NationStates

Valrifell wrote:

Questarian New Yorkshire wrote:well maybe you shouldn't fucking do it, nobody has asked you to do it and all you do is make it worse for the rest of us

The site's enforcement is based on players self-reporting in instances of others making offenses. The alternative is having someone with redtext stalk threads, which sounds like it has the potential for more fun and spectacle so I'm for it.

There's nothing wrong with lurkers reporting questionable things if they come across it.

Celritannia wrote:

Diopolis wrote:They are both just expressions of ending the exclusivity principle of relationships.

No, no they are not. Please understand both terms correctly.

Italios wrote:

Celritannia wrote:
I see polygamy and monogomy, but no polyamory.

there is no tangible difference between a man who has multiple wives and is legally married to them versus a man who has multiple live-in, long-term "girlfriends." it still produces the same strife between the women because of the desire to compete for male attention, financial resources and the bearing of his children. the man is still going to be a social superior with a lot of bargaining power and a disproportionate amount of control over the women. there are always going to be financial problems in these types of relationships because there's usually one breadwinner who has to provide for 1+ adults and a lot of children (since relationships with multiple people produce more children than monogamous ones). this is a very weird hill to die on, the spelling of the word, since as we've explained to you countless times, polyamory has the same detrimental effects that polygamy does.

let's make this a bit easier. do you hate women?

Questarian New Yorkshire wrote:

Valrifell wrote:
The site's enforcement is based on players self-reporting in instances of others making offenses. The alternative is having someone with redtext stalk threads, which sounds like it has the potential for more fun and spectacle so I'm for it.

There's nothing wrong with lurkers reporting questionable things if they come across it.

nobody asked you

Questarian New Yorkshire wrote:

Cekoviu wrote:I mean, how do you propose that those children actually be protected from homosexuals in terms of policy? Obviously there is a disturbing trend here, but I doubt that banning gay marriage would do anything to counteract it and it would actively harm the large majority of gay people who aren't pedophiles.

we can start by hanging child sex criminals

Valrifell wrote:

Questarian New Yorkshire wrote:well maybe you shouldn't fucking do it, nobody has asked you to do it and all you do is make it worse for the rest of us

The site's enforcement is based on players self-reporting in instances of others making offenses. The alternative is having someone with redtext stalk threads, which sounds like it has the potential for more fun and spectacle so I'm for it.

There's nothing wrong with lurkers reporting questionable things if they come across it.

Diopolis wrote:

Celritannia wrote:
No, no they are not. Please understand both terms correctly.

I do understand both terms.
But the natural distinction is not between hierarchical and egalitarian relationships, because egalitarian relationships more or less do not exist. The natural distinction is between exclusive and non-exclusive relationships. Therefore, although I understand the distinction, I reject it entirely.

Valrifell wrote:

Questarian New Yorkshire wrote:well maybe you shouldn't fucking do it, nobody has asked you to do it and all you do is make it worse for the rest of us

The site's enforcement is based on players self-reporting in instances of others making offenses. The alternative is having someone with redtext stalk threads, which sounds like it has the potential for more fun and spectacle so I'm for it.

There's nothing wrong with lurkers reporting questionable things if they come across it.

Italios wrote:

Valrifell wrote:
The site's enforcement is based on players self-reporting in instances of others making offenses. The alternative is having someone with redtext stalk threads, which sounds like it has the potential for more fun and spectacle so I'm for it.

There's nothing wrong with lurkers reporting questionable things if they come across it.

yes there is. a lurker literally contributes nothing to a conversation, their only role is shutting it down. lurkers get the label lurker because they are reporting good-faith, high-content conversations, not because they report those asian spam threads that we occasionally get spammed with.

Cekoviu wrote:

Questarian New Yorkshire wrote: we can start by hanging child sex criminals

And you think that would decrease the proportion of sex crimes committed by homosexuals? Does being gay give you a stronger aversion to being hung?

Italios wrote:

Cekoviu wrote:I mean, how do you propose that those children actually be protected from homosexuals in terms of policy? Obviously there is a disturbing trend here, but I doubt that banning gay marriage would do anything to counteract it and it would actively harm the large majority of gay people who aren't pedophiles.

my problem isn't the defense of the institution of marriage, it's the rejection of facts in favor of your social advocacy. if someone posts a study that suggests a specific social demographic has a trend towards problematic, abusive behavior, you should strive to address it and explain why this doesn't invalidate your allegiance with that social demographic, not just ignore it.

Questarian New Yorkshire wrote:

The New California Republic wrote:I just report rulebreaking when I see it.

what are you, some kind of proto mod? you think because you "report it when you see it" they're going to give you the Cool Prefects Badge eventually?

Questarian New Yorkshire wrote:use your own native reason to decide when someone needs ot be silenced, like when theyre doing something that's going to cause another person to be harmed, for instance.

Celritannia wrote:

Italios wrote:there is no tangible difference between a man who has multiple wives and is legally married to them versus a man who has multiple live-in, long-term "girlfriends." it still produces the same strife between the women because of the desire to compete for male attention, financial resources and the bearing of his children. the man is still going to be a social superior with a lot of bargaining power and a disproportionate amount of control over the women. there are always going to be financial problems in these types of relationships because there's usually one breadwinner who has to provide for 1+ adults and a lot of children (since relationships with multiple people produce more children than monogamous ones). this is a very weird hill to die on, the spelling of the word, since as we've explained to you countless times, polyamory has the same detrimental effects that polygamy does.

let's make this a bit easier. do you hate women?

Yes, yes there is a difference. I have stressed it with evidence enough.

Of course not.

Is it good to get jealous over people involved in a polyamorous relationship?

Valrifell wrote:

Questarian New Yorkshire wrote: nobody asked you

It's a forum lmfao

Celritannia wrote:

Cekoviu wrote:I believe I was at one point in the vicinity of a person who was in a poly relationship IRL, but I didn't ask them about it. I used to frequently engage online with poly people, though.

And what were they like? Did they tell you how their relationship worked?

Diopolis wrote:

Valrifell wrote:
The site's enforcement is based on players self-reporting in instances of others making offenses. The alternative is having someone with redtext stalk threads, which sounds like it has the potential for more fun and spectacle so I'm for it.

There's nothing wrong with lurkers reporting questionable things if they come across it.

That's not to say that everything which would, technically, potentially violate a rule needs to be reported. A degree of judgement is a good thing when making reports.

Questarian New Yorkshire wrote:

Celritannia wrote:
Not all relationships last.
But it's no reason to deny them either.
Just because something is strange doesn't make it wrong.

do you see the problem with your anecdotes now

Valrifell wrote:

Cekoviu wrote:And you think that would decrease the proportion of sex crimes committed by homosexuals? Does being gay give you a stronger aversion to being hung?

Judging by the number of gay pornstars, I don't think so.

see, the joke is quite sophisticated, you said hung which has entirely different meanings but what you meant to say was hanged. What fun!

Cekoviu wrote:

Questarian New Yorkshire wrote: we can start by hanging child sex criminals

And you think that would decrease the proportion of sex crimes committed by homosexuals? Does being gay give you a stronger aversion to being hung?

Diopolis wrote:

Celritannia wrote:
No, no they are not. Please understand both terms correctly.

I do understand both terms.
But the natural distinction is not between hierarchical and egalitarian relationships, because egalitarian relationships more or less do not exist. The natural distinction is between exclusive and non-exclusive relationships. Therefore, although I understand the distinction, I reject it entirely.

Celritannia wrote:

Italios wrote:there is no tangible difference between a man who has multiple wives and is legally married to them versus a man who has multiple live-in, long-term "girlfriends." it still produces the same strife between the women because of the desire to compete for male attention, financial resources and the bearing of his children. the man is still going to be a social superior with a lot of bargaining power and a disproportionate amount of control over the women. there are always going to be financial problems in these types of relationships because there's usually one breadwinner who has to provide for 1+ adults and a lot of children (since relationships with multiple people produce more children than monogamous ones). this is a very weird hill to die on, the spelling of the word, since as we've explained to you countless times, polyamory has the same detrimental effects that polygamy does.

let's make this a bit easier. do you hate women?

Yes, yes there is a difference. I have stressed it with evidence enough.

Of course not.

Is it good to get jealous over people involved in a polyamorous relationship?

Cekoviu wrote:

Questarian New Yorkshire wrote: we can start by hanging child sex criminals

And you think that would decrease the proportion of sex crimes committed by homosexuals? Does being gay give you a stronger aversion to being hung?

Celritannia wrote:

Questarian New Yorkshire wrote:do you see the problem with your anecdotes now

Nope, because polyamorous relationships are rare.

But it neither shows they are any different from monogamous relationships either.

Nap the Magnificent wrote:

Celritannia wrote:
Yes, yes there is a difference. I have stressed it with evidence enough.

Of course not.

Is it good to get jealous over people involved in a polyamorous relationship?

If you think this is over being jealous of them then lmao.

The New California Republic wrote:Not at all. You seem to be spending an awful lot of time and effort on what you think that I am thinking.