El Barto

A looser fit than other here but still a great headline. Reflects the state of corporatism IMO.

Actually, this doesn’t fit here at all!

Hence the “hmmmm.”

Oh yeah, because when I see Egyptian hieroglyphs, I think sexy beasts.

The point is not the anthropomorphism. The point is related tothe deliberate sexual undertone. And I’m not even a prude. I don’t care much about what people prefer. It’s just that the Internet broke us.

It’s like the word “cuck” (ugh.) A scholar may use it in the utmost right context, and yet, all that word does is infuriate me because of the overuse the The_Donald crowd gave to it.

it doesn’t look horny to me. She’s just woman-shaped to me.

An animal. Shaped as a fit, sexy woman. Shared on Lemmy. Yeah, not horny. Sure.

He was selling it to Al-Cateda.

Are capybaras docile to humans?

Lol we’ve all been there, friend!

I think you’re taking this whole thing too seriously.

People can do whatever they want for the lulz.

Just a little push from pops at the beginning.

And they didn’t say it was a long term solution. For all we know, the drive was going to be replaced the following week.

They don’t say how much the seat was being rocked.

Maybe just a couple of inches. Enough for babby to sleep.

I’ve always found it weird how Americans mandate putting punctuation inside quotes at all times.

Wait, is it an American thing? I thought it was an English language thing.

Edit: yup. English language thing. I do concede that it took me a while to get used to it, since in Spanish we don’t do that.

WHY do you have to put the punchline in the title? Stop doing that, folks.

I’ve been hating this since Twitter became a thing. I used to read BBC news articles for (seemingly) good quality reporting, and then they started quoting random twitter users. Like, who gives a fuck?

Friend, I appreciate your mod efforts, and I support 100% what you’re doing here.

Having said that, I think there is a misalignment in terms of free speech definitions.

What I think you’re saying is that people are free to express themselves, and the government (in the U.S., Italy, Argentina, wherever) will not censor you for that. However, a consequence of that is that you can ban them. Fair enough.

But people are not referring to the free speech in the country, region or whether. They’re specifically referring to the exercising of free speech in the community you are moderating. You’re saying that “there is free speech here,” then it follows that transphobic comments should be allowed (something I wouldn’t like because fuck transphobes.) But since you remove comments that don’t align with the community, then the community doesn’t have free speech - and that’s okay. I’m just referring to the contradiction: “you’re allowed to say what you want, but I will ban you if you say this or that” - welp, that just means that “this or that” is not allowed.

I think that’s what the other commenters are saying. They’re not criticizing you for removing comments. They’re calling out that removing comments (as a consequence of speech) and claiming that there is free speech, well no, technically it isn’t.