Multi-Interest Nerding Sideblog

I follow my whims when it comes to fandoms and interests! I enjoy a lot of nerd stuff and also big thinky posts related to writing and art! Tags are mostly for my own filing system and may not be consistent. I also treat them like conversational footnotes! I am an eldritch being of mystery and also An Adult.

[biglawbear]

Rainbow capitalism was good actually, for many reasons.

It wasn't that long ago that banks and companies would refuse to serve gay people. People are going all the way up to the Supreme Court to enshrine the right not to serve LGBTQ people in their business. Rainbow capitalism showed which companies were safe to do business with and it pressured other companies to do the same.

Likewise, companies did and do try to discrominate against LGBTQ employees. Rainbow capitalism let employees be open about their identities and feel safe. The 50 year old gay man marching with Bank of America may have hidden his sexuality for decades because it wasn't safe to come out at work.

It helped set top down societal values and norms that LGBTQ people are a welcome part of society.

It pressured companies to adopt nondiscrimination policies and DEI policies.

It made companies donate to pride celebrations and LGBTQ causes.

with mixed success, it provided powerful and visible allies for political change, like the Respect for Marriage Act. Businesses pulled out of North Carolina and forced it to go back on a bathroom bill.

The drawdown of rainbow capitalism has real consequences. Pride celebrations losing corporate sponsorships means they are not able to hold those celebrations. DEI programs are being rolled back. Companies are buying less from queer owned businesses. Support for gay marriage is actually decreasing in polls.

Are these all cause and effect? No. Is it sometimes just a lagging indicator? Yeah. Are fair weather allies like big corps really not great? Yeah.

Like we're seeing greater threats to LGBTQ people and rights now than in 20 years and if you're still complaining about rainbow capitalism or having to qualify it by saying "I know rainbow capitalism is bad but" then I think you've lost the plot as surely as we've lost some of our biggest most powerful and most visible allies

[mynameiskleiosgirl]

Insurance and real estate companies red-lined areas with high concentrations of gay people (similar to how they treated POC and Jewish people) and either refused to do business or charged exorbitant rates. Gay men and women were prevented from naming same-sex partners as beneficiaries and wills were often overturned in court, if they could find a lawyer to draft them. Being accepted by the financial and economic community is a necessity to survival.

[magpiemirroring]

There's some really good succinct points being made about, here's some rambling anecdotal emotional thoughts.

I am old enough to remember when it was really, really rare to see companies admitting that gay people existed even during Pride. Like. Growing up companies just did not do that.

And like, yeah, it's important to remember that Corporations Are Not Are Friends. They make decisions on what seems profitable. And gradually during my lifetime, it became profitable to celebrate the existence of queer people during Pride, and be openly accepting and encouraging of them all year round. Because society as a whole had leaned in a "queer people are okay actually and I want to buy from companies that aren't homophobic" direction.

And, like, it matters.

I've worked in a place where I did not feel safe being out about being queer. The library I grew up at and worked at never, ever had a Pride display the entire time I worked there. And they have nothing going on for Pride this year. There were very few twee little rainbow stickers letting me know a shop was friendly to the lgbt+ community. Companies in my area didn't do pride decorations. Rainbow capitalism was a thing I sometimes started to see in commercials and saw people complain about online, but....it wasn't happening in my town.

The town I grew up in is 3 times the size of the town I live in now and was considered The Big City for my area.

The library in the town I moved to? Plays host to regular queer events and tables at local Pride events as outreach to the local queer community. I walked into my local health clinic and they had banners and decorations about Pride and my doctor was wearing a rainbow lanyard. I've seen queer-friendly things out year around in places here and it's still baffling and strange to see companies put up any sort of Pride display, like my existence is worth celebrating and protecting!

Which city do you think I feel safer in? The one where I was afraid I might be hatecrimed if I mentioned I was queer, or the one where I can go into shops with Pride displays and openly queer employees?

Can you understand what a relief it is that my friends can casually use they/them for me out in public? In my old town I didn't even bother telling my IRL friends and coworkers that I was nonbinary because it didn't feel like there was a point.

We live in a stupid capitalist hellscape and while I wish we lived in a better world, we don't right now. So, while it might be a hellscape I want to live in a capitalist hellscape where corporations think it will please customers if they at least pay lip service to supporting queer people. I want to live a hellscape where companies FEAR the backlash if they fuck up during Pride or any time of year.

That's what Rainbow Capitalism really is about. It's a sign that companies are afraid of pissing off the majority non-queer population that supports queer people. Companies are cautious entities that operate from a fear of losing customers and profits. So, as shallow as Rainbow Capitalism feels a lot of the time, it's a useful indicator of what scares a company more: being our enemy or the homophobes enemy. And frankly, I want them scared of me. I want them waving those cheap rainbow flags high in surrender to my dollars!

Because most of my life I lived in the world without Rainbow Capitalism and it sucked A LOT. Don't tell me that Rainbow Capitalism is meaningless. I've experienced the difference. I know some folks out there might live in the town I grew up in, or some place like it, or some place worse. And, yeah, the concept of Rainbow Capitalism feels pretty hollow out there.

But Rainbow Capitalism "out there" means that queer online shops and online spaces can grow and thrive because companies are more likely to have policies that treat queer sites and businesses as valid, rather than pulling them down or categorizing them punitively. And like, I know Tumblr has a real problem with how it's treating that trans community right now. It's never been great but there's been some real shitshows lately. And I think a part of that really is because Rainbow Capitalism is slipping so they can "afford" to be lax about it. The gay and trans furry fandom website that's 10 seconds away from imploding at any moment thinks it's financially safer right now to basically ignore Pride and ban trans users. That's what an absence of Rainbow Capitalism looks like. That's why Rainbow Capitalism shouldn't be dismissed.

[stickandthorn]

I’d die on the hill that “stranger danger” is a deeply unhelpful mentality to have. “Ooooh everyone is out to get me they’re all gonna perpetrate harm that’s actually more likely to come from someone I already know. I better never talk to anyone in my community who I don’t already know, just to be safe. I’m sure there are no other biases interwoven with this mentality” like oh my god human traffickers do not just randomly spawn in every parking lot. You don’t have to go solo hitchhiking across the country but you also don’t have to live in fear that every guy on the street is the knife man who’s gonna get you. Like have situational awareness, yeah. But most of the time the guy on the street is not knife man he’s actually just a guy on the street and he’s probably pretty chill, and you’re driving yourself crazy by living in a constant state of unnecessary fear.

[stickandthorn]

Like always safety comes first, especially if you’re in a marginalized group more likely to be targeted by random people around you. But that’s different from stranger danger. I might even say that stranger danger is something that contributes to marginalized groups getting targeted by random people. Which strangers do you find distrust worthy? Why? Does vague distrust justify harmful actions in the name of self defense? Stranger danger draws everyone away from more important issues of safety (underlying bigotries, systemic injustices, abuse in the home, etc) and towards an amorphous boogeyman that has no solution, because it’s not the real cause or culprit.

[magpiemirroring]

"Strangers are scary and are out to get you" isolates you.

If people really want you to be safe, they tell you how to protect yourself.

You don't need to go out into the world scared. Your list of "scary traits/behaviors to look out for" should be applicable to people of your own race and social class. (there is honestly not a lot of difference between a homeless guy with unpredictable and potentially dangerous behaviors and a middle or upper class guy with unpredictable and potentially dangerous behaviors. and I know this because I have been face to face with both and am here to tell you about it.)

Even if you are a woman, you can go about the world taking reasonable precautions and interact with strange men. It's fine. I am a small feminine-appearing person and strange men have been far more helpful and kind and pleasant to interact with than scaremongering tells you. I am white and have had more problems with white men than non-white men in my life.

People who want to hurt other people very often look for victims who seem like they might be easily scared into compliance. Telling you that everyone you meet is a potential human trafficker or serial killer or whatever grooms you to move through the world like a victim.

[animentality]

[bobcatmoran]

I absolutely blame Facebook for this shift. Words cannot describe how freaking WEIRD it was in the mid-00s when there was suddenly this popular website where you were required to use your real, brickspace name and encouraged to post photos of yourself. Every single bit of Standard Internet Safety prior to then said that you should never ever ever do either of those.

[magpiemirroring]

Originally Facebook was a small online directory of Harvard students, meant for Harvard students.

You could be a Harvard student and also be xX_BuffyFan69_Xx on another part of the internet and internet was still a developing frontier zone enough that you wouldn't expect those identities to connect and the rules and expectations of keeping info private still held in most places.

But online "face books" of college students were becoming increasingly common and the version implemented by a certain Harvard student was popular enough that it spread to other colleges. When I first heard about Facebook, it was still a "college student" thing that you signed up for to connect with people at your college.

(I never went to a school that did this and I think it speaks to an interesting mentality that such a thing is desirable in the first place. Not to mention the side project Zuck made for rating how hot his fellow students were... Profoundly immature.)

But it quickly expanded to be a thing that anyone could join. And for a brief flicker of time there was an assumption that you would just use it to stay connected with people you knew in brickspace. But by the late 00s I was getting career advice that was "you need to have a Facebook so that employers can look you up on it" and like, there was nothing legally okay about this, but it was a quickly adopted social norm that even if they couldn't read your Facebook you needed to have one to prove that you are a normal person or employers wouldn't hire you. (I did not have a Facebook account. I have never had a Facebook account.)

Facebook also quickly realized that tying your Facebook account to your real ID and serving you ads based on your real info was far, far more appealing to advertisers than trying to pitch goods to xX_BuffyFan69_Xx. Anytime Facebook made a new disgusting policy asking to expose yourself more to the internet, it was made with the idea of milking your info to sell to advertisers. It never ever matters to Facebook execs that this might be risky for some people. Everything is about profit.

Facebook was also somewhat clever in adding features that appealed to people with a low tech-literacy. You don't need to have a website to advertise your business online. You can just have a Facebook page for it. In the early 00s, there were very few sites like Squarespace (and they tended to cost money versus Facebook being "free") and the "social media" landscape looked more like blogs and webrings still. Facebook was a blog and photo gallery and it turned your personal social connections in a sort of webring and you could have a web presence there without much more effort than making a personal Facebook page. Facebook became everything.

For a lot of people, Facebook became the face of the internet, the portal through which they did everything they did online. I am pretty sure this was by design. "Capturing" internet traffic like this means that the ads on your site will reach more users, which in turn makes it lucrative for advertisers to throw money at you.

Facebook is largely responsible for the cultural shift in the acceptability of putting personal info online and the motivation was and still is making money off of its users at any moral cost.

As someone who has never had a Facebook, and puts in a lot of effort to avoid using Facebook-owned websites or services, it's been very interesting and horrifying to see this shift happen over my lifetime, along with a lot of bad faith arguments being put forward to justify this.

If you cannot remember a time with Facebook, you were robbed of space to play with identity. You are not safer because every website has your name and location and date of birth, etc. Laws and policies that seek to strip you of your privacy online will be used to hurt more innocent people than they will protect them. You are safer when the first line of defense is in your hands, by giving you information on dangers and tools to protect yourself, including reliable information on how to seek help, or the freedom to get away from predators by just disappearing into a new identity. Privacy is a defensive tool.

Growing up on the internet, I was taught that anyone who wanted to manipulate me into giving up private information was doing so because they wanted to make me more vulnerable to further manipulation and exploitation. It was about them getting control over me.

So, whenever I see laws and policies aimed at stripping me of my right to privacy, my first thought is "how are they planning to use this to exploit and hurt me?" It's that line of thinking that has kept me from joining Facebook even when it cost me Friends and made things more difficult. Because every single time I got worn down enough to consider it, Facebook would introduce some new awful "feature" with horrible implications for safety or sanity. And sometimes they would be bad enough that an uproar would force Facebook to change (or be sneakier about implementation) but by and large....people took Facebook's word for why things would be better if your info was public, if people could tag you in photos, if everything you did online was connected to everything else but especially Facebook. And this rippled out to the rest of the internet....

Of course Facebook wasn't the only site making such "innovations" to the internet. That's the nature of a frontier space. But Facebook's position as huge social platform that wide swaths people of all demographics used gave its actions huge normalization power. Like, Facebook has fallen out of fashion now, but there was a window of time when Facebook mattered, cultural, socially, and politically. Gen Z and Gen Alpha may not spend their time there, but your parents did or do. People who are lawmakers did. And Facebook is still a huge company with the monetary power to fund political lobbies or purchase sites you use. (Like, a lot of people who wouldn't use Facebook these days still use Instagram, which is owned by Meta, the parent company for Facebook)

[northstareclipse]

There's a recurring online tendency to aestheticize consensus itself. The imagined future village is full of emotionally compatible people who enjoy communal gardening, conflict resolution circles, acoustic folk music, mutual aid potlucks, and repairing bicycles together at sunset. Which is nice for the people who genuinely enjoy that lifestyle. But plenty of humans are solitary, prickly, obsessive, urban, nocturnal, sensory-seeking, technologically attached, contrarian, novelty-seeking, private, or just plain difficult. Those people do not evaporate after the revolution. They do not get Left Behind while you are Raptured into the Utopia. They become your neighbors.

[magpiemirroring]

There's a lot of major (ableist) ways the Socialist Revolution Where Community Aid In The Small Commune Solves Everything leaves me to die or suffer, but honestly, yeah tend to fail just on the basics of human nature long before we get to my slow painful death on the Commune!

I am a prickly, solitary, urban, nocturnal, tech-loving, private person. I hate gardening. Most of the Post-Revolution Pastoral Fantasies sound like an utter nightmare to me.

Frankly, if you want to form a small community of shared values and bicycles and communal gardens, these places exist already. They're called "intentional communities", these days apparently. Join one! Start one! You don't have to wait for "after the revolution!" Go now!

(And frankly, if you are waiting for After The Revolution to fix things or try to change anything for the better, even if the only thing you change is your own life, I do not trust you to be able to put things together after society as we know it has collapsed.)

[twiststreet]

She got the idea for the study while walking with her advisor at Stanford to discuss her thesis topic, and the paper she eventually published in the Journal of Experimental Psychology in 2014 is sharp enough that it should have ended the seated meeting on the day it came out.

She ran 4 experiments on 176 people. Same person tested twice. Once sitting, once walking. The creativity tasks were the standard ones psychologists have used for decades to measure how good a brain is at generating novel useful ideas.

81% of participants in the first experiment produced more creative ideas while walking than while sitting. In the second experiment, 88%. In the third, 100%. Every single person walked into a more creative version of themselves. On average, people generated 60% more novel useful ideas the moment their legs started moving.

The skeptical question is the obvious one. Maybe it was the fresh air. Maybe it was the scenery passing by. Maybe it was the change of environment doing the work, not the walking itself.

Oppezzo killed every one of those explanations with one experimental decision. She put people on a treadmill facing a blank wall. No scenery. No fresh air. No environmental change. Just legs moving in place while staring at white drywall. The 60% boost held.

Then she ran the experiment that closed the case completely. She took participants outside in two conditions. Half of them walked through a Stanford courtyard. The other half were pushed through the exact same courtyard in a wheelchair. Same outdoor stimulation. Same scenery passing at the same speed. The only difference was whether the legs were moving.

The walkers produced dramatically more novel high-quality ideas than the wheelchair group. The outdoors did almost nothing on its own. The walking did everything.

She also tested the opposite kind of thinking. Convergent thinking. The kind where there is one right answer and you have to narrow down to it. Word puzzles where 3 words share a hidden fourth word that connects them. The seated participants did slightly better on these. Walkers got slightly worse.

Walking is not a general intelligence enhancer. It does one specific thing. It opens up the divergent search inside your brain. The part that generates options. The part that produces unexpected connections. The part that takes a problem and finds five ways into it instead of one.

When you need to converge on the single right answer, sit down. When you need to find the answer in the first place, get up.

The mechanism is now well understood. Walking selectively activates what neuroscientists call the default mode network, the system inside your brain that runs when you are not consciously focused on anything. The DMN is where mind-wandering happens. Where memories cross-reference each other. Where ideas that have been sitting in separate folders inside your head finally bump into each other.

When you sit at a desk and force yourself to concentrate, you suppress the DMN. When you walk at a natural pace, the executive part of your brain gets just busy enough handling the walking that the DMN comes online and starts doing the work that focus was blocking.

The most useful finding in the entire paper is the one almost nobody quotes. The boost did not turn off the moment people stopped walking. Participants who walked first and then sat back down stayed elevated. Their next round of seated creativity work was still significantly better than people who had been sitting the whole time. The rest lingered for at least several minutes after the legs stopped moving.

You do not need to do creative work while walking. You need to walk before the creative work. The brain holds the state.

Edited down a long tweet. (x)

[cacophonila]

[runs hands down face]

Okay this is the problem with sharing pop science stuff online and content aggregation accounts

The study is real, it's very easy to find by searching up the author's name + study. Give it a read yourself. It's written in a pretty accessible way imo.

Note that it does not put forward any explanations for why this effect happens, only that it does. In the conclusion it posits many possible reasons for why, and that it's most likely nothing to do with the specific action of walking, merely any semi automatic repetitive activity. They also acknowledge the study did not account for the social company the walkers were in, which is a pretty massive factor imo. Considering the conclusion brings up MANY alternative explanations and future experiment possibilities, it's decidedly not "killed every alternative explanation" like the tweet says. The actual paper ends like most scientific papers, listing alternative possible explanations, these are preliminary results, more research is needed, wider demographics of people need to be included, etc.

Another thing is the phrasing of these tweets are like red flags flapping in the wind to me. Any short form social media content that's 1. Pop science 2. Conveys absolute certainty 3. Ends with self improvement biohacking adjacent advice, should set off alarm bells.

Look at the implications that if the tweets were true, it would mean wheelchair users and people with mobility issues would be inherently worse at creative tasks.

So who is this person that's tweeting this, rephrasing this paper in a "helpful" way that is sure to get shares from people who really value being creative and are looking for any way to become more creative in their -

OFC ITS AN AI BRO

You wanna see what his recent articles look like?

CAN WE STOP GETTING BAITED INTO PLATFORMING GRIFTERS

[keepingitreluctant]

Thank you! There were so many red flags in the first post's language. The original paper straight up says that the mechanisms weren't isolated! Also there is no single part of the brain responsible for creative idea generation, it involves communication between multiple brain networks.

[lastoneout]

Glad I wasn't the only person who looked at this and thought that it was weird to say this study is SO perfect when the way it's framed here directly implies that people who can't walk are inherently less capable of being creative than people who can.

[lastoneout]

I can't leave a reply but to the disabled people in the notes who now genuinely seem to believe their mobility issues have robbed them of their ability to be creative pls don't think that! That's not what this study said! You're dealing with ableist misinformation from an AI bro, the study did not make these claims. I encourage everyone who's shared the version without the corrections to take them down, this misinfo is hurting already clearly hurting disabled people and should not be spread.

[magpiemirroring]

Yeah, yeah, there are so many activities that might be able to meet your own personal criteria of an activity that will allow your brain to get in a good creative groove.

Knitting was suggested in the study and I know a lot of people who knit or crochet as a thing to do with their hands while they think. Playing with fidgets can work for me sometimes. Chewing gum works for me sometimes. (I went through A LOT of gum during my writing gig and sometimes stock up on gum when I've got a bunch of commissions to get through, lmao)

It looks like what seemed to be promising is the sort of stuff where you can kinda auto-pilot a physical activity. So, like, if you're still learning to knit, it might be awhile before that's a thing you can mostly do without needing to think hard about it. So I think there's a lot more to it than "walking makes you creative" because even activities that seem like they might take up too much mental energy/focus could sometimes work for brainstorming time for me once they became something I could do on autopilot.

When I worked as a library page, I got to the point where I could sort and shelve books with one part of my brain and play with ideas with the rest of my brain. Heck, there are even video games that I've played enough that I can coast on minimal actual thought and kinda drift and daydream while I play and I will sometimes fire those games up specifically because I wanna keep half an eye on some ideas while they simmer.

BUT - I know for some disabled folks, maybe none of these suggest an activity to you that is doable for you. Maybe you just can't spare the energy to run MindlessPhysicalActivity.exe without going into energy debt. This is not the only way to increase your creativity. This is just one early exploration into how certain types of physical activity may help people be more creative. But there are other ways. I've also been able to drift into creative modes while pretty damn still. If you're able to daydream and then teach yourself how to hold onto your daydreams long enough to get coherent ideas out of them for stories or craft projects or art or music, that's just as valid a way to increase your creativity! Chatting with friends you vibe with and can toss ideas back and forth with is another way to explore ideas and fuel creativity. Or even talking to yourself. (Or if literally talking to yourself feels weird, like talk to an imaginary audience. Give am imaginary Ted Talk about your project. Tell your ideas to a stuffed animal. Programmers sometimes keep a rubber duck or other toy around because explaining a problem to someone else, even if they cannot respond at all, can help us work through. That's a method of unlocking creativity to solve a problem! ) You are absolutely not locked out of harnessing your full creative potential just because you use a wheelchair or can't just aimlessly walk!

[thedailyelm]

“Voting for the lesser of two evils doesn’t work.”

How would you know? It’s never been tried for long enough.

Al Gore, Hillary Clinton, and Kamala Harris all lost.

Biden won, but most people spent his entire presidency shitting on him and giving him absolutely no credit for his successes, which were MANY. (If you need a refresher: RFMA, PACT Act, Chips and Science, Inflation Reduction Act, Bipartisan Infrastructure Act, Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson etc.)

You can’t say “vote blue no matter who” and “vote for the lesser of two evils” doesn’t work if you refuse to ever give it a chance of working.

Also I hate that phrase “lesser of two evils” when we’re talking about someone who supports unions and immigrants and healthcare and food assistance and queer rights and voting rights over someone who is literally trying to end us all.

And the lesser of two evils is, by definition, BETTER.

It’s like the difference between a wound with a bit of an infection, and literal death. Those aren’t comparable.

Democrats are not perfect and no one has ever claimed otherwise, but they are making lasting change. It’s slow and it’s not linear , but it is happening.

Pro forced birth Democrats have been all but forced out the party. Same with anti-gay Democrats AND anti-trans Democrats. You don’t see many Dems supported by the NRA at all anymore. And all Dems believe in the climate crisis.

This was NOT a given even 10 years ago.

Democrats are not becoming more conservative. They’re becoming less. Across the board. Progressive policies have become a deal breaker.

This is what you’re saying is one of “two evils”?

Give me a break.

Do you want things to get better or do you want to scream “perfection only!” and watch it get worse?

Cause that’s what we’re living right now.

We’re living in a refusal to vote for and celebrate the successful harm reduction, or “lesser of two evils,” as you say.

There are rarely examples where we actually get to see what happens if the “lesser of two evils” wins.

And the thing is, when they win, they’re shit on so successfully that we lose next time. Again, Biden.

They do something, or many many things right and the goal post gets moved, again and again.

In the end, the only knowledge anyone has of their actions is that they can’t do anything right.

That’s a dangerous way of seeing the world.

I know this cause we are living it.

What is happening right now is a product of that way of thinking.

I don’t need to find statistics or read a report cause this is our reality.

This is what happens when people refuse to vote for and celebrate the wins of “the lesser of two evils.”

When people choose a candidate in the primary who has no chance of a snowball in hell of winning and then complain and don’t vote when a candidate they REALLY didn’t like becomes the party nominee.

This is our life.

We don’t have to imagine it.

And yet, the mantra hasn’t changed. The goalpost keeps being moved. Dems don’t get any credit for doing ANYTHING right. People spread demands that are literally impossible and convince other people that they are not only possible, but easy. And enough people refuse to vote for harm reduction that the harm is constantly increased.

Perfection is the enemy of progress. That’s not just a catchy phrase, it’s a fact.

If Al Gore had won, we would be A LOT further along on climate than we are now, and we would not have gone into Iraq.

If Hillary Clinton had won, we wouldn’t have lost the Supreme Court. We would still have Roe and affirmative action and the VRA and the Chevron Doctrine.

If Kamala Harris had won, we wouldn’t be at war with Venezuela and Iran and possibly Cuba and maybe Greenland? Trans people would not be attacked at the federal level. Immigrants would not be kidnapped off the streets. We would still have the Department of Education and labor and a DoJ that doesn’t do the president’s bidding.

THIS is the result of refusing to vote for and support the lesser of two evils, WE ARE LIVING IT!

So maybe going forward we stop. We give a chance for the lesser of two evils to actually work. To scream from the rooftops every time they do right thing. We don’t just vote for it once, but do so over at least a decade.

Cause we’ve tried your way. It hasn’t worked. This exact moment that you are reading this post is proof of that.

So let’s try this way, for once. Let’s give this country a fighting chance at actual progress.

PLEASE?

[derinthescarletpescatarian]

It's amazing just how few groceries $50 of groceries is

[butt-rice]

you can stretch $50

4lb jasmine rice ($5)

24 eggs ($4)

4cups butter ($4)

4lb dry beans ($5)

buncha bananas ($2)

4lb oats ($4)

2lb ground flaxseed ($4)

10lb potatoes ($5)

10 cans tuna ($10)

2lb carrots ($3)

jar of peanut butter ($2)

a lil treat for yourself idk ($2)

people gotta come to terms with the fact that we can't get all the luxuries all the time anymore. this is like two weeks of food. (some more some less)

[da-lil-muffin]

I kinda wanna do this, I mean buy this stuff and see how long. Can stretch it. But I live with roomies and I'm not sure how down with it they'd be.

Atomic shrimp on youtube dose some very strict budget challenges (going back a few years) and some losser ones lately. I've wanted to try something similar for a while.

[butt-rice]

i mean i'm doing it right now because of poverty reasons. it's really not bad, especially if you enjoy routone. just your meals will go from tasty crunchwrap supremes to kinda bland but easy.

[derinthescarletpescatarian]

Either groceries are WAY cheaper where you are or you live in the USA and are using a very different dollar that's worth way more than my dollar, but that's a great grocery basis either way. Obviously you need to vary the vegetables sometimes for nutrition reasons.

You can remove the blandness by splurging on a different bottled spice or sauce when you can afford it, and rotating through those with your meals.

[mariposakitten]

...that is not what those things cost here. $ for 4 cups of butter?? Where? $4 for 24 eggs? 10 lbs of potatoes are absolutely not $5. Hell, even the candy bars here are over $2, what kind of little treat are you getting?

[magpiemirroring]

lmao, yeah, no one should ever give grocery shopping advice with actual numbers unless you are extremely local and know what store someone is shopping.

But just for fun! for comparison, here's some prices from my area (usa, high cost of living ish area, trying to shop for the cheapest options I can find)

4lb jasmine rice ($10)

24 eggs ($5, surprisingly cheap actually? I mean. comparatively. I can remember buying nicer quality eggs for like half that price. so....)

4 cups butter ($10)

4lb dry beans ($6, I chose pinto beans here since butt-rice did not choose to specify)

buncha bananas ($3, estimated since bananas are sold by the lb so a big bunch or a bunch with hefty nanners may cost more!)

4lb oats (~$10-12 (unclear what kind of oats are intended so just going with the stuff I'd use to make a bowl of oatmeal which is not sold in increments that are easy to make 4lbs here so my math is kinda wibbly)

2lb ground flaxseed ($10)

10lb potatoes ($10, russets)

10 cans tuna ($12)

2lb carrots ($4)

jar of peanut butter ($4, 16oz)

a lil treat for yourself idk ($2, reese's peanut butter cups (2 cup package))

That's about $87, not including

any tax (which is also high in my area, pls do not assume I make an equally high wage to meet the hcol and tax rate. I do not.)

travel costs if I need to take a car or bus

fees for bags if I forgot to bring some with me (like, I usually do, but also if you're adhd/depressed/stressed, sometimes you just forget things and that's also part of your budget too)

delivery and service fees if you're too disabled to shop for yourself or have other limits on your ability to shop for yourself, and your friends/family/community can't do your shopping for you

Additional data: the store I picked is sorta mid-range. Nothing fancy. Prices generally considered pretty affordable and with good sales/deals. There are cheaper stores in my town, but they are farther away and don't reliably have ground flax seeds in stock. Where sales were available I did not use those prices for this price comparison because while you can take advantage of a sale when it happens you cannot always count on a sale when you are shopping and prices can fluctuate do to nonsense so this seemed the best way to calculate an "average" cost.

[bramblepatch]

The thing is you can have a grassy lawn or even a golf course without it being an ecological disaster, you just have to a: be cool about having the occasional non-grass plant in the mix and b: be willing to live in a climate that supports grass without irrigation.

[bramblepatch]

Golf courses in California are an abomination which is why the sport was in fact invented in Scotland.

[abstrusetheorist]

I always thought that golf as a sport should be adapted to the local native landscape. I think this will encourage regional pride when local golfers completely trounce visitors at Swamp Golf, Desert Golf, Forest Golf, etc. Rich tourists will be pressured to travel extensively to experience all forms of golf, instead of staying in their backyard country club golf courses. Internet discourse will probably somehow get worse but I think this is a small price to pay.

[mctreeleth]

[mogseltof]

Nullarbor Links - Wikipedia

[bramblepatch]

Alright, so, it seems like Australia is on a level of golf innovation the rest of us can only dream of.

[sqbr]

I am Australian and had never heard of either of these??? Now I feel extra unhappy with the golf course near me that's just regular water-hungry grass :/

[magpiemirroring]

As an ex-Californian with grandparents that were really REALLY into golf (while I quietly seethed about everything awful about golf) Holy Shit, these are both brilliant ideas and I love that they took care to adapt to the environment!

"hit ball across landscape" is a perfectly fine concept for a sport, but I am enamored with the idea that the sport might provide various terrain challenges based on locale. Or that the sport might develop regional variations.

[helpimsotired]

Justin McElroy talking about accessibility in live theatre (June 9, 2019)

[formichi]

[quasi-normalcy]

“Art is happening everywhere all of the time” but an awful lot of it seems to only ever happen in New York and London, doesn’t it?

[derinthescarletpescatarian]

Unless your enjoyment of theatre is based in the idea that you get to do it and The Poors don’t and that’s why it’s fun for you, how does other people getting to experience recordings of it make it worse? Like why would anybody be against that. “Oh it’s better in person” yeah and concerts are often more fun than listening to CDs, so what? There’s absolutely no reason why people in other places and circumstances shouldn’t get to experience art.

[magpiemirroring]

As someone who has had the experience of seeing a live version of a play, and a filmed version, and a movie version...and enjoyed them all!

Yeah, live art is ephemeral and that's part of the charm. The version of the play that you saw, in the theatre you saw it in, with the cast that you saw, on the night that you saw it, with the audience you saw it with it, with all the personal experiences making up the you that saw it is a totally unique experience that cannot be replicated or caught on film! Live theatre is a really neat and special experience!

People having super special theatre experiences and people wanting to have that live experience will not change if we broadcast a performance so that it can be seen by a wider audience.

And as someone with a very limited, very amateur experience doing live theatre, yeah, there's something magical and unique and enriching about acting in front of a live audience, and also, I think people should get to see plays even if they can't come to them live.

The fact that some people can't see a live performance and might only get to experience a play through a recorded version doesn't hurt the experience of live theatre. It doesn't make live theatre less. Unless the "exclusivity" of it being something other people can't see is what makes it special to you. And if that's the most important thing to about your personal live theatre experience, then I think what you're really experiencing is the pleasure of stroking your own ego about it and you're actually getting less out your trip to the theatre than someone watching a grainy, badly filmed version of a performance on their phone screen. If the prestige of exclusivity is more important to you than human connection of artists to audience across time and space, via whatever medium they can access, then your opinion about theatre means nothing because your opinion isn't actually about theatre at all.

[cheaphalloweencostume]

these are the people you have to share a highway with

[cheaphalloweencostume]

genuinely what is the alternative here

[cheaphalloweencostume]

also i cropped the image but the thing they were using as an example was the nut allergy in Hereditary

[magpiemirroring]

this is the sort of person for whom movies are made where nobody, not even the cast, are supposed to know or understand the central Twist of the film so that it can be surprise that no one could have guessed. (and consequently comes out of nowhere and makes no sense because it's not truly grounded in the movie's world or the characters' actions or backstories in any meaningful way)

[allthingswhumpyandangsty]

not my tweet but I thought it would be a good psa for artists here too

[the-haiku-bot]

not my tweet but I

thought it would be a good psa

for artists here too

Beep boop! I look for accidental haiku posts. Sometimes I mess up.

[magpiemirroring]

one thing I want to point out VBS files.

that's not a normal file type for references.

for a written document you are looking for DOC or DOCX probably. maybe TXT. PAGES if it's from a mac. and a lot of my text files are ODT because I use libreoffice, lmao. (generally I will convert my files into DOCX for folks)

for pictures, you are likely to see JPEG/JPG, PNG, TIFF or maybe GIF.

And of course PDF, the tumblr of file types. (joke, but also, yes, you might see a PDF)

VBS stands for Visual Basic Script. It is a file type for code that could run on a Windows computer. You do not want to open/run this kind of file unless you know what it is and trust who sent it to you. There is NO reason to send references as a VBS file.

Please learn to recognize common file types and look at the file type of files you are being sent. If you don't recognize the file type, google it.

caveat: I am an artist, not a computer person, so I may have missed a common file type or not explained a computer thing 100% correctly. I just wanted to spell out in as much detail as I could a bit of a helpful hint for internet safety!

[violeterror404]

This!!!

It's also good to note that these file types are risky:

EXE (one of the most well known for being potentially harmful - executes on launch)

sh (shell script - normally won't execute when opened)

bat (batch - will execute when opened)

VBS (executes when opened)

cmd (commands - executes when opened)

JS (JavaScript - won't execute when opened)

MSI (installer)

ISO (unless your doing something related disc backups, etc, you'll probably not need to open this type. I'm not that familiar with this type)

Docx - Microsoft word doc, they can actually contain harmful macros

PDF (can contain malware)

[magpiemirroring]

reblogging this again for the additions of other file types with explanations of risks

it sucks that the complexity of common file types like docx and pdf means that they can contain something that can fuck your computer up or allow someone to hijack your computer

there are a lot of clever people out there who get their jollies from finding innovative ways to ruin people's lives so any time you open something from a stranger, there is a risk. some are more easily spotted, like using a very obviously incorrect file type, and some will be sneakier.

it's probably wise to get (and keep up to date) a cybersecurity program, but I will leave recommendations for that up to someone with more computer knowledge than me, so check the notes for that! (cybersecurity programs are never perfect, but can help). and back up your files regularly! that way if something bricks your device or destroys your data, you don't lose everything!

[allthingswhumpyandangsty]

not my tweet but I thought it would be a good psa for artists here too

[the-haiku-bot]

not my tweet but I

thought it would be a good psa

for artists here too

Beep boop! I look for accidental haiku posts. Sometimes I mess up.

[magpiemirroring]

one thing I want to point out VBS files.

that's not a normal file type for references.

for a written document you are looking for DOC or DOCX probably. maybe TXT. PAGES if it's from a mac. and a lot of my text files are ODT because I use libreoffice, lmao. (generally I will convert my files into DOCX for folks)

for pictures, you are likely to see JPEG/JPG, PNG, TIFF or maybe GIF.

And of course PDF, the tumblr of file types. (joke, but also, yes, you might see a PDF)

VBS stands for Visual Basic Script. It is a file type for code that could run on a Windows computer. You do not want to open/run this kind of file unless you know what it is and trust who sent it to you. There is NO reason to send references as a VBS file.

Please learn to recognize common file types and look at the file type of files you are being sent. If you don't recognize the file type, google it.

caveat: I am an artist, not a computer person, so I may have missed a common file type or not explained a computer thing 100% correctly. I just wanted to spell out in as much detail as I could a bit of a helpful hint for internet safety!

[derinthescarletpescatarian]

Today I was forced to do internet banking for the first time in like four years (sad) and they’ve put in a bunch of new security shit I don’t understand and all my info like my phone number and stuff was out of date, so I had to physically go into the branch and actually ask the teller “can you please help me do internet banking” like I’m some doddering old dear who doesn’t understand this newfangled World Wide Web thing and IT GETS WORSE, because they’re like ‘okay so the easiest way to deal with our security is if you have our app on your phone’ and I DO NOT WANT apps on my phone and I grumble about this in the most Old Man Way possible but they say it’s the easiest so fine, we can do that, only there’s an in-bank security step for authenticating the app so the lady helping me has to sit down and wait while I pull out my old scratched beaten-up dinosaur of a Barely Counts As A Smartphone, wait forever for it to wake up, and open the app store.

I do not know where the app store is.

Okay, this lady explains to me (she is very good at customer service and there’s absolutely no sign on her face that she is baffled how someone like me can even be alive, even though logically she HAS TO be thinking that), it should be in your apps. Look at your apps.

I do not know how to look at my apps. I use like 4 apps (call, text, photos, music) and I put them on the front screen thing ages ago. I push all of the buttons on the phone and apps do not appear. There’s nothing in settings or anything either.

Try swiping up, she says.

I try this a few times. My phone does not register the contact. On the fourth time, it realises that I want it to do something, and oh, there are the apps. We install the app. We do all the sign-in and authentification code shit and it does not work. We do it again and it does not work again.

“If I had a checkbook I’d be out of here by now,” I say. She laughs because it is true. We’ve been here for twenty minutes. I restart my phone to see if that’s the problem and grumble under my breath about how banking never used to be so complicated. As I open the app again, I ask how people do internet banking if they don’t have phones.

She seems puzzled by the question. “We have ways for them to do banking,” she says, “but most… most people have phones.”

She’s probably right. You probably need a phone to survive if you’re homeless these days.

The program loads now but catches us in an endless sign-in loop and the problem, we learn from a supervisor who’s wandered over (presumably to see how helping one idiot put an app on their phone could possibly be taking so long) is actually not on my end. There’s something wrong with the version of the app that the woman assisting me has put on my account on the computer (that’s her half in this operation), so we have to uninstall the app on both systems and reinstall it. Fine. I uninstall the app. Now to go to the app store.

I have forgotten how to access the app store. I push all of the buttons on the phone and apps do not appear. There’s nothing in settings or anything either.

Try swiping up, the woman says.

Oh. There’s the app store.

We install it and get caught in an endless loop again but I am computer savvy enough to know that if restarting and reinstalling doesn’t work then sometimes just trying the same thing over and over again will make it work for no reason, and it does, after I sign in three times in a row we can FINALLY authenticate the app and I can FINALLY use it for two-factor authentication and I CAN FINALLY DO INTERNET BANKING AGAIN.

“Thanks for your help,” I say.

“No problem.”

“I’m sorry it took so long,” I say.

“It’s really not a problem,” she says, and because she’s a professional it’s totally convincing, but I have helped people with tech before and I know how much it sucks. I look at this woman who, on any other day, would be a good few years older than me, but not today. For today, I am a doddering 96-year-old woman who wishes for a simple chequebook and does not like smartphones.

I get up, and I pick up my bag and my walking stick, and I leave the bank, thinking about the scarf I’ve been knitting and how much more work I have to do on it. I wonder if I should bake scones tonight.

I have already forgotten how to open the app store.

[derinthescarletpescatarian]

There are too many of them these days! Too many apps! Companies need to stop trying to make us do everything on our phones!

[marlinspirkhall]

TFA shouldn’t even require an app for you to do it. TFA is just testing that one: you know your password, and two, you have a “key” to physically prove it is you (like a device logged into your email account), in case someone else knows your password. Or, if you’re cool enough, a fingerprint or retinal scanner.

The bank could give you a physical button to press if they were dedicated enough. I bet the bank of evil from Despicable Me hands out Big Red Buttons Of Doom for all their customers to use. Honestly what’s the point of being a bank if you’re not going to overthink shit to the most flamboyant degree possible?

[derinthescarletpescatarian]

I know! Everyone else just texts you! The bank is the only place I’ve seen have an app for it.

I asked about this while we were going through all this shit and the girls was like, “oh, you can also bank on the app, so I guess it’s more convenient to put the security there too” (which makes no fucking sense) and I didn’t push the issue because it’s not her fault and she probably doesn’t know any more than me but I think it’s pretty damned obvious that the reason is the same reason that some particularly sketchy free services try to make you sign up with your credit card anyway – if you’ve already linked your card/got the app, you’re more likely to buy things/use the app. They want people using their mobile app so they  make you have it for “account security” even if you don’t intend to use it, because you’re more likely to start using it in the future if it’s already set up.

[theimaginatrix27]

Derin, I say this while fully aware I do not possess my own personal smartphone, but how? How do you not have a minicomputer that you play games on and read on and do a dozen other things with? How are you even real? Are you real? First you have two ridiculously low-storage computers for this day and age, then you tell me you barely use your smartphone for things people were using phones for twenty years ago? This is almost like if I was still making tapes with a clunky old cassette deck like the first one I ever used, which did not have a CD-player, in a bizarre alternate timeline where I didn’t know CDs even existed, let alone anything more advanced than that!

Yes, manufacturers and companies expect you to have a more up-to-date smartphone! This should not come as a surprise to you! You just bought your own house, how do you not have a semi-decent phone? Or computer, for that matter?

[derinthescarletpescatarian]

Because I don’t need one. I do occasionally read fic on my phone (it’s got a native web browser, obviously, they all do) and occasionally listen to music to calm myself down if I’m somewhere too crowded or sensory, but in general I use is as a watch and to text my boss. I don’t need to play games on it, that would be actively detrimental to my life – that’s valuable quiet-brain time I’d be eating up, quiet-brain time is SUCH a limited and very valuable resource these days, I don’t see why people waste it. I despise putting company-specific apps on it because half of them are full of malware and spyware and shit – I put facebook on my old phone and I could never fully remove it and it was such utterly intrusive garbage that it’s a big part of why I got a new one. I had to put gmail on this one, I forget why, and I’ve regretted it ever since because it won’t stop fucking telling me when I get emails and IT IS NOT MY PHONE’S BUSINESS IF I GET AN EMAIL. (Yeah, yeah, I shouldn’t be using gmail, I haven’t got round to switching to something better.)

Just because something exists doesn’t make it a positive addition to my life. I also don’t have fancy clothes I won’t wear, or a subscription to any streaming services, or an expensive car (well I don’t drive, but if I did I still wouldn’t get an expensive car), or any internet-connected household appliances. Just because something has existed for ages doesn’t mean I have to want to use it.

Companies absolutely should not expect me to have a more up-to-date smartphone. My grandmother reluctantly bought a flip phone to keep in contact with family members in an emergency, but doesn’t like or understand smartphones. With this security system, she can’t bank at the library. The world is full of homeless or impoverished people who need phones to survive but absolutely cannot afford to keep fucking getting new ones. I have a lot to say about our high-consumerist, planned-obsolescence-laden culture, and I gotta say when companies expect you to get rid of perfectly serviceable handheld computers every two years and get a new one just so you can use their basic services, that is NOT reasonable. That is NOT okay. That is NOT an expectation that anyone should have. How would we be if people did that with clothes? You can’t eat in this restaurant unless the clothes you’re wearing were made within the last few years? It’s fucking stupid.

The only thing physically wrong with my phone is that the screen’s a bit scratched up and doesn’t register contact all the time, and for that reason I do intend to replace it; I’m waiting until I finish my job (ten weeks) before I change phone service providers to one that’ll let me use a cheaper handset. (Unlocked handsets are so much more pricey.) That’s a reasonable reason for me to get a new (very cheap, very basic) handset. “The new iPhone Zigglybob Jenga 4 is out so everyone needs the fancyphone!” is not, and basic life services like banking should not expect me to have a smartphone at all. (I would prefer a flip phone. I only went to smartphones in the first place because I needed Google Maps a lot; I don’t need google maps here but everyone’s forcing me to use sixteen billion apps to do anything instead.)

And the storage on my computer is completely fine. It has never in my life been any kind of a problem. I have a couple of external drives for media and stuff I want to keep, and I clean out the hard drive once a year or so. I don’t have more internal space because I don’t have any need for it.

[caparrucia]

I work in banking, and every so often I have to remind wide eyed, enthusiastic engineers that they can’t gatekeep services to smartphone app users, because not all customers are smartphone app users.

“Customers without smartphones are not second class customers, they’re customers.”

Even so, at least you’re banked. There’s a significant amount of the population who just doesn’t have access to the banking system, and I get increasingly less gentle in reminding so, to every Musk wannabe who comes in saying how digital money is the future and cash will be extinct by 20XX.

[fakeharmless]

And if it’s any consolation, I also work in banking customer service, and this woman absolutely has this conversation several times a day. If anything, you were merciful by being there in person where she could see your phone (though I suppose it was required in this case). Grumbling about it is generally fine as long as you weren’t an asshole, which I suspect you weren’t.

Part of my job is to talk folks into using our website or app, but even with that in mind we have folks who are blind or don’t get internet out where they live or CAN’T have the website or app for security reasons because they’ve gotten scammed so hard before and simply cannot be trusted to not give out their credentials, that kind of thing.

But there are services gatekept behind having a login or going paperless, and fuck, I may consider raising some stink about that.

[magpiemirroring]

I used to work in a library (in the USA), which is where everyone who doesn't have a phone or a computer goes when the world demands that they do something online.

I have literally had to walk someone through using a computer mouse.

I had customers who were homeless or just struggled to keep a phone. (low-cost, pay-as-you-go smartphones exist, but you often need online access to, yanno, pay. and, of course, money. and stuff gets sold, stolen or "confiscated" a fair bit).

And in general a lot of folks who aren't terminally online are really, really not tech savvy and don't understand that if the website or service wants a phone number, then giving it a friend or family member's number (or even a landline!!) is not in your best interest when it comes to the TFA that number is actually for. I developed a grudge against TFA due to the number of customers I dealt with who no longer had access to the phone number that they originally used and now could not access a site or service with their password because the site also now wanted a number from a device that was inaccessible or just plain gone and I had to try to help them find the secret FAQ and support section where they might be able to email or call someone to get their account (which they have the password for!) unlocked. Which is a bother that people who have limited access to computer or phone time just do not need. So I remain angry at the assumption of TFA that everyone will access to the same number and a smartphone! It's not a sensible security measure if folks can lose access to the key because they can't afford to maintain the key!!!

I left the library before everything was apps all the time, but I could see that time coming on the horizon as my library finally updated their app and began really pushing it and the amount of time I spent bent over someone's phone or ipad trying to troubleshoot our own app started to increase. (I think library apps are great! I love being able to access the library online! But also, the library is about access to information for all and I think it's bad policy/gatekeeping to prioritize the service of customers who have access and knowledge of tech tools over the ones who are lacking such access and knowledge.)

tl;dr : apps and tech are cool and all but I feel like maybe Tech People sometimes lose sight of the reality of how normal people actually interact with the world. yes, some tech tools are genuinely easier and better for some of the population, but there will always be people in your customer base who can't or won't embrace the new thing and your system still needs to provide clear and accessible support for them to continue to use your business or service.

[anarchopuppy]

If you are going to have literally no criteria for being queer, then how can you say that anyone isn't? How can you refer to any person in any context as cis/straight?

If someone tells me they’re queer I believe them. If someone tells me they’re straight I believe them. This isn’t that hard

[jeste-posting]

What so like a cis het allo person can just call themselves queer now?

[anarchopuppy]

What problem, exactly, are you so concerned about? I don’t know if you’ve noticed but queerness is still very much marginalized, it’s not as “trendy” as people try to act, and straight people aren’t tripping over themselves to call themselves queer. And if you’re worried about being “tricked” by “infiltrators”, like, you know those people can just say that they’re gay? Like they can lie? They’re not going to try and “sabotage” queer spaces by saying “hey I don’t have any marginalized orientations or identities but I’m still totally queer”, they’d just say “hey I’m super gay, love people of the same gender”

What, concretely, are you worried about happening? What’s the worst thing that could happen due to inclusivity? Because the worst things that can happen due to gatekeeping are very well-known, and I’m much more scared of that

[jeste-posting]

It’s less that it’s trendy and more like, I like having my queer-only spaces. Also queer is a bad word. All our words are bad words. They aren’t oppressed, and for a cishetallo to use a slur as their identity feels a little demeaning to me. Like I dont hate them of course but the A was never for Ally . It’s not queer to be normal

Interacting with them is cool and having them at pride I’m not opposed to but as a person who’s queer it does feel like they’re kinda dressing it up

Im gonna be honest Ive never seen people like that but like, I’m allowed to not like it

[anarchopuppy]

I’m not going to distrust and exclude people because of a problem you made up. If someone tells me they’re queer, I believe them

[doctorguilty]

[imsobadatnicknames2]

He’s not even pretending the guy he made up to get mad at is real, he’s straight up admitting he made him up and still getting mad at him anyway.

[magpiemirroring]

The thing about "queer only spaces" is that they are not actually guaranteed asshole-free spaces.

I am far more concerned about assholes in my safe spaces making my spaces unsafe or undesirable to be in. This is a far more likely risk.

Some communities are good about having and enforcing rules about assholes. Some are not.

I am trying to go out and join more queer spaces despite the fact that I hate social group drama. But I am willing to take that risk in order to expand my circle of fellow queer people.

If a Fake Queer wants to join my social group and pretend to be queer and behaves according to all the rules and is not an asshole, like, I am okay with that. Maybe they'll figure out something about themselves while they are there. So long as they don't, like, start positioning themselves on a expert on queer experiences (something I would also find aggravating in my fellow queer people), like, whatever. So long as you're being chill and listening, you're not ruining the safety of the space.

As soon as they behave like an asshole ( for any reason) though, this is a situation that needs mediating. If it becomes clear during mediation that they wanted to infiltrate my queer crafting space to spy on queer people knitting together muwahaha, like, yeah, I'd want this person to leave. Because joining a group to spy on them, for whatever reason, is antisocial behavior that should get you banned from the group.

Basically, I think anyone who has asshole reasons to join a queer-only space will be found and kicked out for being an asshole eventually. I'm more concerned about having an asshole-free environment than witch-hunting potential Fake Queers who have got sucked into actually enjoying my Queer knitting group.

And like, if you're in my queer knitting group scrutinizing and spying on other members trying to figure out and hold judgement on whether they are are Actually Queer or not, you are going to make me feel unsafe. That is asshole behavior and I would want to ask you to keep those judgements to yourself or leave the group.

[a-silly-poll-side-blog-yay]

Linktree or carrd.co?

Linktree or carrd.co?

linktree

carrd.co

none

smth else

results

Voting ended onApr 8

[netherworldpost]

Google Sites

Free WordPress site

If you have a mailing list, there is a significant chance your mailing list provider offers some form of "make a website!" thing

https://www.w3schools.com

i know i know i know i know i know

it is just one more thing to learn and there is a service to handle it for you

i know i know i know i know i know

it is easy for me to say this having been a Make Stuff For a Long Time kind of person so this is all second nature and isn't it just easier to have one less goddamn thing to worry about

i know i know i know i know i know

what it is like for a chunk of text you do not own / operate / have any say over

to suddenly say "...we're sorry, we're shutting down, we too are disappointed..."

and/or

"we are excited to roll out FEATURE that will HELP US but PISS YOUR AUDIENCE OFF"

and/or

"we were bought out by private equity and now we have to make loan payments on the equity they are borrowing against to gut our staff like fish haha not literally... unless...?"

i have zero evidence of any untowards plans to the above

and

as per above i have been doing this for awhile and have Seen Things

as a final note

basic HTML is INCREDIBLY user-forgot-something code friendly

your absolute basic, hammered together, missing like portions of the code HTML page "FIND ME HERE" will probably work

and the aesthetic will probably be charming

this will be my last goddamn doom post for awhile, I'm on vacation, and it's 2:25 am, and I'm not used to being this forcibly not stressed, but please explore other non-link options

[magpiemirroring]

seconding this. i've been making basic html websites since I first got online, lmao and while my sites were never like up to current quality standards, they functioned. I have always had a place online to point to that is mine.

I own the domain. I own the code. If my host booted me off, I'd still own my domain and my code and could move to a new host and have my site back up in a day and it would look the same to any users.

If you need a basic site to do a basic job like "this is me! these are my important links! yeah!" you can do that with basic html no problem!

I've only reached a point like last year where my needs (portfolio site that scales with display size) outstripped my patience to learn code. I got very close before handing it over to a friend to implement with the rule that it had to be as simple as possible because I wanted to be able to update and make changes myself without destroying my site and having to pay them to fix it, lmao.

But if they could not have made something for me that was within my range of website-literacy, I might still use Ye Olde HTML because I feel that strongly about my personal site being something I can control!

If you're new to messing around with code and making websites, I might also suggest looking at neocities. The whole ethos of neocities is bringing back having your own personal website for whatever and expressing yourself the way you want to as opposed to the way social media aims to shape our expression. The neocities community is browsable, with searchable tags, so you can check out a lot of sites with that retro personal site vibe. There's beautifully complex sites and some crunchy basic sites. It's great place to browse and shake up your ideas of what a website should be for and what it should look like! Escape the clean corporate box!

(caveat: some modern website standards are good, because they are about accessibility and like, not giving people migraines or seizures. In Ye Olden Days, personal sites often had an "enter here" landing page with minimal content or like 18+ warnings. You could also use those to warn people about flashing gifs, eyestrain, etc. You could make your landing page very basic and user-friendly with your key links and then add more expressive pages if you wanted)

[monkeyislandtwo]

fonts will be named shit like viscera antique, 16 bit dreams, doctor's orders, bingo condensed, googly, wish you were here

[equos-bipes]

for your consideration

[magpiemirroring]

okay but I need all of these now

[dwarven-beard-spores]

Starting a gofundme for my friend Bunbury who's a terrible invalid,

[copperbadge]

GoBunbMe

[magpiemirroring]

okay but can you imagine a modern day adaption of TIoBE set online among fannish culture and tumblr?

Ernest online, but Jack IRL?

Ernest and Algy being fannish friends who've met at a convention and Ernest just never bothered to disclose his real name? (Jack comes from a small, more conservative town and is used to keeping his online self and offline self strictly separated so that he can maintain his legal guardianship over his younger cousin in a town that might take offense at a young gay man raising a kid.)

Ernest writes fic and quippy social media posts and is a BNF with a fair amount of small but entertaining scandals. More than a few call-out posts have been written about him as a bit of a fandom diva. Though maybe not as much as his friend Algy who is known to be a fickle fan and a bit flaky about following through on commitments, tho, of course, some folks will always appear to remind you that he has to take care of his poor sickly friend ("friend?") (known as "Bunbury" online.)

(Algernon uses Bunburying to augment his meager income, to get out of things he doesn't want to do, and as his psued for writing fics he doesn't want associated with his main persona online. Bunbury has his/their own small but passionate fanbase. )

Ernest has an on again off again thing with fan artist Gwen, who has been unable to come to cons so far because her mother is very strict. But she and Algy have somehow managed to convince her mother than Algy will stick by her through the con and protect her from seeing/doing anything she shouldn't. (A promise Algy and Gwen have no intent of keeping)

Which would be great for Ernest, except that he's being forced to escort his cousin C.C (they/them, at least online) to the con and C.C. only knows him as Jack and is really, really hoping to meet their fave fic writer, Ernest, at the con!

The only thing he can think to do to get out of this is to quickly write a post in his hotel room as Ernest's brother Jack claiming that Ernest has died! Suddenly! Tragically! Of, uh, Covid. So he definitely won't be able to meet C.C at the con!

While Jack is distracted by the chaos his announcement has caused online, Algernon stumbles across C.C in the lobby and pretends to be Ernest (as Jack's friend, he's well up on all of Ernest's fics and headcanons and so on, though he quickly segues to spouting his own, superior, opinions) and thoroughly charms C.C.

Gwen joins them, and expresses her own excitement at her plans to meet-up with Ernest. Another fan overhears and is like "didn't you hear? he's dead!" and shows them the post on their phone (the con wifi is a little janky so it takes a little to load) Chaos and confusion ensues!

Jack finally arrives and asks what everyone is crowding around the phone and shouting for for. ("Apparently, Ernest has died, Jack," Algy says meaningfully. "But that cannot be, because as you well know, I am Ernest.")

Gwen sputters and Algy surreptitiously elbows her and she holds her tongue for now but is clearly fuming. He then introduces Jack to his cousin Gwen. As soon as he can, Jack takes Algy aside and says he's made a terrible mistake. He was so panicked about C.C finding out that he is actually Ernest (writer of incredibly smutty gay fanfic) and maybe accidentally spilling the beans to someone who might decide that makes Jack an unfit guardian for his cousin that he hadn't realized what that might do to his other plans, like his meet-up with Gwen! Who he has definitely been flirting with online! So, no, Algy, this is not just a problem for Jack! It's a problem for both of them! and they have to figure out how to solve it before the con is over without getting cancelled! Or worse!!)