My namesake - Rottcodd.

Rottcodd is a minor character in Mervyn Peake’s Gormenghast books. He’s the caretaker of the Hall of Bright Carvings - a gallery of statues high up in a far distant corner of the castle Gormenghast. He lives there contentedly and peacefully by himself and rarely sees anyone, but through a window at one end of the gallery, he can see the castle spread out below him, and can barely make out tiny-with-distance people scurrying around doing… whatever it is that they’re doing.

And yeah - for better or worse, I identify with him so much that I swiped his name.

The only thing I don’t like about the fediverse is the constant stream of people blathering on about how “we” supposedly need to centralize and homogenize it and fill it up with botspam, so that easily confused morons with short attention spans will move here.

I loathe it with every fiber of my being.

I detest bot content in general, and bot reposts of Reddit content is the absolute bottom of the barrel. It’s not just tedious and unimaginative and unengaging - I honestly find it creepy, like someone stalking an ex-lover.

Huh.

I had no idea Marvel Groot was that old.

That seems to make it more likely that it’s not a coincidence though, particularly since while Marvel Groot existed, he was still very obscure. I can see Moorcock slipping the line in, and even giving the character that name so he could slip the line in, just for a bit of amusement.

Broadly, there are two different ways in which a person so inclined can set about projecting the image of an aficionado of great literature.

One is to read, understand and be able to discuss great literary works.

The other is to sneer at supposedly lesser works.

Obviously, the latter is much easier. In fact, it doesn’t actually require reading at all.

So it’s basically a seminar on how to establish a police state.

On a related note , I had no idea that watching a country collapse into a morass of corruption, violence and stupidity would be so exhausting.

Finished Prime City by Michael Robertson. It’s the second book in a cyberpunk thriller series, and it was okay. It was a bit grittier than the first one, to its advantage, but while the first one pretty much stood on its own, this one was very obviously just an installment of a series.

Started Bounty Hunter - the third in the series. It’s not the last, but I suspect it’ll be the last for me. It’s okay, and there’s nothing really wrong with Robertson’s writing - it’s just all sort of generic, and I’m getting bored. It’s about time for something more challenging.

Finished The Anubis Gates by Tim Powers. The ending was a bit too contrived, but it was solid all in all.

Started and finished The Blind Spot by Michael Robertson. It’s a cyberpunk thriller set in a red-light district in a future metropolis - sort of reminiscent of George Alec Effinger’s Budayeen, but without the Middle Eastern flavor. It was a solid page-turner, but has a few shortcomings. The setting feels sort of Disneyfied - like a wholesomely superficial backdrop rather than an actual red-light district, with all that that entails, and the protagonist is an accurately rendered 16 year old, which is to say that she’s impulsive, impatient, over-confident and emotional. I can’t really fault Robertson for that - he did do a good job of writing a believable 16 year old. But that’s the problem - it was just sort of frustrating and exhausting watching her get all wound up and go rushing off too late to try to accomplish too many things in too little time.

Started Prime City by Michael Robertson - the next book in the series of which The Blind Spot was the first. Marcie is still impulsive and frustrating, and the story hasn’t yet hooked me as well, but we’ll see how it goes.

They could be universally referred to by an entirely different term starting tomorrow, and the only thing that would change would be that that term would also come to be seen as a pejorative.

The simple fact of the matter is that the negative view of them is tied to what they do and who they are - NOT to the term used to label them.

“And by ‘we’ I of course mean ‘you’.”

Finished John Dies at the End by David Wong. It was okay all in all - imaginative, but not very well-written.

Started Kafka on the Shore by Haruki Murakami. I’ve been working my way through Murakami in publishing order for the last few years, reading one every few months, and it’s time for this one. I’m thoroughly enjoying it so far.

The Tell Me Why books by Arkady Leokum - Goodreads link Those probably had more to do with shaping me than anything else I’ve read.

When I was about eight or nine, I went through a period of reading lots of (juvenile) non-fiction - mostly biographies, history and myths. I don’t remember the specific titles, but I particularly remember reading biographies of James Cook and John Paul Jones, histories of ancient Egypt and medieval Europe, the myths of Perseus and Jason, and especially the history/myths surrounding the Trojan War.

And of course I went through a dinosaur phase, but the dinosaur book I remember most clearly was heavy on pictures and light on text.

Then when I was about ten, I switched pretty much entirely to reading fiction.

Yes.

I have a friend who is extremely intelligent, endlessly curious and was raised in a locally well-established and notoriously generous and civic-minded family. So he was raised in that milieu of sincere kindness and generosity, and whenever he’s come across anything that interests him (which is seemingly something new every week) he seriously researches it until he understands it.

So it pretty much doesnt matter what the topic is - he knows something about it, but his personality has been shaped so that he’s attentive and considerate rather than pedantic and self-absorbed. I’ve lost track of the number of times I’ve seen him engage in obviously mutually enjoyable conversations with complete strangers over… pretty much anything.

I vacillate between thinking that it’s remarkable that he’s the way he is and that it’s remarkable, in a different sense, that that’s so uncommon.

I stopped trying to contribute to battles between reductionists many years ago, since they’re not coincidentally also binarists, so each just takes the fact that I’m not 100% in agreement with them to mean that I’m on the falsely dichotomous other side.

That’s an awful lot of why they’re so exhausting and discouraging - because I know from bitter experience that there’s absolutely nothing I can do about it. I’m constantly tempted to respond - just, if nothing else, to for instance point out that something as enormously complex as the US Civil War cannot possibly rightly be said to have been about one specific thing - but I’ve learned that that can’t possibly accomplish anything.

Should I then have just kept my mouth shut? Probably, in much the same way as I’d likely just keep walking if I saw two drunks brawling in an alley.

But I didn’t, and so be it.

And who knows? Maybe somebody somewhere will read this and think, “You know… it really is kind of dumb to reduce a complex issue to just one single idea, then get into shouting matches with people who have reduced it to some other single idea.”

Or not. And again, so be it.

There are few things that exhaust and discourage me more than reductionists shouting past each other.

That’s a hard call, and I’m glad it’s not mine to make.

On the plus side, engagement is a fundamental good, diverse viewpoints are beneficial and literature can play a role both ways in a relationship with hexbear users - both the things that they read and share and the things that others might share with them.

On the minus side, some significant number of hexbear users have demonstrated, and repeatedly, that… well… not to put too fine a point on it, they’re obnoxious assholes who flatly refuse to act civilly. And as unwelcome as that might be in other communities, it would be doubly so here, since an awful lot of the appeal here is that it’s relatively quiet and sedate.

The problem though is that that’s not all of their users - it’s just the most visible ones. If they were all assholes, the decision would be obvious and easy. But they’re not.

So…

I don’t think we can have any reasonable expectation that the asshole users will behave like decent humans. In fact, if you read through their discussions on their own instance, many of them are actually determined to be disruptive and abusive, and explicitly to the degree that someone might insist that they not be. Given the chance, they will do it. So the only way to be sure of stopping them is to not allow them to participate in the first place.

But then it becomes relevant that that’s not all of their users, and that this is a relatively non-political instance. It’s possible that those users won’t even bother with this instance, and while they’re off trolling whoever somewhere else, those among the hexbear users who actually can and will be civil will be the only ones who actually participate here anyway. Which would of course be fine, and even good.

So the way I see it, there’s no means of stopping the disruptive, abusive and bigoted hexbear users from being disruptive, abusive and bigoted other than defederation, but there is a chance, and potentially even a fairly strong one, that that particular subset of hexbear users won’t bother with this instance anyway, and the more thoughtful and reasonable ones will be the only ones who do. Which would absolutely be to our benefit.

I guess I would lean toward federating, but with a zero tolerance policy for disruptive and abusive behavior (and with the intent to follow that policy clearly communicated to the hexbear admin). At the worst, we could have a brief period in which the hexbear users prove that they can’t be trusted to not be assholes, and then they go back to being defederated.

But mostly I’m glad it’s not my decision to make.

I doubted this, so I tried it. I haven’t used google for ages, so I first had to search “google” in DDG, then I went to the main page. When I started typing it in, it suggested the full text of the search, so I thought it was even less likely that it would work like the OP said - that even if it had been the case that it previously did that, so many people have self-evidently done that search that the results would now be correct.

But no - there it was, right at the top - “While there are 54 recognized countries in Africa, none of them begin with the letter “K”. The closest is Kenya, which starts with a “K” sound, but is actually spelled with a “K” sound.”

And with that, I’ll contentedly go back to not using google.