this post was submitted on 09 Jan 2025
411 points (98.6% liked)
Casual Conversation
2019 readers
186 users here now
Share a story, ask a question, or start a conversation about (almost) anything you desire. Maybe you'll make some friends in the process.
RULES (updated 01/22/25)
- Be respectful: no harassment, hate speech, bigotry, and/or trolling. To be concise, disrespect is defined by escalation.
- Encourage conversation in your OP. This means including heavily implicative subject matter when you can and also engaging in your thread when possible. You won't be punished for trying.
- Avoid controversial topics (politics or societal debates come to mind, though we are not saying not to talk about anything that resembles these). There's a guide in the protocol book offered as a mod model that can be used for that; it's vague until you realize it was made for things like the rule in question. At least four purple answers must apply to a "controversial" message for it to be allowed.
- Keep it clean and SFW: No illegal content or anything gross and inappropriate. A rule of thumb is if a recording of a conversation put on another platform would get someone a COPPA violation response, that exact exchange should be avoided when possible.
- No solicitation such as ads, promotional content, spam, surveys etc. The chart redirected to above applies to spam material as well, which is one of the reasons its wording is vague, as it applies to a few things. Again, a "spammy" message must be applicable to four purple answers before it's allowed.
- Respect privacy as well as truth: Don’t ask for or share any personal information or slander anyone. A rule of thumb is if something is enough info to go by that it "would be a copyright violation if the info was art" as another group put it, or that it alone can be used to narrow someone down to 150 physical humans (Dunbar's Number) or less, it's considered an excess breach of privacy. Slander is defined by intentional utilitarian misguidance at the expense (positive or negative) of a sentient entity. This often links back to or mixes with rule one, which implies, for example, that even something that is true can still amount to what slander is trying to achieve, and that will be looked down upon.
Casual conversation communities:
Related discussion-focused communities
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
If that's all that were available, and if repurposing existing fixtures to jury-rig something would be awkward and violate social norms, and if the leg-shit were always someplace where the contours of the human body kept it from really touching anything else, and if my culture had a practice of including an extra layer of relatively expendable clothing that was always between the leg-shit-spot and my pants, then yeah, I'd manage.
It's not that it's a terrible analogy, but it's more a bit from standup routine than a revelation about life. That being said, I'd still very much prefer to be able to wash it off with water, and while my shins are generally fine, I try to avoid pooping outside the house and will not be giving up my home bidets, thank you very much.
It's not supposed to be a "revelation about life" though??And I wasn't talking about taking a shit in public, I just said getting shit on your leg.
If you're walking barefoot in a park and step on some dog shit, I doubt you'll feel clean after wiping it out from between your toes with a dry paper towel. Even (especially?) if you put shoes on after
I feel like this thread has a bunch of Charmin employees commenting.
Yes the debate was a bit weird
The anti-bidet brigade was out in full force with the weirdest arguments I've ever seen lol