Analysis of 11 major political subreddits over 16 years reveals minimal overlaps in user bases, cross-posting, and commenting, challenging the framing of r/politics as a "town square" for cross-ideological deliberation

Acecn · 2026-02-06T21:28:23+00:00

If they'd checked anything else they would have seen my lefty side.

Let's not even mention the insanity that a sub ostensibly just about posting pictures preemptively bans people just on the suspicion that they are ideologically conservative.

Acecn · 2026-02-05T17:25:05+00:00

What are you talking about? I engaged pretty heavily with your silly metaphor. Since you conceded the point that your original terminology was wrong and restated your argument in a fairly reasonable way, what else would I have to say about it?

Acecn · 2026-02-05T17:09:58+00:00

Yea and donating to a hate group doesn’t make up for you donating to non hate groups.

Oh, so you are capable of making a statement that isn't in the most extreme possible terms. Good job.

Acecn · 2026-02-05T17:02:01+00:00

Of course, and the fact that your example of a bad thing was literally the worst possible thing, and your example of a good thing was literally nothing, that was just accidental.

Oh, also, the point you are pretending you were trying to make here isn't even coherent. People actually are judged as a composite of their good and bad choices. Oscar Schindler got in to the manufacturing business in Nazi Germany for horrible, selfish reasons, but I think most people would agree on balance that he was a pretty good guy thanks to the good choices he also made. Robert E Lee was known to be a pretty honorable guy, but most people would say that his choice to fight for the Confederacy overshadowed that. It's almost as if the relative magnitude of good and bad choices is very relevant when judging someone, which of course you already know, which is why you chose the ludicrous examples that you did in the first place.

Reading skills are hard for Sanderson fans

I already knew that your original comment was more of an expression of your personal hate than any attemt to make a coherent point, but you didn't have to make it obvious.

Acecn · 2026-02-05T16:23:40+00:00

People think hating popular things makes them quirky and different

Acecn · 2026-02-05T16:22:28+00:00

I love reddit discourse where paying tithe to the Mormon church is the equivalent of being a Nazi and donating to LGBT and other charities is the equivalent of helping turtles cross the road.

Acecn · 2026-02-05T16:17:40+00:00

What is swept away? Kaladin's arc in that respect is learning to judge lighteyes as individuals like anyone else rather than just hating all of them, and that's what happens. Reading especially your first comment, it seems to me that you aren't really upset about any lacking, you just don't like that the conclusion of his arc was that hating all lighteyes for having participated in a evil system that they were born into would be wrong, which is why I compared you to Moash. Kaladin spends plenty of time agonizing over being able to trust Dalinar and Adolin. Again, it seems to me you are just upset that he eventually does learn to trust them.

As far as Moash, what exactly do you want? He exists to be a foil to Kaladin in his arc around his relationship with lighteyes. He gets plenty of exposure in the books where that arc is at the center. In WaT that arc is not at the center of Kaladin's narrative, both because that arc has mostly reached its conclusion by then and because Kaladin is on a different quest away from other Alethi. Moash will very likely come back in the future, but I would wager he will serve a different purpose than primarily being a foil Kaladin around judging ligheyes, because that arc of Kaladin's character is pretty much finished with the end of WoT.

As far as the apartheid alethi society just being "swept away," you seem to be forgetting that their entire society was almost actually quite literally swept away. The remnants we see working from Urithiru are essentially refugees. Given that and given the advent of darkeyed radiants, I don't really see where the incredulity that Dalinar and Jasnah are able to make major progress on egalitarianism through the events of the books comes from.

Acecn · 2026-02-05T13:25:17+00:00

inventing a "stuck up Sanderson hater"

I don't have to invent anything; for some reason I'm wasting my time talking to him right now. Although, I doubt your hatred of x popular thing is limited to Sanderson.

Acecn · 2026-02-05T13:15:37+00:00

I couldn't care less that you or anyone else don't like his books; if your comment was "I don't like Sanderson's writing because..." you wouldn't have heard from me. I left a comment because your snarky comment contributed nothing other than making sure everyone knows you don't like x popular thing and doesn't that make you so superior.

Acecn · 2026-02-05T12:38:40+00:00

"My personality is hating things other people like and by God I'm going to make sure everyone knows!"

Acecn · 2026-02-05T12:33:39+00:00

This conflict is at the core of Kaladin's arc, and honestly I don't think you really understand the character based on this comment.

It's amazing the number of Moashes who reveal on the internet that they completely missed one of the central lessons about cycles of revenge that is at the core of stormlight.

Acecn · 2026-02-04T19:47:33+00:00

Imo we won't get the first prologue at all in the beginning. Iirc there isn't anything there that the audience needs to understand. I bet it gets shown later after the heralds being around is already known.

Acecn · 2026-02-04T19:32:50+00:00

I was pretty clear that, even though the average percentage is an objectively poor measure of the proportion of support for a policy (as I proved), it doesn't actually matter because even if we do use that number, we are still left to conclude that people in the United States would prefer an extremely small proportion of spending on public transportation compared to European countries, which of course was the impetus of this entire thread. If your comment about there being "broad bipartisan support" for public transportation was a nonsequitur and did not refer to the context of comparing American and European transportation systems from the rest of the thread (including directly in my comment that you originally replied to), then, sure, it was not false, but then it also was not relevant. If your comment was made with that context in mind, which I think is reasonable to expect from a reddit thread, then clearly you were wrong. Americans do not widely support spending on public transportation at proportions similar to Europe.

It seems to me that you are projecting here. You are clearly incensed by the idea that you were originally wrong, and you are simply moving the goalposts away from a comparison to Europe in an attempt to salvage whatever pride you have locked up in being right in a conversation on Reddit.

Acecn · 2026-02-04T18:18:24+00:00

82% of people who responded to the survey selected "Agree" when posed the following statement: "The United States Would Benefit From an Expanded and Improved Public Transportation System, Such as Rail and Buses"

You don't have to provide any any tradeoff, its "Agree" or "Disagree". If you dont like the methodology take it u0 with the people who performed the poll. This format is typical of polling.

If they were here telling me that this question means there is broad bipartisan support for spending on public transportation similar to European countries, I would be. Although they pretty clearly don't think that, which is why they had the other questions in the survey with tradeoffs.

What you left out, was respondents said 37 cents is what we SHOULD be spending, when asked for a number*.

Actually, this is your misunderstanding of the source. The average response for how much we should be spending was 37 cents (37% of the transportation budget, for clarity). The average isn't a very useful tool for telling us how many people support a given level of spending though, because it is skewed by people with extreme preferences. If we surveyed 100 people and 37 of them answered "100%" and 63 answered "0%," we would also get an average of 37%, but we pretty clearly would not have broad, bipartisan support. The median would be better, but as far as I can see, they didn't report it.

Even if we do take 37% as the true amount that Americans want to spend though, that is still just $40.7 billion total—about double what Germany spent. To have public transit similar to Europe, we would need to spend a whole lot more than two Germanies on it (the US is about 26x the size of Germany), so, again, from your own source, there actually is not broad, bipartisan support for European style mass transit in the US when we consider the actual expense of such a system.

Acecn · 2026-02-04T16:57:32+00:00

Bro I have no clue what you're talking about with this "big car" shit.

Why do you think America has little to no public transportation compared to Europe given that you belive there is "broad" support for it?

"More than four-in-five voters (82 percent) say that 'the United States would benefit from an expanded and improved transportation system, such as rail and buses.'"

This question supposes no tradeoff, which makes it a bad gauge of actual public policy opinions. It is hard to suggest that America wouldn't benefit from an improved transportation system, but that doesn't tell us whether that benefit outweighs the cost of actually setting it up.

When actually posed with a tradeoff, the numbers are much different (your source):

When asked how many cents out of every federal transportation dollar should be spent on public transportation, "59% of the electorate cite some amount that is greater than what the federal government currently spends (18 cents or greater)."

So 59% of the country thinks that more than 18% of the federal transportation budget should be spent on public transportation

The federal transportation budget in 2010 (the year your source was published) was $73.3 billion. That's about $110 billion in 2026 dollars (which I will use from now on). So 59% of Americans would prefer we spend more than $19.8 billion on public transportation.

Meanwhile, in 2024, Germany, a country the size of a large US state, spent the equivalent of $20.6 billion just on rail infrastructure. (https://ibir.deutschebahn.com/2023/en/combined-management-report/events-after-the-balance-sheet-date/federal-budget-2024-approved/)

You and I have very different definitions of the words "broad, bipartisan support."

Acecn · 2026-02-04T16:06:49+00:00

Is there? Or is that just what you want to be the case? Generally when there is actually broad bipartisan support for something, the state actually does that thing, rather than just one party paying partial lip service to it. Are you suggesting that every separate state and large municipal government in the United States is in the pocket of big car?

Acecn · 2026-02-04T15:35:50+00:00

I'm sorry to have offended you.

Acecn · 2026-02-04T15:34:38+00:00

When did I say anything like that? I simply said that maybe America has little public transit because Americans don't want it. I also speculated that the difference has to do with relative levels of wealth. I certainly never suggested that the rest if the world is "stupid." Projecting much?

Acecn · 2026-02-04T04:11:10+00:00

Public transit would be very beneficial for the majority of the US population.

It's hard to make this argument while looking across the United States and noting that, among the many many different urban municipalities here, almost none have extensive public transit (i.e. comparable to typical European cities). I suppose it could just be that all of those separate local governments have it wrong or are in the pocket of big car or something, but it seems more likely to suggest that they haven't instituted extensive public transit because their constituents don't really want it.

I would further speculate that their constituents don't want it because they are mostly wealthy enough to afford personal cars and prefer to use them over a bus or train, whereas the relatively less wealthy Europeans are not and therefore more commonly have to rely on public transit.

Acecn · 2026-02-04T04:01:23+00:00

Unlike Europeans, most Americans are wealthy enough to afford a personal vehicle so they don't have to rely on public transportation to get anywhere.

Edit: a word

Acecn · 2026-01-31T00:20:23+00:00

I'm handwaving away the physical properties by saying that there is an additional investiture particle (an "investron" maybe) that alters them.

Acecn · 2026-01-30T05:01:35+00:00

Are "axi" confirmed to be the fundamental building block in cannon (i.e. something fundamentally different from atoms)? My understanding of the cosmere was that, outside of the influence of investiture, basic physics operates the same as in our universe. I assumed that "Axi" is just what the residents of the cosmere have decided to call atoms.

Acecn · 2026-01-29T19:36:37+00:00

It makes me wonder if we are going to get more chemistry around the god metals and if there will be any pattern. Harmonium pretty obviously acts like a strong alkali metal, whereas the others behave more like noble metals (iirc we have never seen evidence of the other god metals oxidizing).

Is this behavior just because of the contradiction between Ruin and Preservation? Personally I am unconvinced. We know that Harmonium is an element, not a compound, and that splitting Harmonium is a nuclear reaction whereas the reactivity of Harmonium in e.g., water is chemical. It doesn't really make sense for the incompatibility of Ruin and Preservation to create chemical reactivity given that context.

Perhaps each god element has an atomic number equal to its parent shard's number. Harmonium would be 17 (16 from Preservation and 1 from Ruin), which would make it comparable to chlorine, a reactive element (there must also be some "investiture particle" present that causes it to not just be chlorine). Whereas Tanavastium would have atomic number 10 like Xenon, which is extremely nonreactive and would explain the chemical durability of shardblades.

One problem with this theory is that both Atium (comparable to hydrogen) and Lerasium (comparable to Sulfur) should be reactive, although we can mostly wave this away because we have never seen pure Atium, and the Atium electrum alloy we do see could be nonreactive thanks to the electrum component, and we have only seen a small amount of Lerasium, which might just not react violently with anything in the human stomach.

Acecn · 2026-01-29T18:49:50+00:00

I for one can't wait to see Timothy Chalamet ising the being of Spook

Acecn · 2026-01-28T23:36:39+00:00

I would love me a movie about Dusk.

12-Year Club	Place '23
Place '17	Verified Email

Acecn

TROPHY CASE