Sven Slootweg (🔜 WHY2025) @joepie91@pixie.town

@strypey I actually think it is entirely reasonable for people who have been left for dead by others, to personally attack those who have left them for dead.

I'd say this qualifies, in some cases almost literally.

@strypey Why would this even matter? See also https://social.pixie.town/@joepie91/112855092008052476

And if we're talking about grifters, hoo boy, a very long conversation could be had about political fundraising. A conversation that notably wasn't had in this case.

I simply do not believe that a legitimate concern about grifts is the explanation here. *Distrust of poor people*, sure, that very likely has something to do with it, but that is very different from legitimate concern and precisely part of the problem.

@katanova Honestly, I feel like this description really only applies to a particular kind of giver; someone who does it for a motivation that lies somewhere between "social expectation" and "personal feeling of doing good" (with the exact point varying by person).

But that is not the only way to approach this; it can also be approached from a perspective of "there is an ill in the world, and everyone including me has the inherent obligation to do their part in resolving it", ie. a moral motivation.

I've seen the behaviour you're describing from the former group, but not so much from the latter group. And crucially, that is part of the complaint here by many poor folks - you cannot rely on someone who's only there to support you when they get something out of it themselves, because you never know when some circumstance you do not control changes the math for them and you are left behind.

The underlying desire here is not to pressure people into sending some money, that's just the immediate ask; the actual underlying desire is for people to show *actual solidarity*, to act out of a *moral* framework instead of a "what do I get out of this" perspective.

Or to phrase it more concisely: people aren't asking for kindness, they're asking for solidarity. You cannot build a better world on opportunistic kindness alone.

@Qyriad@chaos.social @helle A sentiment I've seen a fair amount is that there is an 'optimal' formatting style (which somehow always happens to equal the author's preference, and is presented without evidence or rationale), and in that light, this unfortunately makes a lot of sense.

(I am... not a fan of code formatters. Formatting is a communication channel! Deviations can convey very important information about what something means.)

@helle @Qyriad@chaos.social Tangentially: I've encountered an interesting pattern in discussing about tabs vs. spaces with people for probably close to a decade.

It turns out that when prodding someone for a *reason* for their spaces preference, even in light of the accessibility factor, is virtually always just one reason: "because then the code looks how I intended it to look".

This applies even for people who *don't* do weird spacing tricks that require exact indentation control. It seems to actually be the sense of control over how something is presented to the reader, that lies at the root of people using spaces. Nothing else.

In some cases, people have explicitly valued their control over the presentation as being more important than the accessibility to readers. (These were usually people with rather a few more... problematic views about programming.)

@helle @Qyriad@chaos.social This is exactly my reason for insisting on using tabs everywhere (to the point I will not consider languages that mandate spaces); it's an accessibility aid.

@AnthonyJK You know, I occasionally end up at Hachyderm for one reason or another, and then I look at the other stuff on there to see if the place has improved.

And usually within 10 minutes, I am reminded of exactly why I proposed a FediBlock immediately after discovering them... 😞

@ifixcoinops (FWIW I don't see any boosts within the past few hours from you here, and I checked and I'm not hiding boosts)