Gonna be very blunt here, if you mean to say that that comment is “authoritatively and confidently” saying that is misinformation to “undermine another person’s comment” I have to tell you are in a very small minority that interpret that comment that way. Most people whom OP is intending to reach would read that comment as having one claim, one anecdote, and one explanation.

The claim is “macos is stable”, the anecdote is “months of uptime” and the explanation is “powered by UNIX”. And as the main question here is whether the explanation (which I will say is presented as a fact) is said in a manner that represents authoritative blind fanboyism or a casual statement. To preface, I think it’s very clear based on my past interactions as well the upvote downvote spread that it is a casual, but factually incorrect statement. OP has experienced months of uptime and stability and attributes this to macos being UNIX under the hood.

While this is a wrong assertation, shaming is the incorrect response if the goal is to correct this misinformation. Shaming does very little to change minds and often leads to people doubling down. You will have no success with this approach. You must inform positively and confidently. Approach them from a perspective, “oh they just don’t know, let me help them.” Rather than “oh here comes the fanboy again, need to shame this guy”. The first approach has had success time and time again and builds community. I assure OP did not seek to undermine the above comment nor did they post misinformation out of blind fanboyism they merely lack knowledge and that’s how nearly everyone else in this comment chain read it.

I think just in general you may have an issue with taking things at face value and being blunt, which is not an uncommon issue. I experience this problem myself and my siblings have it worse than me though we worked past it by just learning more about language and talking to people about what they really mean when they say things. Do you happen to be neurodivergent? That’s the case for us anyway.

I would like to inform you why your comment’s tone was problematic cause most of the issues are not word choice, it’s structuring. Your comment intention may have been to be amiable, but to average person your comment reads as snarky and with an air of superiority. This is mainly because the comment it is replying to does not present a view with strong conviction or to argue, they stated something and happened to reveal another belief. They talk about their uptime with macos and happen to reveal they think macos is UNIX.

If you had say said “Oh you probably shouldn’t say macos is UNIX and here’s why” and then proceeded to give explicit reasons and then ended the comment, it would have ended there with many upvotes. It’s the presence of the “Well, um ashkuallyyyy…” structure in your comment along with the “That’s not how this works pal” that makes it rude. It’s like you’re shaming them for not knowing instead of seeking to inform, it’s not your usage of the word pal, it’s the argumentative negative stance. You could have ended with “I hope that helped you learn more pal!” And everything would have been fine. Positive vs negative. Structure matters. Anyway I hope that helped you learn more pal!

Despite many people in this thread saying KDE, GNOME has been recently been financed to work on accessibility with the STF fund contract work, so major advancements in accessibility are likely to hit them first. They are also looking into getting more contract financing for it. KDE might be fairly equal right now, but I foresee GNOME getting more stuff sooner. Especially in regards to screen readers and just general app accessibility with changes to Libadwaita.

I don’t think it keeps my saved posts and comments though so I’d have to get those back manually

I really need to move off Lemmy.ml, moving all my saved stuff seems like it’s going to be annoying though

I would replace it with nothing since the system did not support interesting problem nor encourage creative solutions, it just made me button mash more to get more weapons to replace my broken ones. Once I turned it off I felt free to experiment with interesting ways to kill enemies since I wasn’t worried about my weapons anymore.

Combat was not an essential part of this game anyway, the puzzle solving and world were the best part. They could have just given me a set weapons that never changed and it would be essentially the same game. At least for me. The environmental interactions are just icing on the cake.

Damn, I’m sorry all that happened to you, I wish you the best in your life going forward. And I do have to say I don’t think anyone who is into solarpunk thinks those with mental disability should just be pushed aside and discarded. That would be almost antithetical to a concept so focused on improving the human condition.

That said, I could see where an emphasis on nature more in the goals could lead to people suggesting they want to take away the things you hold dear. However, I don’t think that’s the majority opinion of people into solarpunk nor do I believe you would be unable rely on machines in a solarpunk society. The whole goal of solarpunk is environmentally conscious technology not no technology. In fact I think most solarpunks would love a future that has the technology you would want. In other words I think your goals are in alignment if not complete agreement.

Reading this, I think most of the disparity in our views comes from where our view of solarpunk comes from as well as opinion toward nature. I have never engaged with any solarpunk works simply cause I never thought of them as relevant to the overall concept, I’ve only ever engaged with people.

And people as far as I am aware are in a sense anti-urbanist but not anti-cities, mostly just car infrastructure and other urban-specific environmentally hostile additions. In particular many of these individuals actually care a great deal about accessibility and are with greater frequency than other groups I’ve seen disabled themselves. I usually prefer to actually talk to people rather than refer to works unless those individuals specifically refer me to those works as representative. Otherwise you’re being unfair.

Also could you give examples of those works being anti-accessibility? It may be worth bringing up accessibility in this lemmy community in a separate post. Also can’t say I agree with the fediverse take, this place has been nothing but nice to me.

I think we’ll just have to agree to disagree, I think solarpunk societies are focused on community and not on “taking responsibility for your survival into your own hands”. That view is for people trying to run away from others. Generally solarpunk is just for people who want to build a more environmentally conscious society, not one that abandons people. In your case specifically, I think a solarpunk society would actually benefit you greatly.

Again I’m really not sure where this is coming from since the majority of solarpunk people I’ve talked to do not espouse the view you are describing. But in the interest of fairness; why would solarpunk which only aims to create a fair, renewable energy based, democratic post scarcity society focused on human happiness be a prison to you?

I think that’s just cause video games are not great entertainment for grander story beats. They’re kinda like knitting or watching tv, something you do in your off time to relax or get away but not really flashy enough like gambling or an opera house to be featured.

Also are you ok? I find it rather odd to be this intensely invested about what is generally a fairly niche community in solarpunk. Not that the mission and ideology aren’t worth being passionate about, but I mean we are talking about video games and green societies nothing crazy.

I’ll definitely have to give that a read, though some quick reading of opinions about that work are fairly mixed.

Also no one has said you’re broken or that you need to face reality. The whole point of solarpunk is that will be no world to face unless we take action. And none of that has anything to do with video games or anything you have described.

My confusion continues to compound. Many of the people in this thread have zero issue with video games or actually play them. I really gotta see a source for

solarpunk writers are rarely, if ever, gamers.

Agreed, it seems really odd for any such society to do away with something so beloved

Um, but the majority of video games are not made by big tech? What is your point? Indie games are usually just better overall anyway. I’m really failing to see why any solarpunk society would stop people from making video games

I didn’t even think there were serious solar punk stories, and even if so, aren’t all of them like technological utopias? Why would entertainment ie video games be gone from them? Even if they aren’t the focus (which makes sense) what reason would a solar punk society have to do away with video games?

No one is talking about you, mass media and consumerism has nothing to do with anything you described. Video games as a whole does not equal consumerism or mass media. Micro transactions and other terrible patterns do.

Not sure, the thing they use to lift it is a car jack but what they lie on? Not sure

Wheely transporter? Everyone I’ve ever known has always called these “dollies”. Maybe it’s just an American thing. Also I actually looked up dolly to get this image.