• GBU_28@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    2 months ago

    Let’s be clear, opening with a dunning Kruger callout is rude. No one is an expert here, everyone is anonymous. It’s 100% unidan/jackdaw energy.

    Further, I didn’t read your wall of text because nothing other than consent matters. If the performers are uncomfortable, I don’t care if they need the fuckin national guard to facilitate ID checks. I care nothing about the hurdles involved.

    The whole schtick here is le redditor and I’ll stick with the simple “consent established, or leave”.

    • Warl0k3@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      … I’m sorry, you’re attacking my argument based on what you think I might have said? And you’re continuing to belittle me/my attempt to actually engage with you on the topic at hand because…?

      • GBU_28@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        As I said, you started with DK. How are you surprised I didn’t read further, and am unfriendly?

        My point centered on consent, and someone sent me a dismissive opening on a long message. What’s to be done? Discard it.

        Edit ZERO concerns are worth discussing if the consent of participants can’t be achieved.

        • Warl0k3@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          Yeah and in the same sentence I apologized for being excessively glib. Come on. How would you have preferred I say this, “Hey you really painfully clearly don’t know what you’re talking about, here’s why you’re wrong”?. While that’s obviously a sarcastic extreme we both know that any other approach I took that contradicted what you were saying would have lead to the same hyperdefensive redoubling of your positions that you’re doing right now. You’re even still obsessing about saying ‘consent is important’, when it’s got nothing to do with the discussion at hand here. I’m sure glad you know the word, but what does it mean? Genuinely, sincerely, explain your point to me. Because right now it appears to be “Conventions shouldn’t have adult panels if they’re unwilling to police the age of the participants to ensure their panelists are comfortable” and yeah, no shit sherlock. That’s why we don’t have very many adult panels. Wanna know what the challenges to ensuring consent / comfort are? Read my earlier post where I elaborated on the topic and apologized for initially dismissing your comment.

          Jesus fucking christ, while ignorance isn’t shameful, choosing to stay ignorant because of your ego sure fucking is.

          • GBU_28@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            2 months ago

            Apologizing after the fact can’t erase y response, unless you’d prefer I go back and edit.

            My dude I don’t know shit other than consent is king. Does that admission appease you? The performers are uncomfortable and I care nothing about any real world limitations of the panel tour circuit. If they can’t do it right don’t do it at all. Volunteers or negative guest interactions are meaningless

            Enjoy your win, you’re clearly so learned on the topic, leave me alone

            • Warl0k3@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              2 months ago

              Uh… yeah, actually, it does. Being able to admit ignorance or fault, even begrudgingly, is an often insurmountable obstacle in any human interaction.

              I’m not doing this to win an argument or something similar. I’m doing this to explain a topic that’s important to me, to someone that can negatively impact said topic by jumping to conclusions. Conclusions which, to anyone not familiar with the topic, would appear totally reasonable. Even though in this case we’re even in agreement, knowing the complexities of a topic is important to growth and understanding as an individual.