this post was submitted on 24 Jan 2025
95 points (84.7% liked)
Casual Conversation
2035 readers
80 users here now
Share a story, ask a question, or start a conversation about (almost) anything you desire. Maybe you'll make some friends in the process.
RULES (updated 01/22/25)
- Be respectful: no harassment, hate speech, bigotry, and/or trolling. To be concise, disrespect is defined by escalation.
- Encourage conversation in your OP. This means including heavily implicative subject matter when you can and also engaging in your thread when possible. You won't be punished for trying.
- Avoid controversial topics (politics or societal debates come to mind, though we are not saying not to talk about anything that resembles these). There's a guide in the protocol book offered as a mod model that can be used for that; it's vague until you realize it was made for things like the rule in question. At least four purple answers must apply to a "controversial" message for it to be allowed.
- Keep it clean and SFW: No illegal content or anything gross and inappropriate. A rule of thumb is if a recording of a conversation put on another platform would get someone a COPPA violation response, that exact exchange should be avoided when possible.
- No solicitation such as ads, promotional content, spam, surveys etc. The chart redirected to above applies to spam material as well, which is one of the reasons its wording is vague, as it applies to a few things. Again, a "spammy" message must be applicable to four purple answers before it's allowed.
- Respect privacy as well as truth: Don’t ask for or share any personal information or slander anyone. A rule of thumb is if something is enough info to go by that it "would be a copyright violation if the info was art" as another group put it, or that it alone can be used to narrow someone down to 150 physical humans (Dunbar's Number) or less, it's considered an excess breach of privacy. Slander is defined by intentional utilitarian misguidance at the expense (positive or negative) of a sentient entity. This often links back to or mixes with rule one, which implies, for example, that even something that is true can still amount to what slander is trying to achieve, and that will be looked down upon.
Casual conversation communities:
Related discussion-focused communities
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Families in Uyghur communities around the world have referenced the camps with regards to their missing friends and relatives. Here are some from my city. It's intellectually dishonest to suggest there are no witnesses or evidence.
Yes, as I said, western people with vague ties and no evidence of said ties making up stories.
We know what genocide looks like when a country has complete control over all communications ... It looks like hd video. It looks like leaked audio. It looks like tens of thousands of refugees despite military blockades on all sides.
It is not vague stories and claims from people that voluntarily left decades earlier. It is not stories that you can immediately disprove on a visit. It is not the d-tier propaganda that people like you only believe due to racism and believing the Chinese are so fundamentally different that those doing the genocide would have not one single person defect and come forward. The Chinese are human. Not a hive mind. In even the most brainwashed examples of real genocide, a double digit percentage of those perpetrating it defect and try to tell the world. Not one single one has. None of the thousands upon thousands of people required in the act and cover-up of this 'genocide' have broke... Making it the most successful conspiracy in the history of the world... If it were true.
Why do you people stop having critical thinking skills the second China is mentioned?
???????????