@admitsWrongIfProven@qoto.org Fair, ill give you the notes and breakdown I have then and I hope it will help you understand the meaning behind the imagery:
Narrative Arc & Thematic Fidelity
Arrival → Reckoning → Departure should be crisp.
The horizon blistered, then brightened— / metal sundered into light succinctly marks the decisive turning point: pain transforming to radiance.
The closing virtues should remain demonstrated, not lectured; every infinitive in the list has should be pre‑earned by prior action or image, so the final stanza lands as affirmation rather than summary.
Imagery & Symbol Cohesion
Motif / Function / notes
Water (waves, tide, river, sea)
Emotional flux, integrity
Now balanced between turbulence and clear emergence (surface true).
The “discipline of light” + “surface true” pairing underscores moral vigilance.
tone / Shard / Metal
Past wounds, resilience
Stitching shards into a coat is a visually elegant metaphor for carrying scars as craft.
Lemons
Quiet perseverance, bittersweet forgiveness
Placement only at opening and close keeps the symbol potent.
Virtues Embodied
Integrity in darkness & light
“so the dark could witness me no different / than the noon‑bright street.”
Self‑discipline
old currents of impulse go quiet, not hushed by force but eased by vigilance.
Uplifting others
hoisting strangers’ mornings on my shoulders.
Scholarly self‑examination
footnoting apology upon each fracture / forging now a lexicon of healing.
Setting boundaries
never again accepting iron / masquerading as a kiss.
Other considerations of flow / meter / imagery
“footnoting apology upon each fracture / forging now a lexicon of healing.”—the enjambment gives breath, and forging adds sonic heft that echoes the upcoming metal imagery.
“its pressure a promise to surface true.”—true carries a moral and optical double meaning; the half‑stressed monosyllable quickens the line’s close.
Intended emotion resonance
The poem should read as a continuous, controlled surge. Nothing feeling extraneous; yet each stanza should retain room for the reader’s own breath. It should balance lush phrasing and disciplined syntax in order to model the journey from riotous impulse toward mindful strength.
No its ok, dont feel you need to excluded. I appreciate the effort if nothing else.
I'm just asking, do you want an analytical break down of its construction or what? I generally find explaining poems ruin them so I'm just trying not to ruin it for you, otherwise happy to answer any questions.
@admitsWrongIfProven@qoto.org You want an analysis of the poem and what it all means? I mean I have my notes I can always share that explains the imagery and purpose of most of it, but wouldnt that ruin ithe discovery of such things?
True usually when people talk about generations they talk about the time to average child bearing age, not the length of time of a lifetime. What I meant here was a single persons lifespan.
Second, the last non Democratic, non Republican President was Millard Fillmore
To be clear here I didnt actually answer your question, because I misread it as being applicable to my claim.
I claimed the majority party changed 8 times and the last time was 80 years. That is not the same as saying a non-majority party won all those 8 times. Some of those 8 cases represent presidential wins, some of them simply represented a new majority party pushing out an old, but not corresponding with a presidential win during that year (and by some future point when the new party does win has now been established as a majority party so wouldnt count by your criteria).
Specifically in the case of 80 years ago, we are talking about a third-party becoming one of the two majority parties, but not becoming the winning party,. 80 years ago was also the one time out of 8 that I had mentioned that the thuird party did not retain majority status after wards. In all other cases, 7 of them, the new majority party remained a majority party and I beleive in all cases eventually had a presidential candidate in office.
> so each was on its way already to becoming a majority party and entrenching itself. Gotcha. And WHEN was the last one?
No actually not at all. In every case where a new party came in and took over a majority party it had <1% support int he previous election. These new parties that come in and replace existing majority parties in 7 out of 8 of the cases all happened over the course of a single election. In the one outlier it was over the court of 2 elections.
> And WHEN was the last one?
Quite some while back, Its about a generation back, something like 80 years ago. Which again is to my point, the fact that it has happened 8 times already and has not happened **recently** means the underlying cause is something recent and not FPTP which we had through that entire time.
> My only point was that THIS election, a 3rd party vote is nothing but a not-D and not-R vote, because there is no 3rd party groundswell.
As stated in virtually all cases of a switch of parties there was no building "ground swell" in all cases the switch of party was abrupt and over the course of just a single election.
Moreover as stated earlier, its a pointless argument because there is no rational argument that a vote for a candidate that wins, particularly when your vote does not swing the outcome, has any more value than a vote for a canddidate that looses, again, when your vote wouldnt have caused the swing. Since votes never really come down to a single vote, your vote will never swing the outcome, so there is little incentive for you to pick a canddidate you dont like as much simply because you think they would win.
The 8 times I was talking about was specifically the presidential election. Moreover not only did a third party win, but in every case except for one the third party became the new majority party and the majority party that lost went out of existance. So 8 times.
The fact that it hasnt happened recently should tell you that it has nothing to do with FPTP (since we had that for our whole history and had 8 transitions) but rather something more recent to blame.
There are 40 countries that ellect with FPTP and I dont know of one of them that claims a two-party system. So that is a bit of a myth that is easily enough debunked.
The 2 majority parties have also been replaced by a new major party 8 times in the history of the USA. We even within the USA we know we arent locked in to two parties.
I cant in good conscious support a party that is pro-genocide. Never mind Harris's horrible history of women's and trans rights.
I plan to vote for the good guy (shocker I know)... chase oliver is my top pick for the moment. Green party's Stein might get my vote if i change my mind.
I just cant imagine anyone supporting the level of evil the democrats and republicans have demonstrated, not to mention incompetence.
So our group server has two components, the group server itself, which is not usually where you will be viewing things or logged in. So no special sorting directly on the group server.
However on our normal server where the users live there is a "group directory" which is how they peruse the groups (as is the case for most fediverse activity). For the group support ont he client side there kinda of storting and filtering yes, but the sorting could be extended a bit to make it more powerful for sure.
QWhen you say matodon groups do you mean the group server I wrote several years ago that integrates well with the standard, or did Eugene after years finally implement that feature lately?
I havent played enough with lemmy to have an opinion. Very disapointed in their leadership though for reasons related to peripheral projects I wont get into.
Point is what happened the monkeys is perfectly normal and expected... so nothing "not straight" about that (other than the sadness of animal testing)...
That said I dont like them as a companya nd wouldnt buy an implant off of them if I needed one, sure... but you'd need a pretty solid objective reason to actually block them.
Why? We already have brain interface links that do similar damage to neuralink, this isnt unusual or unexpected. In its current form it is rightfully used on terminal patients with locked-in syndom. In other words, people before it damaged their brain in a meaningful way and whom cant be further paralyzed.
It would give these people a chance at someinteraction with the real world... What happened with the monkeys was about in line with other neural interfaces, its a consequence of the limits of the tech not negligence.
@admitsWrongIfProven@qoto.org Fair, ill give you the notes and breakdown I have then and I hope it will help you understand the meaning behind the imagery:
Narrative Arc & Thematic Fidelity
Arrival → Reckoning → Departure should be crisp.
The horizon blistered, then brightened— / metal sundered into light succinctly marks the decisive turning point: pain transforming to radiance.
The closing virtues should remain demonstrated, not lectured; every infinitive in the list has should be pre‑earned by prior action or image, so the final stanza lands as affirmation rather than summary.
Imagery & Symbol Cohesion
Motif / Function / notes
Emotional flux, integrity
Now balanced between turbulence and clear emergence (surface true).
Self‑revelation
The “discipline of light” + “surface true” pairing underscores moral vigilance.
Past wounds, resilience
Stitching shards into a coat is a visually elegant metaphor for carrying scars as craft.
Quiet perseverance, bittersweet forgiveness
Placement only at opening and close keeps the symbol potent.
Virtues Embodied
“so the dark could witness me no different / than the noon‑bright street.”
old currents of impulse go quiet, not hushed by force but eased by vigilance.
hoisting strangers’ mornings on my shoulders.
footnoting apology upon each fracture / forging now a lexicon of healing.
never again accepting iron / masquerading as a kiss.
Other considerations of flow / meter / imagery
“footnoting apology upon each fracture / forging now a lexicon of healing.”—the enjambment gives breath, and forging adds sonic heft that echoes the upcoming metal imagery.
“its pressure a promise to surface true.”—true carries a moral and optical double meaning; the half‑stressed monosyllable quickens the line’s close.
Intended emotion resonance
The poem should read as a continuous, controlled surge. Nothing feeling extraneous; yet each stanza should retain room for the reader’s own breath. It should balance lush phrasing and disciplined syntax in order to model the journey from riotous impulse toward mindful strength.
@admitsWrongIfProven@qoto.org
No its ok, dont feel you need to excluded. I appreciate the effort if nothing else.
I'm just asking, do you want an analytical break down of its construction or what? I generally find explaining poems ruin them so I'm just trying not to ruin it for you, otherwise happy to answer any questions.
@admitsWrongIfProven@qoto.org You want an analysis of the poem and what it all means? I mean I have my notes I can always share that explains the imagery and purpose of most of it, but wouldnt that ruin ithe discovery of such things?
@godofbiscuits @CoachMark @WrenArcher @kamalaharrisforpresidentnews > First off, 80 years is more like FOUR generations.
True usually when people talk about generations they talk about the time to average child bearing age, not the length of time of a lifetime. What I meant here was a single persons lifespan.
To be clear here I didnt actually answer your question, because I misread it as being applicable to my claim.
I claimed the majority party changed 8 times and the last time was 80 years. That is not the same as saying a non-majority party won all those 8 times. Some of those 8 cases represent presidential wins, some of them simply represented a new majority party pushing out an old, but not corresponding with a presidential win during that year (and by some future point when the new party does win has now been established as a majority party so wouldnt count by your criteria).
Specifically in the case of 80 years ago, we are talking about a third-party becoming one of the two majority parties, but not becoming the winning party,. 80 years ago was also the one time out of 8 that I had mentioned that the thuird party did not retain majority status after wards. In all other cases, 7 of them, the new majority party remained a majority party and I beleive in all cases eventually had a presidential candidate in office.
@CoachMark @WrenArcher @kamalaharrisforpresidentnews
@godofbiscuits
> so each was on its way already to becoming a majority party and entrenching itself. Gotcha. And WHEN was the last one?
No actually not at all. In every case where a new party came in and took over a majority party it had <1% support int he previous election. These new parties that come in and replace existing majority parties in 7 out of 8 of the cases all happened over the course of a single election. In the one outlier it was over the court of 2 elections.
> And WHEN was the last one?
Quite some while back, Its about a generation back, something like 80 years ago. Which again is to my point, the fact that it has happened 8 times already and has not happened **recently** means the underlying cause is something recent and not FPTP which we had through that entire time.
> My only point was that THIS election, a 3rd party vote is nothing but a not-D and not-R vote, because there is no 3rd party groundswell.
As stated in virtually all cases of a switch of parties there was no building "ground swell" in all cases the switch of party was abrupt and over the course of just a single election.
Moreover as stated earlier, its a pointless argument because there is no rational argument that a vote for a candidate that wins, particularly when your vote does not swing the outcome, has any more value than a vote for a canddidate that looses, again, when your vote wouldnt have caused the swing. Since votes never really come down to a single vote, your vote will never swing the outcome, so there is little incentive for you to pick a canddidate you dont like as much simply because you think they would win.
@CoachMark @WrenArcher @kamalaharrisforpresidentnews
@godofbiscuits
The 8 times I was talking about was specifically the presidential election. Moreover not only did a third party win, but in every case except for one the third party became the new majority party and the majority party that lost went out of existance. So 8 times.
The fact that it hasnt happened recently should tell you that it has nothing to do with FPTP (since we had that for our whole history and had 8 transitions) but rather something more recent to blame.
@CoachMark @WrenArcher @kamalaharrisforpresidentnews
@godofbiscuits
There are 40 countries that ellect with FPTP and I dont know of one of them that claims a two-party system. So that is a bit of a myth that is easily enough debunked.
The 2 majority parties have also been replaced by a new major party 8 times in the history of the USA. We even within the USA we know we arent locked in to two parties.
@CoachMark @WrenArcher @kamalaharrisforpresidentnews
@Burnt_Veggies
Thats why I said Chase Oliver is my first choice.. Stein would be a compromise at best... basically anything is better then Harris vs Trump.
@CoachMark @WrenArcher @kamalaharrisforpresidentnews
@CoachMark
I cant in good conscious support a party that is pro-genocide. Never mind Harris's horrible history of women's and trans rights.
I plan to vote for the good guy (shocker I know)... chase oliver is my top pick for the moment. Green party's Stein might get my vote if i change my mind.
I just cant imagine anyone supporting the level of evil the democrats and republicans have demonstrated, not to mention incompetence.
@WrenArcher @kamalaharrisforpresidentnews
@dichotomiker
So our group server has two components, the group server itself, which is not usually where you will be viewing things or logged in. So no special sorting directly on the group server.
However on our normal server where the users live there is a "group directory" which is how they peruse the groups (as is the case for most fediverse activity). For the group support ont he client side there kinda of storting and filtering yes, but the sorting could be extended a bit to make it more powerful for sure.
@til
@dichotomiker
QWhen you say matodon groups do you mean the group server I wrote several years ago that integrates well with the standard, or did Eugene after years finally implement that feature lately?
@til
@dichotomiker
I havent played enough with lemmy to have an opinion. Very disapointed in their leadership though for reasons related to peripheral projects I wont get into.
@til
@dichotomiker
Correct me if im wrong but this isnt a top level post but rather a comment on an existing post?
@til
@ludrol
Weird, I'd expect that to ruin a blender.
@blender
@raymccarthy
Point is what happened the monkeys is perfectly normal and expected... so nothing "not straight" about that (other than the sadness of animal testing)...
That said I dont like them as a companya nd wouldnt buy an implant off of them if I needed one, sure... but you'd need a pretty solid objective reason to actually block them.
@ajsadauskas @technology
@raymccarthy
Why? We already have brain interface links that do similar damage to neuralink, this isnt unusual or unexpected. In its current form it is rightfully used on terminal patients with locked-in syndom. In other words, people before it damaged their brain in a meaningful way and whom cant be further paralyzed.
It would give these people a chance at someinteraction with the real world... What happened with the monkeys was about in line with other neural interfaces, its a consequence of the limits of the tech not negligence.
@ajsadauskas @technology
@wintermute_oregon @breadsmasher
I agree with this. The problem is, so are the republicans.