Some people over here can’t understand that sensitive questions can be asked without bad intent.

This just screams mott and bailey fallacy. It is very reminiscent, for example, of transphobes complaining that they get attacked for having the gall of claiming “sex is real”. And that’s basically what happened here. You said some upsetting shitty things in the thread about the two child policy, and now you’re whining about people getting upset about it. Go touch some grass.

Blocking them isn’t enough, because the harm they do with the plagiarism goes beyond stinking up your personal feed. This kind of stuff proliferates. People save the image to post somewhere else, and so on. Annoyingly, plagiarism doesn’t seem to be against the rules in this comminity, but I really think it should be.

No, I am here to try to understand. You have to admit that “I’m not a serial shitposter” is much less of an explanation than “ad filled comics”. So I’m a little confused what the ad is that you’re referring to. When you go to a museum, and see a painting has the artist’s name scribbled in one of the corners, do you consider that an ad? Or are you talking about something else here?

That makes absolutely no sense.

Whatever. Why are you going through so mich effort to remove the artist info from comics?

Mod action 2 days ago in another community

Banned 
Beep
@lemmus.org
 from the community Technology@lemmy.zip
reason: constantly removing artist info from comic strips

Seems like a good idea

They’re very much first world.

Death to America

I hope she comes back earlier than planned :)

Indonesia and Guatemala beg to differ. This is not the first genocide the west has supported.

Yeah sure I’m in total agreement. But we’re not choosing between tackling property ownership systematically versus hurting the systematic evil of booking. We’re choosing between hurting one single landlord and hurting booking. And again for me this is a very obvious choice because I’m against booking for the reasons I mentioned earlier, but if you’re completely okay with booking, then I totally get why you would prefer hurting one single landlord over the neutral or benevolent entity of booking. I would arrive at the same conclusion.

Oooh, ok, understood. I was under the impression that folks didn’t like booking here. I personally don’t, for the obvious reasons (1), and so for me personally the moral calculus is easy. But if you’re fully on board with booking as a company, then it makes perfect sense to write what you have.

(1) Primarily offering hotels on occupied land, but also terrible customer service, rent seeking behavior, and of course the usual platform monopoly strategy we also see with Amazon, UberEATS, etc.

Yeah that’s the pot calling the kettle black. Infighting between groups who manage to effect 0 change.

Yeah ok, sure, but again I feel like you’re focussing on the wrong thing here. It’s like you’re watching a video of a homeless man being beaten up, see someone jaywalk in the background and go “oh my god I can’t believe someone just jaywalked!”. Like, yeah, sure, you’re completely right, that is a bad thing to do, but I feel like there’s more important things going on here, and it’s really quite odd to focus on that, instead of the bigger evil here.

To be really super duper clear here: I think you’re right, the lady sucks. But there is a bigger problem here, namely booking.com. And focussing on the small fries rather than the bigger picture is just kind of weird. If anything we said or did on Lemmy mattered at all I’d say you were harming the greater good of bringing down booking by focussing on one tiny little instance of a symptom of the system rather than the system itself.

Or is this a fundamental disagreement in how to solve systemic problems? I believe systemic problems can only be cured with systemic change, like regulation, going after the root cause of the problem. Some folks believe it’s a matter of personal responsibility, and they believe that huge systemic problems can be solved by going after one individual at a time.

The adage “don’t hate the player, hate the game” comes to mind. Focussing on her in this situation is missing the forest for the trees. Here we have two evils fighting each other, a horrible system aimed at ultimately monopolizing the hotel market, and one woman enabled by that system. Focussing on her is like writing a little book against communism and about how much you hate Russia, during the holocaust. Like, yeah sure ok, but is now really the best time to do this, and when you look at these two sides fighting each other that’s the side you focus on?