Are they called MrsShankles?

This comment scares me

[email protected]

I am confident it won’t take my job. I don’t have a backup plan.

Four at the same time? I guess we do have four extremities to control four at once…

Do you have the same feeling as OP, though? Does smartphone time feel worse than desktop time, with the same activities?

I want to add, not just “worth my time”, but after writing out the response, one can ask oneself: “Does this add in a meaningful way?”. If not, and reformulating/reapproaching is not worth it, then Cancel and leave the thread.

The Cancel button may be used as often as the Reply button

I agree with both rules. - Or do I?

I think you’re correctly labeling what is necessary, but I don’t think it will help OP develop them.

How did you learn the skill of purposely removing yourself?

I guess it’s the typical cycle of awareness → action practice.

Gotta have a strategy for deciding on a stopping point. A good overall goal for a social media argument is to get people reading to consider things

These two are the main points in my eyes.

I do engage in responses and discussion to a specific comment or person, but only so far as it seems like a productive and good or decent-faith one. Beyond that, I consider whether it’s worth it to set the record straight.

If it’s a public, shared resource that we have to cultivate. Giving it up to the loudest or strongest-opinioned would be a negative influence on the community. I think a sense of justice, correctness/validity/truthfulness, and moral also plays into it.

I enjoy reasoning and formulating, and also thinking about how best to approach or defuse (bad) arguments/bait. The act of doing so is practice as well, useful in other situations, too. So, even ignoring the public record/shared resource aspect, it’s not like you gain nothing from formulating responses.

Any reasoning based on historic belonging is entirely arbitrary. Ignoring an entire people’s factual autonomy and right to self-determination, safety, and security is nothing short of oppressive, toxic, and inhumane. Flaunting and threatening power, entitlement, military, and invasion is horrendous and violates international law, advocating for a violent, corrupt world instead of a cooperative multi-national rule of law and stability.

I watched a documentary recently about the history of China, the two opposing factions. It provided some interesting additional context and things I didn’t know about previously. I’ll refrain from mentioning specifics to keep this comment more focused and concise.

China hides its own atrocieties and history. Both parties were horrendous and sacrificed and murdered their own people. Neither is “the good guy”.

The solution is simple: Accept the status quo. That history played out as it did. China MUST accept Taiwan’s sovereignty.

Not accepting the status quo has a lot of negative consequences. The solution would be simple. Respect and cooperation instead of oppression, instability, uncertainty, and suffering.

Is that realistic? Doesn’t look like it. Possibly with a leadership change. Xi Jinping seemingly already lost some power, and his more aggressive politics have been weakened. Which should not make us think there’s no thread anymore.