this post was submitted on 19 Sep 2023
-23 points (17.1% liked)

Mildly Infuriating

35491 readers
533 users here now

Home to all things "Mildly Infuriating" Not infuriating, not enraging. Mildly Infuriating. All posts should reflect that.

I want my day mildly ruined, not completely ruined. Please remember to refrain from reposting old content. If you post a post from reddit it is good practice to include a link and credit the OP. I'm not about stealing content!

It's just good to get something in this website for casual viewing whilst refreshing original content is added overtime.


Rules:

1. Be Respectful


Refrain from using harmful language pertaining to a protected characteristic: e.g. race, gender, sexuality, disability or religion.

Refrain from being argumentative when responding or commenting to posts/replies. Personal attacks are not welcome here.

...


2. No Illegal Content


Content that violates the law. Any post/comment found to be in breach of common law will be removed and given to the authorities if required.

That means: -No promoting violence/threats against any individuals

-No CSA content or Revenge Porn

-No sharing private/personal information (Doxxing)

...


3. No Spam


Posting the same post, no matter the intent is against the rules.

-If you have posted content, please refrain from re-posting said content within this community.

-Do not spam posts with intent to harass, annoy, bully, advertise, scam or harm this community.

-No posting Scams/Advertisements/Phishing Links/IP Grabbers

-No Bots, Bots will be banned from the community.

...


4. No Porn/ExplicitContent


-Do not post explicit content. Lemmy.World is not the instance for NSFW content.

-Do not post Gore or Shock Content.

...


5. No Enciting Harassment,Brigading, Doxxing or Witch Hunts


-Do not Brigade other Communities

-No calls to action against other communities/users within Lemmy or outside of Lemmy.

-No Witch Hunts against users/communities.

-No content that harasses members within or outside of the community.

...


6. NSFW should be behind NSFW tags.


-Content that is NSFW should be behind NSFW tags.

-Content that might be distressing should be kept behind NSFW tags.

...


7. Content should match the theme of this community.


-Content should be Mildly infuriating.

-At this time we permit content that is infuriating until an infuriating community is made available.

...


8. Reposting of Reddit content is permitted, try to credit the OC.


-Please consider crediting the OC when reposting content. A name of the user or a link to the original post is sufficient.

...

...


Also check out:

Partnered Communities:

1.Lemmy Review

2.Lemmy Be Wholesome

3.Lemmy Shitpost

4.No Stupid Questions

5.You Should Know

6.Credible Defense


Reach out to LillianVS for inclusion on the sidebar.

All communities included on the sidebar are to be made in compliance with the instance rules.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

don't dogpile them. i just wanted to vent.

top 12 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] kersploosh@sh.itjust.works 15 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I'm not familiar with this particular case, but in general it's completely reasonable to not be a single-issue voter dedicated to one party. Politics is complicated and parties have broad (sometimes conflicting) platforms. Even when one party clearly fits your ideals, occasionally they have a particular candidate that you just can't get behind.

[–] commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com -5 points 1 year ago

it just seems to me that they could stay the fuck out of it instead of actively trashing the green party voters.

[–] wander1236@sh.itjust.works 14 points 1 year ago

Not voting for the green party doesn't mean you don't want or fight for better climate policy. That sort of thinking is what's gotten us into this "voting against them" mess.

[–] Chickenstalker@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

You can be anywhere on the political spectrum and still be an environmentalist. E.g., historically, hunters have been at the forefront of conservationism, if only so that they can continue to hunt wild animals. Many capitalists are "green" if only to carve a niche for their products, e.g., The Muskrat.

[–] BigilusDickilus@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

What does running as a spoiler actually accomplish? They are doing nothing but taking away votes from the democrat candidate* with no chance of being elected to national office. If you want better environmental policy, and actually want to accomplish it then the democrats are your only realistic option.

*I understand and respect that a good portion of Greens would not vote for the Democrat, but anyone who is likely on the fence is vastly more likely to vote D than R. I am also very happy to acknowledge that our voting system sucks and we should implement ranked choice nationally. I would like to the Green party as a viable option in the future, but it is not in 2024, all this candidacy is accomplishing is helping the republican nominee. I am still bitter that my first time voting was for Nader because I was dumb. I would honestly love to see examples of the Green party working to actually build up their base in local elections as that is the only way they are going to ever be viable and not just a spoiler.

[–] commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

He's not running as a spoiler. He's running as a leftist.

[–] BigilusDickilus@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago (3 children)

To what end? Him running ultimately only helps the GOP. If the green party wants to advance progressive policy, they should focus on creating infrastructure to become an actual block that democrats need to work with. Siphoning votes away only helps republicans, Ralph Nader got George W. Bush elected as much as Gore's shitty campaign did.

[–] commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 1 year ago

If the green party wants to advance progressive policy, they should focus on creating infrastructure to become an actual block that democrats need to work with

if their voting block didn't matter why are they still so salty about 2016?

[–] commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Ralph Nader got George W. Bush elected as much as Gore’s shitty campaign did.

gore won that election.

[–] BigilusDickilus@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I agree with you, but it would not have been within the margin of fuckery that allowed Florida to happen had Nader not be on the ballot. Gore did run a shit campaign though, all he really had to do was ask people if they were better off than they were in 92 and promise a continuation of the core of the Clinton policies and he would have won. Instead, he focused on distancing himself from a still very popular president and not being charismatic and largely allowed himself to be put in the position he ended up in.

It was my first election as an adult, Nader came to my college and gave his "both parties are the same" speech and I bought it because I was a dumb ass at the time and in fairness it was a lot closer to the truth then than it has been since.

[–] commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 1 year ago

this is pure speculation. there is no way to know what would have happened in a world where Nader wasn't on the ballot. in such a world Donald Trump might have been the Republican nominee that year. you simply don't know.

[–] commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com 0 points 1 year ago

To what end?

to lead the empire to dismantle the empire