I got you fam

I think the biggest reason in favour of doing so would be that this would provide oversight and accountability for donations. I for one don’t feel entirely comfortable donating when I don’t know how the funds will be used.

Another potential reason would be to have multiple levels of democratized power. For instance, guests of the Agora might have no decision-making power, users some decision-making power, and members (having paid a one-time membership fee) some more decision-making power. Of course, that kind of structure assumes a decently large scale of organization.

If it comes to incorporating as a not-for-profit, I’ve got some experience with not-for-profits, and would be open to helping incorporate.

Not always, but often, making unpopular changes is precisely what the executive is being paid to do. Their job is to implement these changes, make sure that they are the one everyone gets upset with, and then take that anger with them when they leave.

@annegreen@sh.itjust.works

Hey, it’s me! For what it’s worth, I’m excited to see this community grow and would be happy to be a part of the mod team helping guide it. Either way, I’m looking forward to seeing what’s next for this community. I don’t have a lot of experience with online moderation, but I do a lot of conflict resolution and strategy, which I feel are valuable skills for a moderator. If you choose me for a mod, I commit to helping make sure this instance and this community hold to their original vision of being friendly, chill, and democratic. I feel like I’ve already been able to bring some valuable contributions to the table, like the idea to use the [vote] format, and I believe I’ve got a lot more to offer the community. Thanks!

I agree that we shouldn’t assume corruption if TheDude starts receiving any funds, but I think it would be beneficial to have clear expectations about how donations are being used. If it’s clear that excess funds go straight into TheDude’s pockets, great. Let anyone who wants to donate go for it. But I wouldn’t want anyone to donate thinking that they’re supporting server costs when they’re actually just tipping someone. Whichever way it goes, it just needs to be clear.

This is a bit of a strange question, because an amendment is just that - an amendment. You don’t list amendments in your first draft of a constitution, you list articles. Amendments are changes made to the constitution after it’s ratified.

I agree with the direction you’re suggesting. I think it may also be helpful to identify a few key issues that would require more than a simple majority vote to overturn.

In particular, we’ve already gotten multiple posts on defederating from various instances, and on clearing our defederation list. My suggestion is that something like once per month we hold a vote on defederation issues. A 2/3 majority vote to defederate/refederate must be achieved to pass.

Aye, aye, captain.

Well said. I think it’s a slippery slope to start de-federating with instances we find distasteful.

If you’d asked me 2 minutes ago what Canada’s population was, I would have told you just under 33 million with almost 100% confidence. When did we grow that much?

Agreed. I think we need to separate the discussion from the vote. It’s confusing to have amendments take place on voting posts as discussion develops. We also need clear parameters on how to draft a vote and then how the vote gets resolved.

Aye. I’m concerned about bot presence on Lemmy because recent estimates place bot accounts as the vast majority of accounts on the networks. I worry that if we don’t take actions against bots now, we’ll come to regret it in the future.

That’s perhaps one of the better ways of doing it.

I’m seeing the desire for both verification of users (with accounts on this instance) and for the protection of anonymity. It’s possible to provide both those things at the same time, but I don’t see how we can do so on the native server.

Thanks for engaging with the question. The only thing I would push back from my perspective is that I don’t think it’s so much about applying the principles of the Bible in your life as it is about allowing the Holy Spirit to shape your life.

I listen to audiobooks a lot and this used to happen to me often. But I found that it actually happened less when I increased the speed. Now I generally don’t listen to anything slower than 1.3x

I’ll sometimes experience this, but it’s inconsistent. Other times I’ll be able to scroll as normal.

This is truly the core resolution mechanic for DnD.

I tell my players who are new that there are only 2 things they can do: 1) ask me clarifying questions, and 2) describe what they want their character to do. That’s literally the game.

Everything beyond that is determined by the dice (more or less). Whenever an outcome is certain, it just happens. For example, no roll should be necessary for a character to just walk up the stairs. But if a character wants to scale a cliff wall in a torrential rain, then they’re going to roll to see if they actually accomplished their task. A vast majority of the time, these “can you do it?” questions are resolved by rolling a twenty-sided die, or a d20. As the DM, you generally decide what the players need to roll to succeed - the DC. An easy task would have a low DC, while a difficult task would have a high DC. If characters are proficient in related skills, they get to add bonus numbers to their rolls, making it more likely for them to succeed.

I truly believe that’s all you need to start playing the game. From there, the rules just work on establishing a consistent and balanced way of deciding judging actions. How hard is it to hit you? That’s your AC. How many times can you get hit before you go down? That’s your hit points. How hard can you hit others? That’s your attack modifier. How often can you do something cool to turn the tide of a battle? That’s your class abilities.

@Milk@latte.isnot.coffee feel free to PM me if you want more help, and have fun!

Update: FHSA accounts are only open for early access to individuals who sign up for the FHSA waitlist. They should be open to the general public soon.

Though OP never actually stated that the machine can perfectly predict the future. If that’s the case, then yes, you should just take box B. But we’re not given any information about how it makes its prediction. If @Sordid@sh.itjust.works is correct in assuming it’s a 50-50, then their strategy of taking both is best. It really depends on how the machine makes its prediction.

The way that someone chooses to interpret scripture is certainly going to impact their perspective on women in leadership. I agree with you that, despite the claims of many fundamentalists, it seems difficult to uphold the Bible as a univocal, concordant text. I see a lot of issues stem from the assumption that the Bible is effectively an instruction manual with a clear and consistent message on how we are to live our lives. A great resource on this topic is “The Bible Made Impossible,” by Christian Smith.

I think an interesting example of how we should depend on biblical authority within the Bible itself is from Acts 15. By appealing to the scriptures, the early church determines that Gentiles shouldn’t be required to practice circumcision - which was one of the core elements of their faith at the time, because it was commanded in the scriptures.

In my experience and perspective, the value of the Bible comes from its role as the word which reveals the Word. I will stand firm on the conviction that Jesus is the definitive revelation of divinity - not the Bible. The Bible is useful inasmuch as it is a book about Jesus. And yes, the portrait of Jesus it provides for us is someone who declares liberation, not subjugation.