196

16743 readers
2331 users here now

Be sure to follow the rule before you head out.

Rule: You must post before you leave.

^other^ ^rules^

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
1
1284
submitted 2 years ago* (last edited 5 months ago) by moss@lemmy.blahaj.zone to c/196@lemmy.blahaj.zone
 
 

==please incorporate the word rule in your post titles==
Here are the things that get you banned:
-saying anything remotely iffy with a lemmygrad or hexbear account
-tankie behaviour
-nazi behaviour
-authoritarian behaviour
-genocide denial
-prejudice of any kind
-anything else that is clearly bad

Things that get your post/comment removed:
-AI generated content
-anything in the banlist
-posts that are so off topic that they don't fit on 196 at all
-moldy memes (old memes, crusty memes, irrelevant memes. The type of things you'd see on your aunt's Facebook page or Elon musk's Twitter account with a laughing emoji as the caption)
-corpoposting

Ban length varies, and is mostly based off of whether or not I think you will change your behavior. I have baned certain people for upwards of 2000 days.

---------EDIT:NSFW RULES---------
NSFW Content is now fully permitted BUT it must be tagged. Any NSFW content that has not been tagged and blurred will be removed. Content warnings should also be added to the title in brackets. Example: [penis] or: [explicit description of sex].
Non-sexualized breasts of any gender are not considered inappropriate and therefore do not need to be blurred/tagged. Yes, even female breasts.

IRL GORE IS NOT PERMITTED UNDER ANY CONDITION.

8-----------------------------------------------------------
Please leave any suggested edits in the comments.

JAN 2024 UPDATE: MOLDY MONDAYS
Monday is now moldy Monday. on this day and only this day moldy memes are not only allowed, but encouraged. The crustier the better. The type of thing that's been reposted at least 2,000 times with filters and bad crops and watermarks and hopefully minions. please caption with moldy rule

If you have any issues, please reach us at 196mods@protonmail.com. PLEASE do not dm me, as I am not consistently available and tend to step away from the mantle for weeks to months at a time.

2
 
 
3
 
 
4
209
rule (files.catbox.moe)
submitted 6 hours ago* (last edited 2 hours ago) by spujb@lemmy.cafe to c/196@lemmy.blahaj.zone
 
 

inb4 “it’s actually 14 kb 🤓” it’s the joy that is 1kb in size, here’s an image that’s 1kb:

5
 
 
6
302
submitted 9 hours ago* (last edited 9 hours ago) by user224@lemmy.sdf.org to c/196@lemmy.blahaj.zone
 
 

Source: https://twitter.com/Sugary_Carousel/status/1866590527577264352

Unrelated: I fucked up, it's 5AM. I forgot to sleep...

7
 
 
8
172
rule (lemmy.world)
submitted 11 hours ago by turnipjs@lemmy.world to c/196@lemmy.blahaj.zone
 
 
9
 
 
10
 
 
11
 
 
12
 
 
13
151
The Bee Rule (files.catbox.moe)
submitted 23 hours ago by rbits@lemm.ee to c/196@lemmy.blahaj.zone
 
 
14
 
 
15
 
 
16
 
 
17
 
 

Merry christmas 🎉

18
 
 
19
 
 
20
 
 

alt-text (full)

Screenshot of news:

“Dying boy, 15, gets wish: losing virginity Chicago Sun Times ^ | 12/23/01 | BY BENJAMIN ERRETT Posted on 12/23/2001, 6:26:24 AM by Mopp4

A terminally ill boy had his dying wish granted in Australia this month, but ethicists are still at odds over whether it was the right thing to do. The wish was not for a trip to Disneyland or to meet a famous sports star. Instead, the 15-year-old wanted to lose his virginity before he died of cancer. The boy, who remains anonymous but was called Jack by the Australian media, did not want his parents to know about his request. Because of his many years spent in the hospital, he had no girlfriend or female friends. Jack died last week, but not before having his last wish granted. Without the knowledge of his parents or hospital staff, friends arranged an encounter with a prostitute outside of hospital premises. All precautions were taken, and the organizers made sure the act was fully consensual. The issue has sparked fierce debate over the legal and ethical implications of granting the boy's request. By law, Jack was still a child, and the woman involved could in theory face charges for having sex with a minor. The debate was sparked by the hospital's child psychologist, who wrote a letter to "Life Matters," a radio show in which academics debate ethical and moral dilemmas. The scenario was presented in the abstract, with no details about the boy's identity.

"He had been sick for quite a long period, and his schooling was very disrupted, so he hadn't had many opportunities to acquire and retain friends, and his access to young women was pretty poor," the psychologist said recently in an interview with Australia's Daily Telegraph newspaper. "But he was very interested in young women and was experiencing that surge of testosterone that teenage boys have." Hospital staff initially wanted to pool donations to pay for a prostitute, but the ethical and legal implications prevented them from doing so. The psychologist presented members of the clergy with the dilemma and found no clear answer. "It really polarized them," he said. "About half said, 'What's your problem?' And the other half said [it] demeans women and reduces the sexual act to being just a physical one."

Dr. Stephen Leeder, dean of medicine at the University of Sydney and a "Life Matters" panelist, said the issue was a difficult one. "I pointed out that public hospitals operated under the expectation that they would abide by state law," he said. "While various things doubtless are done that are at the edge of that, it's important the public has confidence that the law will be followed." Jack's psychologist, who works with children in palliative care, said the desire was driven in part by a need for basic human contact. "In a child dying over a long period of time, there is often a condition we call 'skin hunger,'" he said. The terminally ill child yearns for non-clinical contact because "mostly when people touch them, it's to do something unpleasant, something that might hurt." Leeder called the diagnosis "improbable." Judy Lumby, the show's other panelist and the executive director of the New South Wales College of Nursing, argued that the details as presented made it abundantly clear the boy's wish ought to be granted. "I said that I would try my darndest as a nurse to do whatever I could to make sure his wish came true," she said. "I just think we are so archaic in the way we treat people in institutions. Certainly, if any of my three daughters were dying, I'd do whatever I could, and I'm sure that you would, too." National Post”

Source

21
 
 
22
 
 
23
72
bioterroism rule(s) (sh.itjust.works)
submitted 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) by herinaceus@sh.itjust.works to c/196@lemmy.blahaj.zone
 
 

~~pharmacists solely being distributors of pre-ordained medication has no detrimental effects on humans. 🫠 the US is great to its people, and has very good healthcare practices!!~~ (livestream is on the 27th and i am excite, but not involved at all)

https://fahrplan.events.ccc.de/congress/2024/fahrplan/talk/ASBXWW/

stream link for those interested:

https://streaming.media.ccc.de/38c3

EDIT: my lack of capitalization and poor word choice has confused people. this event is about making legal, tested for efficacy medication only. pharmacists are good. doctors are good. the cost of medication and other hurdles that prevent people from having access to medication are not.

EDIT 2: i looked into the 4 Theives Vinegar Collective (breifly, just on wikipedia) and i did not realize that they made the EpiPencil, which is an open-source device that injects a mesured dose of epinephrine (a medication that can be bought from a trusted and legal distributor). that's awesome stuff, but it's less awesome that they now want to share chemistry knowlege that they don't necissarily have a full understanding of, and push automated synthesis for people who also don't have the foundational knowledge to ensure safety. not really great. i guess that's what happens when healthcare is entirely for-profit, and inaccessable to so many people.

24
 
 
25
 
 
view more: next ›