this post was submitted on 09 Apr 2025
18 points (90.9% liked)
Casual Conversation
3089 readers
349 users here now
Share a story, ask a question, or start a conversation about (almost) anything you desire. Maybe you'll make some friends in the process.
RULES (updated 01/22/25)
- Be respectful: no harassment, hate speech, bigotry, and/or trolling. To be concise, disrespect is defined by escalation.
- Encourage conversation in your OP. This means including heavily implicative subject matter when you can and also engaging in your thread when possible. You won't be punished for trying.
- Avoid controversial topics (politics or societal debates come to mind, though we are not saying not to talk about anything that resembles these). There's a guide in the protocol book offered as a mod model that can be used for that; it's vague until you realize it was made for things like the rule in question. At least four purple answers must apply to a "controversial" message for it to be allowed.
- Keep it clean and SFW: No illegal content or anything gross and inappropriate. A rule of thumb is if a recording of a conversation put on another platform would get someone a COPPA violation response, that exact exchange should be avoided when possible.
- No solicitation such as ads, promotional content, spam, surveys etc. The chart redirected to above applies to spam material as well, which is one of the reasons its wording is vague, as it applies to a few things. Again, a "spammy" message must be applicable to four purple answers before it's allowed.
- Respect privacy as well as truth: Don’t ask for or share any personal information or slander anyone. A rule of thumb is if something is enough info to go by that it "would be a copyright violation if the info was art" as another group put it, or that it alone can be used to narrow someone down to 150 physical humans (Dunbar's Number) or less, it's considered an excess breach of privacy. Slander is defined by intentional utilitarian misguidance at the expense (positive or negative) of a sentient entity. This often links back to or mixes with rule one, which implies, for example, that even something that is true can still amount to what slander is trying to achieve, and that will be looked down upon.
Casual conversation communities:
Related discussion-focused communities
- !actual_discussion@lemmy.ca
- !askmenover30@lemm.ee
- !dads@feddit.uk
- !letstalkaboutgames@feddit.uk
- !movies@lemm.ee
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Haha for real, I have seen that a lot and fought not to be that person the second I noticed I wasn't good at this and it wouldn't be different.
I went out of my way to have a pretty rough time where I was basically burned out for a couple of years so my kid would always be met with safety and love. But it nearly killed me and is exactly why I only have one.
Those years are too formative to be fucking around with "I'll just damage you for my own selfish desires."
Even still I live with guilt most days worrying about the damage I do not really being wired for this. I wish I'd had better self awareness before I got into it all.
I feel like she did the best she could. We weren't close but I don't feel traumatized by it, and I enjoyed having kids. When she died, the priest was asking my sister for some adjectives to describe my mom for the eulogy and suggested "nurturing" and my sister laughed and said no, not really. And she WAS close with mom, it wasn't an insult just an observation. We weren't neglected, certainly not by the standards of the time. And I was so close with my dad, and he died when I was a teenager so I'm glad I got that time with him.
The ex of my husband loved babies, little kids, was a cuddly sort of mom to babies but was an abusive nightmare of a mother to the older kids, like they don't even talk to her now. He said she loved them only as long as they couldn't talk back or be their own person - I think that's so very much worse.