view the rest of the comments
Unpopular Opinion
Welcome to the Unpopular Opinion community!
How voting works:
Vote the opposite of the norm.
If you agree that the opinion is unpopular give it an arrow up. If it's something that's widely accepted, give it an arrow down.
Guidelines:
Tag your post, if possible (not required)
- If your post is a "General" unpopular opinion, start the subject with [GENERAL].
- If it is a Lemmy-specific unpopular opinion, start it with [LEMMY].
Rules:
1. NO POLITICS
Politics is everywhere. Let's make this about [general] and [lemmy] - specific topics, and keep politics out of it.
2. Be civil.
Disagreements happen, but that doesn’t provide the right to personally attack others. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Please also refrain from gatekeeping others' opinions.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Shitposts and memes are allowed but...
Only until they prove to be a problem. They can and will be removed at moderator discretion.
5. No trolling.
This shouldn't need an explanation. If your post or comment is made just to get a rise with no real value, it will be removed. You do this too often, you will get a vacation to touch grass, away from this community for 1 or more days. Repeat offenses will result in a perma-ban.
6. Defend your opinion
This is a bit of a mix of rules 4 and 5 to help foster higher quality posts. You are expected to defend your unpopular opinion in the post body. We don't expect a whole manifesto (please, no manifestos), but you should at least provide some details as to why you hold the position you do.
Instance-wide rules always apply. https://legal.lemmy.world/tos/
number 1 is a nothing rule, unless you change it to "One must act with compassion and empathy". Then you have to define compassion and empathy, and what it means to act with them, in a way that respects rules 2 and 3.
number 2 renders all other laws meaningless unless you have some objective measurement of a person's sense of justice, whatever that is.
number 3, ok, supreme over what? over someone else's sense of justice?
number 4: you don't get to demand my respect. My mind is in my body, therefore rule 4 is a violation of rule 3
number 5: LMAO unscientific belief is the progenitor of science, also rule 3 so kick rocks telling me what I can and cannot believe.
number 6: who defines and adjudicates wrongdoing and remedies thereof if not the law? How can anyone contradict my own sense of justice without violating rule 2?
number 7 is another do-nothing law until you define common sense and everyone agrees that the definition conforms to their own sense of justice. Good luck with that.
number * a.k.a. optional taxation: Taxes are already optional. Optional doesn't mean consequence free. Who are you to contradict the tax collector's sense of justice?
overall score .25/7*, I do not endorse these rules and judge them unpopular to the extremity.
P.S. I think you're on the right track. Reading back over my criticisms they sound harsh, and I stand by them, but I think it's good to think about these things. Creating rules for groups of people is really, really hard, and I am of the opinion that no one has ever done a very good job at it, so in this respect you are in esteemed company. I hope you post another draft at some point.
P.P.S. A lot of my criticism revolves around the expansive nature of Rule 2 and the phrase "sense of justice". The tension between one's personal sense of justice and the relative inflexibility of the law is a huge philosophical problem known as Civil Disobedience and reading up on some other thinkers on the topic may help you sharpen your own thoughts on the matter. As a start I'd recommend some Thoreau for the reason that he's the first person I thought of, since he figuratively wrote the book on it.
This guy debates!!