mailorderfictionalcharacter

[mailorderfictionalcharacter]

type of guy who is so committed to eating totally unprocessed food that they swallow their food whole like a snake

[mailorderfictionalcharacter]

everyone who has a different opinion than me is illiterate; everyone who does something immoral is a psychopath. damn, this ethics shit is easy.

#op #negativity

[mailorderfictionalcharacter]

This is an ask from 2014. Here is an AO3 blog post from 2021 describing the rollout of blocking and muting. This feature has since been implemented. When you hit on someone’s profile you will see the option to block or mute to the right of the ‘subscribe’ button.

People will continue to write about incest because it’s a common human experience, much like hunger, war, marriage, and discrimination; but if you want to block those writers to keep the incest cooties away that option is available to you.

Is there a way to block a user? At the very least prevent their stories from showing up when browsing? I have an ex that is on AO3 and still in many of my fandoms and it's a little triggery to see their username come up.

We don’t offer blocking options, unfortunately, and it’s unlikely we’ll ever add this as a feature. We do understand why some users might want it, but it would complicate our code immensely and affect site performance, so we have to compromise.

However, there’s several third-party tools that help you avoid certain tags, keywords, or usernames when browsing or searching for fanworks. If you’re using Firefox or Chrome, you can have a look at the Blurb Blocker script, AO3 Savior, or AO3 Saved Filters. I hope one of these will meet your needs!

(For more detailed instructions on setting up a userscript in your browser, you can check out this unofficial tutorial.)

Edit: tuff_ghost points out their other script, which lets you hide comments and kudos from specified users and/or (named) guests.

Edit: allochthon outlines a different method for peaceful browsing, namely bookmarking “cleaned up” versions of work listings.

#ao3 #incest #notably the block feature was part of the 2020 discussion around racism in the otw

[mailorderfictionalcharacter]

#jason todd #mary shelley #standard tumblr joke #wayne family adventures

[mailorderfictionalcharacter]

#gambling addiction

[mailorderfictionalcharacter]

Too many options on this one to add a "show results" button, sorry!

–

We ask your questions so you don’t have to! Submit your questions to have them posted anonymously as polls.

#polls #fanfiction #ff> gen > m/m #there was one het fic but I anon’d it because it was genuinely terrible

[mailorderfictionalcharacter]

If i didnt hate votescold shit before its going to start sending me into conniption fits now every time i hear pearl clutching about how could you ever think to vote for a convicted felon?

#us politics #political #endorsed

[mailorderfictionalcharacter]

The Aqua Horological Tintinnabulator, Victoria Centre, Nottingham, UK (1973). Designed and built by Rowland Emett.

#sickos: yes! #undescribed

[mailorderfictionalcharacter]

Arguably the role of placebo in most research is just to capture the natural course of an illness + to maintain double blinding as compared to a no blinding system (telling the subject they’re in the control group). I have no idea if this is a popular opinion in any field of academic research but I’ve read various researchers directly stating that placebo is meant to capture the course of untreated illness & any “placebo effect” is secondary.

ok im looking through the citation on that meta-analysis of the placebo effect, looking at individual studies on depression

like here's a cool one. "Treatment of Depression by Drugs and Psychotherapy". Old paper, 1974. But it's cool because they included both a placebo group and a no pill group:

i ignored the high vs low interpersonal contact, and the drug group, and just looked at all the placebo and no pill patients. And I only included those that completed the study, but yo ucan see that this excludes the same number of people from each group

what was the relapse rate?

Placebo: 42% ± 8.6%

No drug: 38% ± 8.3%

So we are uh very limited by the small samples here, those are large standard errors. But yeah, no statistically significant difference between placebo and no drug. And really just, like, no difference.

By the way, the conclusion the authors drew was this:

In the low contact groups the expected gradient was found: a weak placebo effect appeared, and there was an added effect with amitriptyline. However, there was a small negative placebo effect in the groups that received psychotherapy (high contact).

These differences were not statistically significant.

looking at another... Effects of pill-giving on maintenance of placebo response in patients with chronic mild depression. This one is odd. A group of people were given placebo for ten days. Those who seemed to improve during that time are the subject of that study; the rest graduated to become subjects in some other trial. I guess they were trying to filter out "placebo responders". This trial just asks: what happens if we keep giving placebo to these supposed "placebo responders", vs discontinuing it? The answer is nothing, no measurable effect. Their conclusion:

In summary, continued pill-taking does not appear to play a substantial role in maintaining a placebo response, once achieved.

Reading these papers is kind of eerie. The placebo effect is mentioned as a well-known thing, but no references are given to anyone that's directly observed it. Then they do a direct comparison and find no placebo effect on depression questionnaires. And then the conclusions are... in the first paper, overinterpretation of their subgroups. In the second paper, we take for granted that these are placebo responders because they happened to get better over a ten-day period, and then conclude that the placebo effect doesn't require continuing to take placebo pills after that period.

I don't even know what to say. I don't think placebos improve self-reported depression symptoms. Looking at actual data I don't see anything. But everything is written as if it's been definitively established somewhere, somehow, but nobody can cite it.

#undescribed #not refuting op btw #psychiatry #academia

[mailorderfictionalcharacter]

She does so love her flowers.

IG: iridessence | artist support

#photography #undescribed

[mailorderfictionalcharacter]

House (staring directly at wilson): we have to have gay sex in order to save my fujoshi patient.

#house md

[mailorderfictionalcharacter]

story about a man who only ever dated women bodybuilders and is now dating a chubby guy: this was different from being with a woman. women, with their sharp edges and hard bodies, tongues battling for dominance. Josh was all soft curves and smooth skin,

[mailorderfictionalcharacter]

letby looking up the families of deceased children being a piece of evidence is startling considering that she's a habitual googler and looked up over 2,500 people in a few years alone, of which the family members amounted to 31 people (sidenote: terrifying that this information can be dragged up before court). i've looked up almost everyone i've ever interacted with. when i was dealing with the hospital, i looked up the socials of every nurse and every doctor, and i looked up the socials of the principals and fellow teachers of the school i worked at

#justice #no commentary on letby atm beyond her obviously needing a retrial #reblogging for the comment #guilt

[mailorderfictionalcharacter]

reverse unpopular opinion: libertarianism

Libertarians are correct to be suspicious of state power. State power is corrosive and coercive, it is liable to abuse and corruption, and it is dangerous. They also correctly observe that many monopolies require state power to create and sustain, and are broadly correct about the utility of markets for the distribution of most goods.

Libertarians get a lot of crap--much of it for their perceived personal qualities rather than the things they're not correct about--but if progressives, leftists, and left-anarchists had any sense, there are many issues they could productively ally with libertarians on. They frequently share with libertarians concerns about privacy, surveillance, corruption, abuse of power, regulation of police and prisons, skepticism of large monopolistic firms, personal freedoms around things like sex work and drug use, even overseas military intervention.

Like socialists, libertarians are intensely animated by a sense of equality and a desire for fairness, and although their different starting assumptions lead them to quite different conclusions from leftists, I think these shared principles can be the basis of quite productive cooperation.

One good test of an ideology is to imagine the proponents of that ideology could go off and found their own society, exactly as they would like it, and what it would be like to live in that society, and what effect that would have on the rest of the world. By that measure, I think libertarians are pretty benign--a libertarian society isn't my preferred mode of social organization, but it would be better than a great many alternatives. And unlike Catholic integralists or Wahhabi theocrats or neoconservative American exceptionalists, I think it would be a society that would be largely happy to let the rest of the world do its own thing. I would not worry about the libertarians getting revanchist ideas and trying to conquer their neighbors, or deciding that what the world really needed was to have their ideology imposed on it at gunpoint.

#political #note the bears 😉 #libertarianism

[mailorderfictionalcharacter]

desperately need y'all to understand that when i say "no one deserves to be abused, even if they have done extremely harmful things" i am not saying that You, Personally, Must Feel Sad Emotions About Them

i hate this idea we have that feeling a certain away is a requirement to acting a certain way. its the same shit that makes people view low/no-empathy folks as scary/evil/dangerous because they think that acting ethically towards other people requires certain feelings.

i don't think its bad for a white supremacist woman to get horrifically and misogynistically abused by her husband because i like her. it doesn't matter how i feel about her. i have an ethical worldview i choose to follow and part of that is the idea that no one deserves that and everyone deserves support to get away and heal from that. i can both see how harmful her actions have been, and maybe will continue to be, and support people working against the harm of her misogynistic white supremacism, while also acknowledging that she has been unjustly hurt herself and hoping she heals from that (ideally by growing as a person and rejecting those beliefs). it does not matter how i feel, or how cathartic it feels to see her suffer. you don't have to feel sad about a white supremacist getting abused, but you should acknowledge that it's a bad thing and she deserves help and support to escape that.

i will never demand anyone feel a certain emotion, and if i do, i am violating my own beliefs. saying "no one deserves to suffer and its terrible feminism to celebrate misogynistic abuse or to scrutinize whether a victim deserves to be abused based on their own beliefs" is not a command for you to feel sad for anyone. its a call for you to reflect on your actions and whether or not they are ethical and conducive to the goals of feminist liberation.

#ethics #political

[mailorderfictionalcharacter]

Odeyemi Oluwaseun

#art #udescribed

[mailorderfictionalcharacter]

That one beloved mutual you would kill without hesitation before letting them have an ounce of political power

#standard tumblr joke #tumblr culture