It’s still in Team Fortress 2 and Factorio

Back in 2000-2012, a good lot of mainly singleplayer games had optional multiplayer modes. Think Halo, Starcraft, TRON, Titanfall, etc. Even DOOM 2016 had it. These games function with the servers down.

Methane is easier to reduce than CO2. CO2 is the inevitable product of combusting any carbon based molecule, such as fossil fuels or organics. Methane is basically what happens when you take an organic molecule, and fail to burn it all the way. If you take your stack exhaust and expose it to more heat and enough oxygen, the methane will react to form water and CO2. For every methane molecule you combust to CO2, you will reduce its greenhouse effect to one twentieth of what it would have been, at least for its first couple decades in the atmosphere. So it is low hanging fruit with a big impact.

CO2 emissions are harder to reduce, because in order to get rid of those you need to stop fucking burning carbon, and companies don’t want to do that. So the only way for a society to reduce carbon emissions is to transition to a model where capital does not control the economy. Whereas you can reduce methane emissions and still have capitalism if you just apply some gentle economic pressures.

Methane has 20 times the global warming effect of CO2, and it eventually decays to CO2 in the atmosphere. After a few decades iirc

I’m not mistaking you for someone else, I mean to say that the opinion you expressed is one I would have agreed with yesterday. I believe you misunderstood what the point of disagreement was.

When they express their desire to not talk about something, it’s good advice to try to understand what they actually meant, not start a discussion about what the word means from your perspective.

Well that’s not true. If someone says “Don’t talk to me about them F*****s, I hate them”, then the correct thing to do is say “gay people deserve to exist, you homophobe”. It’s always correct to counter someone when they spread a harmful message, with or without their consent. Because spreading harmful messages must be considered implicit consent to be challenged on them. You can’t have a functioning society otherwise.

People even don’t have to agree with your definition of politics

Yes they do. Trans people will be hurt if they don’t. Their definition of politics is propaganda created by transphobes, which benefits transphobes. That’s why it’s important. That’s why the speech is harmful.

Well no, that would be an appeal to nature fallacy. You’re making the argument that I should accept the world as it is, simply because it is. Most people think the word works that way, therefore it should. That’s a nonsense argument. The world isn’t perfect, and people shouldn’t define words that way.

You know, 30 years ago, the word “man” was defined as “someone with a penis” by 90% of the population. It was trans activists who changed the defintion. Your logical fallacy is the exact same one that opposed the progress of trans rights back then.

I agree with you, and I agreed with you yesterday when I was banned. That wasn’t the argument.

English default on the internet is male for strangers.

So you misgender every transfemme stranger you meet as a matter of personal policy? Your defence for misgendering me is that you do it to every trans girl and enby? And Ada is defending you?

That’s not the whole truth either. I said that voluntarily isolating yourself from all social interaction would be understandable if you had ASPD, but my thesis was that you do not have ASPD, you do not voluntarily isolate yourself from social interaction, and you love politics.

Yes, the world is very antagonistic. It wants me dead. It’s full of fascists who hate trans people and eat the flesh of slaves. It’s an awful place.

I’m not going to modify my demeanor to match the patriarchal ideal of nonbinary submissiveness. Because what the patriarchy ultimately wants from nonbinary people is our deaths. Every breath I take is an act of feminist defiance, and I’m not interested in compromise on this issue.

I wasn’t hostile in the original thread, the patriarchy just thinks that nonbinary people having emotions and opinions is aggressive behaviour. It’s plain old sexism distorting people’s perceptions. I’m not going to be a shy, polite, demure little enby for any patriarch’s benefit, and they hate that.

Its only political if you make it political.

You mean in the sense that politics is a social construct and we all have a say in its definition? Yes. But the alternative to defining everything as political is defining some things as apolitical. And that’s a dangerous worldview. I’m not interested in saying or permitting dangerous speech.

I agree that we need to close the door on that torrent of hate. And when Abigail said she hated politics, she opened that door. I want it closed again. I want us to stop engaging in dangerous speech that legitimises hate.

I get it, you’re incapable of understanding that someone with different views than your own exists. Your world is small and you control the rules. Anything which contradicts your worldview doesn’t exist and must be some trick or deception.

Agreeing and doing what needs to be done without discussing anything or appointing leaders is politics! When everyone goes on r/awww and looks at pictures of cute kitty cats, they engage in the collective exercise of making a decision that the cat is cute. Why do people like agreeing that an animal is cute? Because humans are a social species, humans are designed for politics, and agreeing a cat is cute is a low-stress way for people to do the politics they were born to do. It’s play politics. Politics is in everything, we love politics and we always want to do it. Politics is everything. So you’re right that controversies are political, but only because everything is political.

You’ve misunderstood. The new account I made for a fresh start is u/PM_ME_FAT_ENBIES. I made this account to continue discussing the issue because I think Ada’s transphobia deserves attention. A lot of people pressure victims of abuse to stay silent, but I don’t believe in doing that.

Everything is political because that’s the definition of the word politics. Defining the status quo as apolitical is propaganda, and not everyone wants to deal with you spewing propaganda all over the place. Especially when it’s the same propaganda used by transphobes and repeating it will benefit transphobes.

Also I’m allergic to grass. I get all itchy. And if it’s been freshly mowed, I get a horrible runny nose. Maybe try a non-ableist way of phrasing things next time? There’s also sunlight allergies, agoraphobia, mobility issues, and executive function disorders like autism, anxiety, and depression that can make it hard to touch grass.

I accept the existence of the fact that some people believe politics means controversy. But I don’t accept the morality, justice, or rightness of that fact. It’s a bad thing that people believe politics means controversy. It should be challenged. Nothing good can come of agreeing with the propaganda of transphobes.

Your link says politics is “the total complex of relations between people living in society”. That includes asking somebody to go for a walk.