are on StackExchange as well, they know you, and you don't want them to know you asked, there's not much you can do :/
But Zachiel could post under an anonymous account, obscure the names, and hope for the best. If they're active on this site, though, it's probably a bit risky to do that.
(I'm a horrible person to play monopoly with, I never want to do the trading stuff... I'd rather have incomplete streets than allow someone else to build houses :P)
We almost never play monopoly. The only game my eldest brother will play is Rummikub and with the youngest and my parents I often play a variant on Ludo, with cards instead of dices
Honestly, this was my first thought, and I especially agree with having several in-hand. With a card that says "I'm your neighbor!", obviously not a business-card (unless it's State Farm ;)), you're clearly intending on passing them out. The stack de-escalates the notion that you're hitting on anyone. — Regular Joe1 min ago
@Mithrandir yeah. The other thing I could do is ask people from the chat to come to a different chat system, take a look at the question and give me their opinion. I think it kinda breaks how this site works but at least it'd be safe for me and for the other people involved.
@ArtOfCode Sorry that it makes their job harder, but... Well, people have to decide what's more important to them. Is it better to follow the rules, or do the right thing?
When the entire community, and especially the moderators, are sick and tired of dealing with the crap that this question has generated, I'd hope your conscience would take that into consideration.
It's not a reflection on him, but John is not as active as a moderator as Catija and HDE - so this site is effectively running on two moderators. That's already critical capacity for a site with this volume, this incident has probably run them both off their feet, and dragging it out feels like insult to injury.
Well the thing about that is... I'm quickly losing respect for the community and moderators here. I'd rather see the site closed than see it devolve into a place where people are allowed to be awful, provided that they follow "the rules" A well spoken racist is still a racist. A well spoken misogynist is still a misogynist. Etc.
A hell of a lot of that isn't visible to regular users, which is good in keeping drama out of view but doesn't help in cases like this where some people want to see punishment being meted out left and right.
@apaul What is the desired outcome of your actions? Something tells me that there are better ways of achieving your goals then your current behavior.
@apaul The rules are biased against racism, bigotry, and misogyny. It's much easier to deal with people who fall into those camps if there aren't people breaking the rules to lash out at them.
It's being dealt with as objectively and impartially as possible. That means accepting a definition of "being awful" that may not match your own precisely, but is objective and enforceable. It still keeps the awfulness out, but if your personal definition is stricter then you're inevitably going to see some stuff that you personally would rather see gone.
Here's the problem as I see it, the community is seemingly fine with any sort of jackassery provided that they keep it on just this side of the rules. So we have rules-lawyering, users endlessly picking apart what is and isn't against the rules, but those same folks are notably silent when it's convenient.
At this point, you have a decision to make. Either you need to accept that you might see some of that, or you need to decide that this site isn't for you. You can't have your cake to stay on the site and eat it too by openly flouting the rules.
To try to have it and eat it is to say to the community and moderators that your opinion is more important than a community consensus and general peace, which... I hope you can see is less than desirable.
@apaul That's a behavior that you can mod-flag though. If you have the feeling that some people are just keeping the discussion going for the sake of discussion, flag that.
@apaul You have a valid point about how singling out a individual question like that isn't very nice. There are ways of addressing that concern within the existing framework. Remember that just because someone else does something shitty doesn't give you license to do so either.
@apaul So, essentially, you're saying "These people aren't following the rules, so I don't have to either"? That's honestly how I'm interpreting what you're saying. That's what I'd expect from a 5-year-old, not a grown person.
@apaul 24+ hours later I got the OP to chill out on the arguing with everyone on the meta question. The rate of new comments on that question decreased.
@apaul This is where your personal philosophy and the SE philosophy disagree. From what you're saying, I'm reading that you want to see all (or at least the vast majority) of your flags accepted and acted upon. SE is about having moderators who are responsible for enforcing standards, but who don't have to conform to any individual user's opinion.
I've found when it comes to getting people to change their behavior it's more productive to provide a description of why a behavior should be changed rather than saying "Your behavior is x. X is bad. Don't do x"
@Mithrandir And there's the usual bs moral equivalency argument... Do you honestly think that's accurate? Do you really believe that saying: interpersonal.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/2776/… is equally problematic as the constant veiled bias, racism, misogyny, homophobia and so on?
@apaul That comment is the point at which you need to disengage. As soon as it starts entering into "you're X" "no you're X", let the moderators handle it. If you can't do that... isn't that equally problematic as the behaviour you're trying to stop?
@sphennings Got tired of pretending that we were having an honest conversation. Figured it was more effective to pull away the veil and address it plainly.
@apaul All I can see is people's behavior on this site. Improving people's behavior on this site is the best I can do.
@apaul Did that improve people's behavior?
It seems to me that that prolonged the conversation, got more people to double down on their horrible positions, fanned the flames, brought more people to meta to argue, and alienated the OP enough that they deleted their account.
Surely it takes two to tango, there were a lot of people not arguing in good faith on that meta question.
Most of them I don't have the luxury of having an existing relationship with to ask that they try to improve the quality of the discourse like I can with you.
@sphennings And I'm trying to say that if your primary contribution is generally being awful to people, you probably don't have great interpersonal skills and you should be here to learn, or you just shouldn't be here.
user15026
@Mithrandir I have been listening to The Greatest Showman soundtrack pretty much nonstop lately, and that is one of my most favourite songs from it
@apaul If people are being not nice they should be dealt with. That especially goes for experienced members who set an example for everyone on the site.
@apaul It's very satisfying to call people out but does that actually make anything better.
@sphennings Can't change everyone's mind. But you can say that some things won't be tolerated in a community, and that some perspectives simply aren't welcome.
There's a great article by an ex member of the Westborough Baptist Church about how she came to leave the church. Trust me her change of heart wasn't through people calling her a bigot and a homophobe.
@apaul I know. But we have to make sure the people we're standing up for are behaving in a way that falls within the rules for SE and are as nice as possible
@Tinkeringbell So... The person who's already been beaten down, must be exquisitely polite in their words about the people who typically beat them down. That's cute.
@sphennings I typically do it in a way that encourages people to take similar stands.
user15026
Regardless of your intentions, being intentionally rude does not and will not fly here, stop trying to make it like you are the only one who cares about being a better person.
@apaul Which is why I'm wasting my time talking to you about being nice, someone who I generally agree with, rather than the people singling out a POC who had the "audacity" to ask a question about race.
Administrative note: Due to recent events, the "Be Nice" policy will be strictly enforced, dangerous or inappropriate conversations will be shut down and offenders will be kicked from the room. Please respect room owners who are trying to enforce this; moderators will step in if necessary. This isn't directed at any specific user(s), just a general reminder.
user15026
I'm so tired of this. We are all trying to help people be better people. Sometimes we suck at it, because we are all human beings trying to figure this stuff out.
Heh. I think I've managed to listen to a large percentage of his stuff recently. I can't comment and request a song, though, because that would involve creating a channel and I can't legally do that yet.
