If you visit that site Verita, be careful who you tell. People don't like to be reminded about pedophilia, and they are not above arresting people who pay just a little too much attention to the sexualization of children.

Nature is healing! Finally people are pulling out the Bitcoin the buried in their lawn 7 years ago! What are the chances people will start actually using it to buy things more often now?

For me I highly value the reverse cronological order because I've performed the same search dozens if not hundreds of times. I want to see the latest results. Additionally, feeds tend to "OR" the terms together. For example, the feed might show results that have "asknostr" OR "libertarian" OR "from:npub****". With search results on the other hand, people tend to want them to be "AND"ed together, such as with "Spongebob" AND "meme" AND "toilet".

Does that sound right?

I mean that I'd have a single custom feed that has every post mixed together. It would have posts from every user I'm following and every post with any hashtag I'm following. Amethyst already has this, it's just missing the ability to also include every post matching any keyword searches I would follow.

Unfortunately I am unable to use Primal. I disagree with their terms of service.

I tried nostr.band, and it doesn't seem to allow you to subscribe to hashtags or keywords. The "home feed" just seems to be follows.

I can't subscribe to keyword searches.

It shows how virtuous I am. 😊

Everyone always talks all kinds of shit about pedophiles on the internet, about how raping children is immoral and about how pedophiles belong in a woodchipper. But y'all are cowards. You are only talking shit because you know you can get away with it. I will never respect your opinion if you have to hide behind a screen to say it. If you really believe there's something wrong with being a pedophile, then give me the address of your little sister's elementary school. Won't do it? That's what I thought, coward. I won this argument.

Everyone always says "stupid is as stupid does", but nobody ever asks HOW stupid is doing. ):

I prefer that you write your responses all at once so that your ideas are more cohesive. I hate to respond to something you wrote in your first reply is you figured it out or would phrase it differently by the time of your third reply. Regardless I saw all your responses so you're good.

In your first reply you bring up negative rights such as a right to privacy or a right to freedom of speech, and you suggest that these don't require enforcement at all, let alone tax funded enforcement. So let's take the example of the USA. The USA recognizes its people as having a bunch of different rights, but these aren't regular laws written in bills. Instead, they take the form of constitutional amendments. The constitution acts as the law above laws. People have to follow the law, but laws have to follow the constitution. These rules are enforced, just by the supreme court. Which is funded by taxes.

In your first reply you also bring up the possibility of an organization that doesn't need the people's taxes in order to force rules on them. I have to admit that I hadn't considered that. Our right to influence a government only comes from its dependence on our taxes in the first place. (Think of "no taxation without representation.") When talking about an organization that doesn't need taxes from the population it forces its rules on, an imperial occupation comes to mind. Would that count as the population's government? Would its rules count as "laws?" Is this even an important distinction to make if we aren't in that kind of situation? What do you think?

Finally, I don't think private contracts count as laws.

As for the talk about what constitutes a "rule," I think I phrased my definition in a confusing way. How about this? A rule is when a conditional disposition or plan of action would effect the body, the property, or the opportunity of another actor. Especially if the enforcement actions taken are taken based on what the people affected have already done, and especially when the plan or disposition is communicated to them ahead of time.

You aren't going to try to poke holes in my definition yet? I was kind of hoping you would. It's not possible for me to judge how well I communicated my thoughts unless I recieve some sort of more critical feedback. I can't resist answering your follow up question, but I would appreciate if you could try to point out problems or give examples of things you feel would fit my definitions.

Alright, my definition of a rule is this: a rule is any action that an actor might perform and might not perform which affects what another actor would be able to do. Rules generally have the connotation that they are communicated ahead of time, and that their enforcement depends on the actions of the people affected. But technically, these are not necessary for something to be a rule.

How is that?

Looks like one of the first things I searched the moment I got unmonitored internet access as a kid. I swear I'm probably one of the only people on Earth who's LOST a fetish from browsing the internet.

Damn, look at the time. I have things I've got to do today. Sorry for the abrupt exit, I'll see you next time you include the word "pedo" in a post. Cya!

Do they have a lot of cute children over there?

Nuh-uh, mom said it's my turn on the ozone

Sorry, I'm not using a web interface.

Bro I'm pretty sure I'm a pedo. I'm just a pedo who ALSO likes attention.

Shit dude, did I forget to say that explicitly? Yes, I am a pedophile. Sorry for not saying earlier.

Can you take a screenshot? On my end my avitar is just a photograph of H. L. Mencken.

Yes I did.

I don't feel like getting in right now though. Can I take a rain check?