🎓 Dr. Freemo 🇳🇱 @freemo@social.cleverlibre.org

@mike805 @RodneyPetersonTalent

Agreed its a ethical dehlema where any solution will have some immoral imposition on someone. The only truely moral solution would be incubators.

My focus is to find a solution that minimizes the infringement on both parties.

@mike

Why wouldnt it be technically possible? Perhaps you mean the server software you run doesnt have that feature. Thats not the same as it not being possible (Our server does a hell of a lot of things not possible on any other server, and I can always add more).

@mike805

Well said... the people who look for even the slightest subtle hint of a thought on the right as an excuse to attack someone or discredit them proves to e they **are** the problem right now, and not the solution. Toxicity at people who are partly on your side does nothing but to weaken the case for your side to anyone who is on the fence.

This person has certainly done more to increase Trump's vote count than I could ever hope to do.

@RodneyPetersonTalent

@mike Of course I can, I am the system admin I can do what I want with my server.

@mike I would just block the whole server then selectively allow must-have accounts if that turned out to be the case, which would still eliminate spam.

If the system allows commercial accounts which are likewise allowed to spam I'd have no tolerance for it.

@realcaseyrollins

At least he was prepared to look good in his mug shot :)

@mike I really dont care if it does happen. So long as I am not expected to use it and no one cares if i block them from our server (assuming they start allowing spam, which is my main concern)

@EFreethought

Sure, its not like I should be ashamed for looking at nuance and considering the arguments of all sides in constructing my stance... I will take that over "I blindly follow one side" any day...

Kinda funny how you think I should be ashamed of that, ha!

@georgetakei

@thatguyoverthere It never went off the rails.. YOU got tired of a conversation you insisted in staying in... You are dealing with a problem that is entirely YOU... just walk away when you get tired.

@thatguyoverthere

> I guess technically I disagreed with you first but it spiraled into a really unpleasant conversation as it often does.

If you find it unpleasant then dont engage, do yourself a favor. I myself am not so emotionally sensitive to a respectful different of opinion. So for me there is no antagonism or issue that you dont intentionally bring yourself. The nature of my conversations are going to usually be direct, and frank. If you dont like those sorts of philosophical/scientific conversations then feel free not to engage. Likewise if you are going to see disagreement as confrontation. Otherwise if you want to be in the convo feel free, thats on you.

> Anyway you are exhausting. maybe just go on without me

Right thats how it should be... you leave when the conversation has no more interest to you.. let those who are still interested and energized by the discussion carry on with whoever is left...

What you shouldnt do is complain about how "tired" you get staying in a conversation you have long since lost interest in... just walk away... silently, and politely, thats how conversations should be.

tldr: you dont need to stick with a public debate until the very getting the last word in... if it interests you, share, if it doesnt walk away, just dont turn it into a shit show that your upset cause you got tired of a conversation and it wouldnt end when you can just walk away.

@thatguyoverthere

Im not going to play that game.. your tone was apparent and implied:

> I had no idea you were an expert on water fowl. How often do you interact with ducks out of curiosity?

> you really do seem to be an expert at just about everything. pretty amazing sir.

Seems obvious to me this was meant sarcastically and in a mocking tone. So you assumed going in I had no expiernce raising ducks (the assumption) and even went so far as to mock the fact that I did.

@thatguyoverthere More like projecting... but call it what you will.

@thatguyoverthere

Probaby a good reason not to make assumptions then.

@thatguyoverthere You are the only one imagining a competition here.. **You** are the one who challenged my expertise and demanded what it was.. Prior to that I had no desire to measure who was the greater expert, I still dont.. that was all you and now your crying foul... way to go.

@thatguyoverthere

I never claimed to be an expert on this, in fact I explicitly said I dont like the term. But ok if your amazed by the fact that I raised ducks for 15 years thats cool. I have talked about it before, I was a volunteer for 15 years at "The great vally nature center" where I was responsible for caring for all the animals there and was often the only person responsible for it. That included ducks, chickens, goats, and a few other animals.

And yea the issue isnt if more drakes are "messy".. the discussion is about how much of a stress response the females show, which is ultimately the only way we could begin to measure morality, if the animals care about the stress they put others through.. If the act of rape or even death is a situation the females **want** to be in (due to biology) then it isnt immoral to do it.

The fact that females, despite the apparent abuse, do not show stress indications, and in fact they willfully will remain in such a flock after the incidents shows, or at least strongly hints, at consent. If there was lack of consent then females would leave the flock.

@thatguyoverthere IRonic since I was saying that to mirror your own statement.

> I think it's funny how much people anthropomorphize animals instead of just embracing their own animal aspects.

Suggesting you had some superior understanding of ducks. You even went so far to talk about expertise.

@thatguyoverthere

> I had no idea you were an expert on water fowl. How often do you interact with ducks out of curiosity?

About 15 years raising them, though I dont currently.

> A purely female flock is no problem at all.

No problem to raise them sure. But to claim they are at their happiest is a whoe 'nother ball of wax. I'd argue they arent as we see an increase stressors in all female flocks.

@pwm

Nah, just the only person in the conversation who an see past the normal human box we frame everything in.

@thatguyoverthere

@thatguyoverthere

So no, you saw them beign sexually rough, to the point of putting others at risk, but have no way to know if the female ducks wanted to be in that situation or were happier for the environment.

I'd argue the best way to tell objectively is to look for happiness and stress behaviors. Take a duck in a purely female environment and they will demonstrate more stressed and less happiness than a duck explosed to it. Id argue this is a strong indicator the duck is conscenting to the behavior in some sense (in that, despite everything they want to be in that environment and thus moral for them).