bumblebeer

I think you are very out of touch with reality.

I can see why WasabiWabbit@lemmy.ca decided to betray his class.

So not only a treasonous class traitor, but also an accelerationist without an ounce morality and hope for a future.

Good luck in foodbanks.

That's some pretty strong disagreement...

1. Wabbit
2. Are you claiming this is your project?

Sir, this is a Wendys.

Two questions for you:

1. What behavior, if any, would you consider appropriate here?
2. What have you done (other than posting hate-filled comments on Lemmy) to further your cause?

Thank you for being the adult in the room. I appreciate it even if others cannot.

It's really disheartening to see people on here not only consistently fail to understand what is happening in the world around them, but also go on to tar and feather anyone who tries to give them an informed perspective.

Yeah, it's a legitimately difficult situation trying to balance effective safety measures with the needs of teens and young adults to be able to participate in civil discourse. And I'll be the first to admit that I do not have a good answer for how to handle this.

Also I'm pretty new around here but so far my experience has been that Lemmy does not strike me as a welcoming place(period) so that likely goes double for anyone with an undercooked prefrontal cortex.

While I believe this is largely correct, it does not support your conclusion.

You are assuming that the participation would need to be to the benefit of the community to be worthwhile. That's not the case. The party which stands to benefit most is the teen themselves. They may not be able to meaningfully participate in the kinds of discussion examples you have listed, but they could try.

After all, not being an ignorant dumbass is a skill that must be learned, and one that (as evidenced by this thread) many adults never managed to learn for themselves.

I completely agree and think that the proposal in the article really misses the mark.

However, to claim the issue is moot because "15 year olds are not children" (as some have done in this thread) is patently ridiculous. Taking that argument to its logical conclusion exposes its flaws — which was the point of my previous comment.