Casual Conversation

2216 readers

464 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

[email protected]

Do people have a desire to see "THE END?" (lemm.ee)

submitted 21 hours ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

19 comments fedilink hide all child comments

The more I think about it, the more I feel like people seem to have some level of desire to see "THE END". Call it morbid curiosity. Call it nihilism. Call it death anxiety. Whatever. It seems like with all the effort people give to thinking about "the downfall", there must be some fascination with it.

There's so many forms of it. Doomsday preppers. Prophetic apocalypses. Global warfare. Climate disasters. The rise of fascism. People see "THE END" in so many different ways. And with the world not becoming any less precarious any time soon, we can only expect these mass-anxities to continue. (And the rich guys certainly have a vested interest in the end of everything. They get to keep their High Score.)

Or maybe not. Maybe human civilization (in at least some form) will continue for millennia more. Maybe we're far off from the end. But one thing is certain: for each and every one of us walking this earth, the end is at most a century away, give or take a few decades.

"How grand would it be to witness the end of everything!" cries the mortal pretender. For it is not just his death, but the death of all that he knows -- and he gets to bear witness.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 3 points 20 hours ago (1 children)

I don't know if it's wanting to see "The End" as you put it, but at least in my case I'm just tired of all the "We're this close to doomsday!" stuff and think to myself "Holy crap, just get it over with already" - the idea being that after everything turns to absolute crap, the only direction left is back up.

Like either the world is going to end soon, or we're going to figure out how to get along as a collective, global society. But while we're stuck in between the two, it's annoying.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 17 hours ago* (last edited 17 hours ago)

i feel you. i recently learned about the "Doomsday Clock" that has apparently been ticking up and down since 1947, and was apparently just moved from 90 seconds to 89 seconds. seems like such a ridiculous, unhelpful way to conceptualize challenges to society. learning about it did nothing to impact my sense of power in affecting it, and really just increased my sense of despair as time marches on without concern