In a store/library/browser I interpret it as the misc category. The other, perhaps outdated or simply prejudiced, aspects (artistic, high culture, etc.) make more sense with the context that at some point the fiction world started to use genres to market fiction to target audiences.

So people could imply that a genre fiction that easily falls into such a genre must be simplistic, commercial and uses the benefit of a readership that is already familiar with the genre. Vice versa, a literary fiction that doesn’t fit these popular genres, can be regarded as unique, complex and a work of art that doesn’t bend to the masses.

And how do you keep that opinion to yourself, when a woman asks for your opinion on her makeup, but uses this analogy to pretend that it’s physically impossible for you and any other man to simply dislike make-up?

But “itis” isn’t “it is”, is it?

I agree to an extent. The problem is that an interest in a specific topic does not translate into an interest in the broader topic. Personally, if we only had broad communities on the level you suggested, I’d likely not use Lemmy at all, because then I’d have to spend too much time scrolling past the majority of posts or adding filters.

I can see the issue with spam-bots, regardless of the self-nuking, and how especially this community is targeted. But I wouldn’t consider the accounts marked in this post as spam-bots at all.

If this community or instance considers a couple of posts a day, perhaps specifically from new users, spamming, then as a user I’d expect that rule to be written before actions are taken.

In general, I’m not disputing the actions of the mods and I hate to be the guy who expects something from people who contribute to this platform in their free-time, but for these kind of bans based on suspicions and patterns, I just wish there would at least be more transparent communication.

In that case I have a few doubts:

1. Why is the given ban reason for these accounts “bot”, when that doesn’t describe the actual issue here, and why isn’t there a clear transparent explanation how these accounts were identified as part of this self-destruction scheme?
2. What exactly is the issue with self-destructing accounts other than losing the comments, discussions, etc. associated with the posts? Because if that’s the only thing, I don’t see the severity.

I don’t care about the quantity, but arbitrary sex scenes for the sake of sex sells are one of the most annoying elements in modern film and television - especially in Netflix TV shows. While sex sells is not new, it used to be at least within the flow of the movie/TV show. Now it’s Witcher 1 level of random sex, as if a specific amount of sex per season was part of a contract.

Michael Jackson likes dogs.

Did you post the code as an issue on purpose?If so, then why?

deleted by creator

I will gift a water bottle to anyone named “Mike D” who posts a picture of their gun within the next five minutes.

My new year’s resolution is to prepare a new year’s resolution for next year.

It doesn’t matter, because you don’t remember your past lives anyway.

The greatest Superman of all time - https://youtu.be/h0-sl315b5Y

No, I’m not.

Could it be “Woodcabin” by Saint Etienne? If not, how close is it?

I don’t think they are saying that you can’t solve problems in the shower, but that this meditative thought process is limited in the first place by an intentional work mentality.

It means that you should check your father’s birth certificate. He’s 100% Gen Z!

I’m not sure why it would make zero sense for a doctor to spend their time making educational content on the internet. Helping people directly may be indeed more important and urgent, but contributing to a more positive impact of free educational content on health and medicine is just as reasonable, especially if they are good at that.

Maybe the baby’s real mother carried him in her womb for 20 months.