• 0 Posts
  • 20 Comments
Joined 2 years ago
cake
Cake day: July 16th, 2023

help-circle
  • My wife and I own three homes, each purchased below our means so we could invest time and money into renovations while living in them. One is currently rented, and we’re working on the second, with plans to have it rented by next summer.

    Balancing full-time jobs with these projects demands a lot of our time and resources, but I take pride in the work we put into each home. I treat my rental properties with the same care and quality as my own home—because they were my homes.

    I also expect my tenants to treat the house with the same respect I do.


  • The moderation practices on that subreddit have created an environment where dissenting opinions are swiftly and permanently banned. This approach has fostered an echo chamber where only one perspective is allowed to thrive, reinforcing a cycle of confirmation bias and groupthink. As a result, most conservative posts lack depth and often resemble oversimplified memes rather than meaningful discourse.

    Even when an opposing viewpoint manages to slip through, it’s often dismissed as artificial or the work of bots. This mindset reveals how deeply entrenched their worldview has become—so much so that they struggle to believe that differing opinions could be genuine. It’s a surreal and unfortunate dynamic that stifles any chance of productive discussion.




  • The Greatest Showman is a masterclass in style over substance—a glittery spectacle that sacrifices depth and integrity for catchy tunes and flashy visuals. Beneath its feel-good facade lies a shallow, formulaic narrative that romanticizes P.T. Barnum’s exploitative history while failing to give meaningful voices to the marginalized characters it claims to celebrate.

    The musical numbers, though undeniably infectious, feel jarringly modern and out of place, prioritizing audience pandering over authenticity. Despite its popularity, the film’s sanitized themes and lack of emotional nuance reveal it as more empty circus than cinematic triumph.

    If you’re looking for substance, you’ll find the tent empty.





  • Wow, I really appreciate your thoughtful and self-aware reply. It’s rare to see someone online who’s so open to engaging with criticism in a meaningful way, and I think that speaks volumes about your willingness to reflect and grow. We all get frustrated—especially when it feels like we’re up against deeply ingrained beliefs or conspiracies—but the fact that you’re mindful of it and striving for constructive dialogue is something worth celebrating.

    I know it can feel overwhelming, but staying grounded in truth and compassion, even when it’s frustrating, is powerful. It’s people like you who keep conversations moving in the right direction, even when it seems like progress is slow. Keep that courage and integrity in your interactions. It really does make a difference.


  • Nope! Person here. I just use GPT to clean up my text.

    Hmm, while we’re here, I don’t have a pumpkin pie recipe to share, but I recently tried Mayo Cookies, and they turned out great. I recommend replacing the vanilla extract with coconut extract and adding coconut flakes for a nice twist.

    Ingredients:

    • 1 cup white sugar
    • 2 cups all-purpose flour
    • 1 cup mayonnaise
    • 1 teaspoon baking soda
    • 1 pinch of salt
    • 1 teaspoon vanilla extract (or coconut extract)
    • Optional: coconut flakes

    Directions:

    1. Preheat your oven to 350°F (175°C).
    2. In a bowl, mix together the sugar, flour, baking soda, and salt.
    3. Add the mayonnaise and vanilla (or coconut extract) and mix well. The dough will be crumbly.
    4. Shape into walnut-sized balls, place them on a baking sheet, and flatten with a fork. Sprinkle with sugar if you’d like.
    5. Bake for 12 minutes. Let cool before serving.

    *Edit Make sure they’re walnut size. My first batch was good but too big and soft. They are so much better when smaller and more crispy.


  • The fallacy here is Tu quoque (appeal to hypocrisy).

    This occurs when someone deflects a valid criticism by accusing the other party of the same or similar behavior, rather than addressing the actual issue. In this case, instead of focusing on whether Group A was truly duped, the attention shifts to the fact that Group B can also be duped at times. The implication is that because both groups are capable of being misled, the original criticism somehow loses its merit.

    Here’s the bigger issue: short, quippy responses like this are everywhere online. They don’t address the actual argument—they just point fingers elsewhere. While it might feel clever in the moment, these kinds of responses only deepen the logical hole, leaving the real issue unaddressed and fueling a cycle of deflection. Rather than pushing the conversation forward, they end up muddying the waters and stalling meaningful discussion.

    Ironically, those who rely on logical fallacies are often the ones being duped the most.