They are? Where? I mod a Community and I’ve never seen anything that isn’t explicitly for Admins that can see them.
I advocate for logical and consistent viewpoints on controversial topics. If you’re looking at my profile, I’ve probably made you mad by doing so.
They are? Where? I mod a Community and I’ve never seen anything that isn’t explicitly for Admins that can see them.
For my community ( !actual_discussion@lemmy.ca ) I would adore this as long as it’s available to Mods of the community the downvotes are in and Admins of that instance only. It should absolutely not be visible for normal users.
We are hit with downvotes nearly every time we post a new thread on anything even remotely controversial so it would really help us filter out people who simply downvote to bury the thread and contribute nothing whatsoever to the discussion.
If you disagree, we want to know why and discuss that with you. It’s the entire point of our Community.
Heck, we actively made it a rule to not downvote unless the user is not adding to the discussion, and that it should not be used as a disagree button. People generally ignore this, however.
That or just add the moderator option to disable downvotes for Communities. It would be an incredibly handy toggle.
EDIT: For an example as to why it should be implemented, see this post you’re currently viewing where I give reasons, how it’s been impacting us, some alternatives, and people hit the “fuck you” button with zero discussion and that’s all. This is the problem.
I appreciate it! I mod !actual_discussion@lemmy.ca if you’d ever care to join us.
We try to disagree in good faith and not attack each other there.
That paper is not really a source, it’s a literature review. That’s not inherently bad, but essentially all it does is pull things in from other (if you check, quite outdated by nearly 60 years, which is a lot, ESPECIALLY for biology) articles and say “… and therefore this other thing may be true.” It’s essentially philosophizing.
The paper neither invalidate nor proves anything, it simply makes a loose connection to a strange claim.
The author is correct that we do have characteristics of herbivores. However that is not something anyone was questioning; that’s literally one of the requirements for being an omnivore. We also have characteristics of carnivores. And even obligate carnivores will often have some characteristics of herbivores due to evolutionary holdovers.
The paper is, essentially, saying nothing of value.
Errrr… are you looking for me to provide you a primary scientific source for how teeth work in animals with differing diets? Most of that is in veterinary texts (which is an amalgam of info), but it’s akin to asking for a scientific evidence for gravity. What you’re asking is too broad to be covered in a single paper and shows a misunderstanding of how scientific studies focus and function. I was simply giving you a primer since you asked, and that blog is good enough for that (and accurate from the portion I read).
I can point you at papers (such as this one on Tooth root morphology as an indicator for dietary specialization in carnivores) which can help explain part of how food selection works in evolution, but I’m not sure what level of information would satisfy you or why you’d even want it?
Here’s one on how tooth wear affects teeth differently based on evolutionary eating habits.
Here’s one on the development and evolution of teeth.
Here’s one on mammalian teeth in specific.
If you’d like more, feel free to use https://scholar.google.com/ to look for more.
Human teeth also have sharp peaks and deeper valleys within them which is the case for the overwhelming majority of omnivorous creatures. Most obligate herbivores have flatter teeth or will regrow them unless they have teeth explicitly for a particular use case.
Source: You can check out scads of scientific resources on herbivores versus omnivore versus carnivore teeth. I assume you know how a search engine works, but here’s a solid article on differences.
Also my sister has been one of the veterinary bigwigs at several zoos through her lifetime and we’ve had multiple discussions on it.
Definitely. When I did all of my forestry work, we were warned about brown bears extensively. Don’t get on their territory. If you have to, don’t take chances. Don’t fuck with them.
I don’t know where the idea comes from that these things will just leave you alone. They will not.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assyria
If true at all, the year is about 200 years prior to Assyria even being formed. This closely coincides with one of the pre-Assyrian collapse (or massive shift) periods where the society changed a great deal.
Hence “as we know it.”
The writing on this tablet being from a time when his civilization was collapsing. The only change to make his words 100% correct would be “as we know it.”
That’s called being a centrist or an independent. Lemmy hates those.
I like this! Would I be able to bother you to post this to https://lemmy.ca/c/actual_discussion
I feel it would be a really worthwhile topic to dig into and you’ve articulated it well!
Ah yes, nothing like a nice rum and water.
I truly don’t mean to be pedantic here, but aren’t these nearly word for word the same beliefs Left-leaning people here have about the Right in America?
Maybe if you’re being generous and want to write out the other side of these beliefs you could leave out the descriptors “lazy and weak” and replace them with “psychotic and brainwashed”, but other than that, is this meme not the same for Left and Right?
As a Windows user who manually updates weekly and reads changelogs for what actually changes, neither do I.
But then again I don’t leave 400,000 items open on my desktop for no reason whatsoever and get mad when I have to close them.
That might be what you wish they are learning, but I assure you that’s not the case. There may be more of those Highway blocking protests that you’re thinking about, but you’re simply hearing about them spread across many, many locations. They are not occurring frequently enough in one location to warrant a change to the way people commute. I have never even heard of anybody linking those two points together before.
If they’re blocking a highway, it’s not like you can just see the protest up ahead and turn off instead instead of choosing to be stuck. Often they are held in the middle of long stretches where they will trap as man cars as they are able on both sides.
And the lesson most people learned from COVID was that there was absolutely no reason why we couldn’t work from home. Although I could potentially see a link between working from home and, when the time comes to replace the infrastructure, replacing it with something more environmentally sane… but they’d have to convince big business owners to not force people to come into work for no reason, and good luck with that.
It seems like there’s a lot of wishful thinking to get from “those protesters are blocking this street” to “man, we should completely redo the entire infrastructure of North America because of these protests.”
My favorite Star Trek game of all time was the video board game with the Klingon host. I had everything from the Nightmare games so this was the next logical step and we loved it to even though it was cheesy as all get out.
No matter the outcome of this, nobody is learning that lesson from this demonstration.
If you want to take a (more obvious) environmental bent, this is a terrible idea for them to do because all they’re doing is causing vehicles to have to run substantially longer.
Well that’s a terrifying prospect if you have any sort of opinion outside of the groupthink.
Other than the precise numbers contained in the infographic, which aspect of the original post ignores the fundamentals of science? Especially now that you’ve also agreed that fewer people equals less consumption.
It looks like I will be nearly the only dissenter here. I didn’t care for the game.
PROS:
NEUTRALS:
CONS:
CONCLUSION: Meh? I really don’t understand the adoration people have for this game. It’s a mediocre non-combat roguelike with about 3 hour of content they’ve spread over 20 hours. It feels very much like a case of style over substance. This game genuinely makes me sad. I really wanted to like it, but… ugh. It feels like work.