To be fair, the first despicable me was decent imo. But the abominations which followed…

A pro Po, bin ich, auch Arsch.

It’s much more like politics than it is religion. People take a stance because of their values, ethics, mortality, etc (as opposed to religion which is generally a more irrational basis for belief). And the reasons for being loud about it follow from that.

So if you can understand why someone might proselytize about the situation in Gaza, then you should also understand why someone might proselytize for veganism, even if your views might align differently for different issues.

In seriousness, the reason people try spread vegan ideas is the exact same reason people try spread their political ideas: because they believe there is injustice in the world which they are trying to help fix.

While I agree, I am also not sure why vegans are being singled out for this, since I see memes and post shoving leftist politics down people’s throats constantly, and not just in political channels.

It seems that for most people, the throat shoving is only a problem when they disagree with the content, and there are a lot less vegans on Lemmy than leftists.

But again it wasn’t the team, and it wasn’t " throwing shade" it was one guy, who listed it as one reason against AI. Power consumption is also a valid reason against using gentoo. People are able, and indeed should be aware of potential problems and downside of things, even if they are involved in other things which also has those issues. I am sure most of the gentoo team would readily acknowledge that energy consumption is a downside of gentoo compared to other distros.

You really went looking for something to hate on there didn’t you. That is the only sentence in the whole article that even mentions power consumption, all the other arguments both fit and against are for a variety of other topics.

It seems to be that you are more likely caught up in some kind of movement if one argument from one person is enough for you to label everyone there luddites

Sometimes people want to be generally helped, and sometimes people just want an answer to their question. If the answer is “it’s impossible” then that’s a valid answer, but if the answer is “I’m not going to tell you, instead I’m going to assume that what you actually want is me to teach you why you were wrong to ask the question in the first place” then theres a good chance that actually they just wanted an answer, and you deciding for them what they need comes across as patronising.

I think the talking down aspect comes from phrases like “you shouldn’t be doing X”, especially when these statements are made as absolutes, rather than contextualised with actual reasons.

Running GUI programs as root might cause security problems, or it might cause software problems. And while you might find these issues important, others might not.

In my opinion, saying something like “it’s not a good idea if you care about security” or “doing so might make your PC burst into flames” gives helpful warnings for OP and future readers without talking down to them by making decisions for them what they should and should not do.

That’s probably why he’s doing it, so you and all the others who blocked him are forced to see his posts again.