The only thing I will say for "blue no matter who" is that the alternative - threatening to withold your vote - only works if the campaign is aftaid of losing. They aren't. They clearly don't care. They don't want to govern, they want to present only a token resistance to encroaching fascism and corporate domination.

The benefit of voting the nominally-left-of-extreme-right party in is that it forces them to disappoint their base and that radicalises those people against US empire. Letting Trump win won't accelerate that process, it will just force people to radicalise in an atmosphere of extreme oppression.

After checking out more options, I think forgejo looks like a good place to start.

Thanks, yes, I'd far rather stick with a familiar and ubiquitous system unless I see a reason to switch. Thanks for the suggestion, I'll keep it in mind.

After looking at that list, I think forgejo or gitea are what I'm looking for. I would prefer to stick with software as open as possible, so forgejo looks like where I'll start. I love that they're involved in federation and have a collective governance structure.

Oh, yeah, I meant open-core, not closed-core, but I'm still leery of software where they close off portions to make you want to pay. It gives them an incentive to make the open part of it worse.

MOOSEN

Yeah it's like listening to your mobster neighbours fighting. It's their business but anyone can catch a stray.

No one should have to use xhamster.

I think it's exactly what you would write into a movie to make it clear to anyone paying even half attention that he was definitely murdered. It's so unsubtle it makes me think it was almost a message - we can kill people this brazenly and it doesn't even get investigated. We are untouchable.

Ofmg it's lemmy microcelebrity Asafum!

I honestly have no idea what you're saying here. Is this what 'retell my point back to me" was about? You want me to explain how you're doing genocide denial, again? A fourth time? I'll copy-paste the three different ways I've tried to explain it and which you have ignored, and then we're done here if you keep ignoring it.

I explained how you were doing genocide denial. You said that complaining about Biden is only “sowing division”. So that means that we shouldn’t criticise him for his genocide. Denying that a genocide should be criticised on its own merits is a form of genocide denial. Not all genocide denial is “this genocide didn’t happen”. In fact most of it isn’t. Most of it is politically motivated muddying of the waters, like what you did.

Pretending that the entire value in discussing genocide starts and ends with who will be elected president is pretty minimising to the importance of the, you know, genocide. Seems like a kind of genocide denial to me.

Edit 3: The other person arguing is also doing genocide denial, but the oblique kind where you pretend that the only reason to criticise a sitting US president engaging in genocide is because you want him to lose an election. Almost like they’re denying that we should hold people accountable for genocide on its own merits. That is, and I cannot stress this enough, genocide denial.

I told you multiple times how it was genocide denial. I explained the how of it. You have failed to even acknowledge that let alone respond to it.

I guess it's hard to face the fact that you're doing genocide denial, so the only thing you can do is pretend I'm being disingenuous. Funny thing is, even if I'm being disingenuous that doesn't make you not a genocide denier.

If you want to explain how that's wrong you need to respond to the argument, but you're not doing that.