Interesting, yeah this sounds like a good idea. No they don’t care as long as it’s easy to find other people competent enough in the event I’m disposed or something.

Do you have any experience you could share?

Yeah mostly paranoid about getting doxxed and I think it would derail the the conversation. I tend to like to work abstractly to get novel solutions as well.

Could you comment on your own experience with this software and on-boarding users? The technical stuff isn’t always so much of an issue as the interpersonal stuff. It seems like you have a good deal of knowledge!

Have you thought of frendica? I think it’s kinda what you’re looking for but it doesn’t seem too popular. Have you used bumble for friends? I thought bumble was for dating, I’m not sure how that would work for friends.

Wishing you the best comrade o7

Ah ok yeah that gets pretty annoying. When people diagnose others I think that’s problematic too. You only know a sliver of what they thought suitable to share, which isn’t necessarily indicative of anything…

I see a Clinical Psychologist, PhD and 2 PostDoc’s. We call our sessions therapy, wouldn’t that be an ok way to refer to something as therapy?

Are you referring to ‘trauma-dumping’ or when people share their negative experiences en masse? When I think therapy speak I think people being supportive, I’m probably misunderstanding, an example would help!

Oh this calendar is cool, do you know if orgs or people use it?

Yeah for sure. Do you think it’s ok to use digital methods offline for organizing stuff like infrastructure? E.g. spreadsheets and word docs? I’m working on a local wiki to put the different kinds of knowledge we accumulate in one place instead of spread out in different paper docs or in members’ heads.

Yeah definitely, at the moment we are doing it in-person and then sending details through MMS which I think is less than ideal.

Would bioinformatics stuff be appropriate for that community?

Thanks for the response! Could you think of any reasons why? I want to try bringing it up again without starting a struggle session, right now it seems like the best course of action is to get enough clout (I’ve been attending almost all the upcoming events, offering technical help where it wasn’t asked of me, etc) and build the infrastructure myself and show how it works in practice.

This will take a bit of time since I think I might need to write guides as well.

I’ll suggest The Doomed City by the Strutgatsky brothers. I found it much more satisfying than Roadside Picnic. It’s much longer and much more philosophical. My username is from one of the characters in the book!

Please see my reply to the same comment. If you disagree I would be glad to hear why so so can foster a better understanding on my end.

Intersectionality itself may not be explicitly materialist, the theory which supports it (which was done so through a marxist perspective) is standpoint theory which is completely materialist. The tokenization and other aspects occur in practice, which is unfortunate but not what the theory itself advocates.

To boil it down, do physical bodies which have a continuity in time and space have aspects or characteristics which are evident as a result of their environment and the effect of the environment on it?

In geology an example would be stratification. A large vertical column of earth has within it a novel set of characteristics corresponding to the effect of the environment around it. For example different geological epochs which can be determined through radiometric dating. Another could be a layer of a specific type of soot from the blast of a nearby volcano with compounds novel to the composition of the volcano. This continuous physical body is has information which is evident externally by observers or by other physical forces.

Similarly the person with an intersection has specific knowledge by virtue of themselves having experienced it. This may not be available to them readily, it may not manifest physically either. Perhaps even outside observers do not know and cannot know. None of that means it did not happen and was not potentially causally involved in the sequence or set of events they experienced.

EDIT: To add to what you said about ‘whack-a-mole’, it always seemed to me the general distaste towards some of the methods of intersectionality were founded in the relativism individuals engage in. I agree in this sense it becomes ‘whack-a-mole’ as what is kept at the forefront of individuals is their own material conditions and experiences to the consequence of others. Each intersection here becomes a unique identifier which is atomic and incommensurable which does not lead to productive engagement. I think the rational comes after the material conditions they face. However, I don’t think it is appropriate to shoot the messenger for the message, or rather the framework for consequences as a result of it being used by certain individuals in a certain space who are known to take advantage of whatever they can to gain whatever slight they may over others.

If these individuals had a better context with which to engage (e.g. Marxism, or any other developed school of thought) then I don’t believe the relativism nor the ‘whack-a-mole’ would be anywhere near as prominent. The breadth of human experiences and intricacies needs to still be dealt with, and in this case I think it acts as a bolster to Marxist-Leninism which is rather vague initially about how it organizes people.

I always felt as much as ML and other adjacent ideologies maintain that they are materialist, in effect they don’t act as such. This is partly informed by my experience online and in in-person organizing.

There’s a significant ignorance of the physical and natural sciences which do well to inform a materialist perspective. When I have brought up points from Biology, Physics, or some things which are more contemporary like Psychology (and the effectiveness of therapy) I have largely been brushed aside. I have some education in these areas, and I feel that many of the MLers I interact with have very little. Dialogue becomes nearly impossible as I am hitting heads against ideology as opposed to empirical evidence. This may be due to my background in the sciences as compared to the many individuals I interact with in-person (I don’t know about online) having humanities and arts backgrounds. Of course when I was in the space where the people who were well versed in the sciences or engineering were around, I’d hear similar ridicule against people who were less technical.

My hope would be at least among MLers that there would be space for critical thought and discussion but that has not been the case. In fact technical people who have a less coherent understanding or ideology, more or less piecemeal, at the very least seem more amenable to discussion relating to non-human materialist phenomena. Though there is often moral bankruptcy involved as well unfortunately.

Ah thanks for the clarification.

No yeah it says literally after I click the spoiler “For some reason Memmy cannot render this” :/

I won’t argue, I will say that Adam Smith is a notable figure who predates Marx, Ricardo, Madison, Stuart Mill, Hayek and Friedman, etc. All of whom were important figures who have shaped our current economic system and form of liberalism.

Even if you don’t care it’s important to note the effect he’s had as it largely effects you even to this day. Warren Buffet, notable capitalist, said one of his two favourite books was Wealth of Nations by Adam Smith. Think of it like the Bible of economics. It’s where the phrase “invisible hand of the free market” comes from (wording might be off but I hope you get the idea!!)

Hey comrade, I’m on Memmy and the excerpt from Adam Smith won’t render, might want to check that out. I’m guessing it’s the one about landlords seeking wealth from land which they never toiled or something like that? There were a couple times he talked about the problems of landlords and rentier capitalism.

Yeah. I want to say that everyone has enough in common to get along and be friends but that doesn’t seem to be the case in practice :/

Could anyone comment on how these compare to usenets?