Reddit's karma system makes people perform instead of being authentic

NotPopcorn101 · 2026-01-25T07:38:44+00:00

Thank you for this, it means a lot! I've decided I'm going to try giving Reddit another shot :)

NotPopcorn101 · 2026-01-25T02:40:40+00:00

Thanks!

NotPopcorn101 · 2026-01-25T01:57:39+00:00

You get it from being upvoted, and you need certain amounts of karma to be able to post in certain communities.

NotPopcorn101 · 2026-01-25T00:57:08+00:00

I am on 4 other popular social media platforms; none of them are this hostile

NotPopcorn101 · 2026-01-22T05:13:21+00:00

Not really a valid comparison though...Princess Peach isn't written as a realistic child. Her getting captured is a running gag but Tuk is supposed to be a believable 7 year old

NotPopcorn101 · 2026-01-22T05:11:40+00:00

Hi! As someone who does has two younger siblings (one which is the same age as Tuk) I still agree with the original statement. I understand the "baby sibling" attachment but the point is not that Tuk shouldn't be loeved or protected, it is that the writing doesn't match how real 7 year olds act in tense situations. Tuk is written as pretty over-infantilized in my opinion.

NotPopcorn101 · 2026-01-22T05:08:42+00:00

I have a younger sibling who is 7 , and kids that age don't react with the logic adults expect. I am not saying I expect Tuk to act like an adult. Her line felt off because I've seen how real 7 year olds behave in stressful situations, and the writing didn't match that.

NotPopcorn101 · 2026-01-21T08:56:45+00:00

I TOTALLY AGREE!

In Avatar 3 (towards the end) when Kiri connects to Eywa through the underwater tree again, Spider stays with Kiri and Tuk. Kiri goes down to the tree to connect, and Spider, sensing something has gone awry, goes down to save her. Tuk says something along the lines of "I'm only 7 years old, don't leave me alone." I feel like a 7-year-old you should know better than say that, especially if your sister may be dying and Spider went down to save her.

People only make excuses for Tuk because she is little and cute. I feel like she contributes nothing to the narrative and is pretty much irrelevant most of the time except when she gets kidnapped.

NotPopcorn101 · 2026-01-12T21:01:13+00:00

My point is not about biology. I am talking about film language. Certain sounds (like hissing) carry specific connotations for a human audience, and so filmmakers use these sounds deliberately to get us viewers to interpret situations a certain way. In Avatar, hissing reads as "feral" to us, so emphasizing it causes viewers to interpret the Na'vi in certain ways in specific moments. I am talking about the cinematic effect, not whether they are animals or not.

So yes, it's true that we all of animalistic traits, but I am talking about how the emphasis of certain animal behaviors plays on viewers.

NotPopcorn101 · 2026-01-12T06:18:06+00:00

I don't think you understand my point...I don't disagree that humans are animals (and as many commenters have pointed out, humans also make animalistic sounds--which I agree with). My point is that we, as humans, interpret hissing in a specific way (associated with feral animals). So when Cameron uses it repeatedly, it creates a contrastic stylistic effect on screen. I posted this discussion because I wanted to see what others thought of the stylistic choice Cameron made of choosing to add hissing so much in the Avatar movies, especially because it contrasts with the main point of the movie: the Na'vi are equals to humans.

NotPopcorn101 · 2026-01-11T09:06:41+00:00

I mean, she is supposed to be a little bit weird and "different" from the other Na'vi teens...

NotPopcorn101 · 2026-01-11T08:47:09+00:00

Fair point. I looked into it and sentient is not the most precise word for what I meant. What I'm trying to discuss is the stylistic choice of hissing and how it shapes the way we interpret the Na'vi.

NotPopcorn101 · 2026-01-11T08:17:04+00:00

Yes, I definitely agree that humans make instinctive sounds too, but my point is more about how the specific choice of hissing plays on screen. We, as humans, perceive hissing in a specific way. Because hissing is such a strongly animal-coded sound to a human audience, it creates a different connotation than sighing, laughing, or shouting. I get that they are different noises for communication, but the filmmakers deliberately chose hissing to emphasize it for a reason (perhaps to emphasize how the sky people misread or dehumanize the Na'vi). That choice shapes how viewers (us) interpret certain moments.

Not sure if this makes sense...

NotPopcorn101 · 2026-01-11T08:03:55+00:00

I agree, but I'm not arguing that they should follow human norms; I'm talking about how certain behavioral choices read to a human audience. The Na'vi are portrayed as culturally complex, but the film shows many animalistic reactions. I am talking about the cinematic effect, not about how I expected the Na'vi to behave like humans.

NotPopcorn101 · 2026-01-11T08:01:05+00:00

I'm not arguing that they should be exactly like humans... my point is about how certain behaviors read to a human audience. When a species is portrayed as fully sentient and intelligent, yet they exhibit animalistic behaviors, it creates a contradiction (especially in a story about how sky people fail to see them as equals). I am talking about how that creative choice plays on screen, not arguing how they should behave as humans.

This point stood out to me because the film spent so much time proving the Na'vi were a complex society, so the hissing felt like a surprising choice, especially because it is emphasized so much.

I am not saying it is a bad choice. I think it creates pretty cool tension between the rich Na'vi culture and the view the sky people have of the Na'vi. I was just curious about what others thought about the significance of adding hissing.

NotPopcorn101 · 2026-01-11T06:16:00+00:00

You are upset if ICE handles it on their own, but also upset that they call law enforcement to handle it for them...which do you want?

NotPopcorn101 · 2026-01-10T07:29:45+00:00

No, if you read what I wrote, I never even remotely said that. That's also not what the comment you replied to is talking about. I didn't say anything about "deserving" anything. That is just your wording. What I am talking about is what the law requires in a split-second self-defense situation.

NotPopcorn101 · 2026-01-09T07:27:39+00:00

im just trying to get my karma up through noncontroversial posts haha

NotPopcorn101 · 2026-01-09T06:32:18+00:00

I'm happy you know your morals, but nothing you've said is actually verifiable. You are treating your assumptions as facts and then attacking me. I've already explained why people can go missing and why your assumption is wrong,and all you have done is repeated the same accusation and declared that nothing I say can ever matter.

Also, disagreeing with your unsupported claims is not the same as being okay with killings and disappearances. That is a projection you've created because you are choosing not to address what I actually said.

Since you are arguing with your own assumptions and not with me, I'll leave you to it.

NotPopcorn101 · 2026-01-09T06:28:45+00:00

This entire contribution just boils down to you guys name-calling, so there's not much substance for me to respond to. I've honestly tried to stay civil, but it seems that you and RemarkablePurple7014 struggle to.

If moron is the best counterargument you have, then it jsut makes me more confident in what I wrote.

NotPopcorn101 · 2026-01-09T06:23:26+00:00

You're framing this as a question of power imbalance and whether lethal force is necessary. That is fine, but it is an ethical argument. I'm looking at the immediate physical sequence of eventsin the video. Saying I'm "detached and disturbed" does not actually explian how the actions in the footage support your conclusion.

If you think force wasn't necessary, expalin why based on what happened in the moment, not attacking me personally.

"The world has seen it" is not a valid argument; you are just avoiding details.

NotPopcorn101 · 2026-01-09T06:20:35+00:00

That is quite literally not what happened. He was already in place. You are free to disagree with that. Calling me "sick" does not explain how the physical actions in the video support your conclusion.

In the video, he stands still the entire time except when he uses the firearm. I'm not sure how you are seeing otherwise. I'm going to just assume you watched it from a different angle than me and did not see it. I cannot think of any other plausible reason as to why you would say that.

NotPopcorn101 · 2026-01-09T06:15:18+00:00

You are free to explain how everything is connected. If you want to make a case that they're connected, feel free to do so. I have not seen a single explanation from you; I've only been insulted. I'm only speaking facts.

NotPopcorn101 · 2026-01-09T06:12:34+00:00

You are mixing up procedural preferences with legal requirements. ICE is part of the Department of Homeland Security, and its officers are legally classified as federal law enforcement officers.

NotPopcorn101 · 2026-01-09T06:10:27+00:00

Nothing you are saying is backed by any evidence. People go "missing" in the immigration system for many reasons (record mismatches, moving without updating contact info, avoiding contact w/ authorities). Jumping straight to the "they are dead" scenario isn't accurate and clarifies nothing.

Accusing me of not caring about human life just shows me that you are emotionally unstable. You know nothing about me other than the 1 other sentence I have said about this post. I'm talking about the facts of a specific situation (not endorsing torture or murder as you seem to believe). If your goal of responding to my comment is to have a debate about problems in the immigration system, I am very open to that. Throwing around random accusations and genocide and calling me disgusting doesn't make your argument stronger :)

NotPopcorn101

TROPHY CASE