Once codified into law, would the recent executive order not invalidate the legal identification of everyone who doesn't have their sex assigned at birth listed?

A [State] department webpage that described how people could change their gender marker was taken offline, and Chase Strangio, an ACLU lawyer, said it’s unlikely that any new application to change the gender marker on a passport will be approved.

https://apnews.com/article/trump-transgender-passports-prisons-eggs-sperm-da1d1d280658a8c85c57cfec2f30cefb

I don't think media coverage is a very reliable gauge of truth in a society where the media is controlled by oligarchs. On top of everything that that's been going on, a journalist just got fired for calling Elon Musk a Nazi.

It's also pretty common for marginalized people to relate their problems secondhand because victims don't always want the public eye on them. Yes, victims should go to the authorities, but it's often easier said than done even when the authorities aren't well-known for dismissing victims and/or furthering their abuse.

e: To clarify, I don't think it's true that what the official said is policy; I think that person is probably lying. What I mean is that the incident itself is very plausible, and I have a policy of believing victims if there isn't a good reason not to, especially where it may protect others.

I can't actually imagine what proof of this situation would look like.

I've never been good at reading stuff like this, so it's more than plausible I'm just missing it, but I can't find where the resolution would give anyone the legal power or moral authority to invade another state.

First thoughts: The Antichrist looks like Draco Malfoy if he were the son of the billiards man from Homestuck.

I'm not religious and so do not believe in any prophesies at this time, but I don't think covid fulfills "…and many people died from the waters that had become bitter." (Revelation 8:10) The water part seems pretty specific, so it's something yet to come, and potentially much worse than covid, so that'll be fun.

The author seems to be stretching things a bit in quite a few places, but it was an interesting read regardless. Maybe Trump will check even more of the boxes in the coming years. Is he doing this on purpose?

e: Realized I hadn't looked up the quoted verse. There's supposed to be a star that falls, and that's what corrupts the waters. Good example of what I mean about the author stretching things.

I think he just connected all the Boxers as necessarily being related by virtue of being Boxers.

We can't see communities on LW because of federation choices, so that meant no 196 at all for us unless we swapped instances. The meme is saying that we're helping build this new iteration of the community.

e: Shoot, can I even reply to this post properly with my instance blocked?? I'm not sure how it works.

I literally just made this account after lurking however-long-it's-been-since-Reddit, partly for 196, and then that happened. 🙃

But then this happened instead! <3

No, I agree that there must be a rule(s) to prevent just this sort of thing. I'm only objecting in an attempt to help moderation craft the best version of the rule for the desired effect. And even with that said, an imperfect solution is better than no solution, so my objection should be disregarded if there's no way around it.

Possibly there should be new systems in place, such as registering membership with communities beyond simply subscribing, and then it would be very clear who should vote on community issues.

I'm always wary of how such systems can be gamed and how they'll influence user behavior, but the only downside to trying is your own efforts. Even if you fail miserably, I imagine the exercise itself would improve our understanding of what works, what doesn't, and how to form better approaches in the future. To succeed in making a system which improves user interactions would be a truly wonderful thing, and may even translate to IRL applications. I would urge you to follow through with this for as long as you feel it's something you'd like to do.

But it would still be possible for me and a number of trolls/bots to make accounts here and participate in voting, right?

I completely agree with the sentiment of involving the community, I just remember having problems with direct democracy on Reddit and question what the best implementation is.

People on other instances can be community members as well, which is an extra complication on top of Reddit's problems in the "Who's allowed to vote?" question.

"All decisions affecting the community and its members as a whole must be backed by a public vote."

Is there a way on Lemmy to distinguish who is or isn't a community member? Is there a way to prevent me from rigging votes with a bot army or a group of bad actors?

I think going forward it would be wise to have a rule that communities need to be actively moderated at some minimum interval by an account on the community's home instance, or else face closure or the institution of new moderation. Sitting on an unused community is like owning unused private property. "I don't want this, but I don't want you to have it either."

"I understand your mental health problems and your efforts to be your best self. The pros of spending time with you outweigh the cons; you have not lost my affection."

vs

"This topic brings my discomfort with you to the fore. Join me in a mutual lie so that we can continue our suffering and never make progress."