Tabletop creators leave X for Bluesky in droves

[Umbran]

I see your point; however, this could also mean that most people suffer from ignorance, bias, and being uninformed.

Of course we do! Good grief, do you have any idea how much there is to know out there? There has not been a time since we began to use tools that everyone knew everything there was to know.

Bias is a separate issue - it isn't about what you know, but about how you process and prioritize information. It is my understanding that, contrary to some popular assertions, simple exposure to opposing or differing viewpoints DOES NOT do much to eliminate most forms of bias you run into.

Which, when you think about it, makes sense - bias is the thing that leads one to hold a view in spite of counter evidence. If bias did not survive contact with counter evidence, bias would not be a concern.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

At least the religious have an excuse (a crappy one, but still). Bigoted atheists worship at the altar of science, except it appears the science that they don't agree with.

This has been an increasing problem with "skepticism" and related self-proclaimed "rational" atheism (not atheism in general, that specific subset of it) since the late 1990s. I remember in the mid-90s (like 1994), as a teenager I got quite into US-style skepticism and back then it was mostly good stuff because they were fighting back against stuff like The Bell Curve as pseudo-science and trying to get people out of such a conspiratorial mindset in general (which as you may recall, was pretty common, as it is once more today). But already by about 1998, Dawkins-esque weird "rational" atheism and really reactionary faux-skepticism which actually translated to contrarianism were seeing a bit of surge, and I got out. This linked to early anti-vaxx stuff too - there were a lot of self-declared skeptics trying to big-up Andrew Wakefield, even though even dimwits like me could tell he was full of nonsense simply by looking at what actual scientists were saying (Private Eye even got caught up supporting him, albeit I think that was down to Ian Hislop trusting their medical columnist way too much). I think there's a real issue with this sort of mindset where they're desperate to latch on to contrarian voices, no matter how obviously pseudo-scientific or poorly evidence, on the off-chance they'll turn out to be right (a losing proposition, mathematically, I'd suggest!), and a lot of them are fundamentally reactionary people who are just desperate to be both the self-perceived underdog or iconoclast and "right" as part of what makes their personality tick.

 

[Umbran]

Mod Note:
Folks,
The continued discussion of religious or atheist positions isn't appropriate, by site rules. Please stop commenting on real-world religions. Thanks.

 

[shirleyishmael]

That's the weird thing, it appears and functions almost identical.
Somehow for me it feels less cluttered making navigation easier.
It is probably a just me thing.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

That's the weird thing, it appears and functions almost identical.
Somehow for me it feels less cluttered making navigation easier.
It is probably a just me thing.

I think the lack of ads helps.

 

[Myrdin Potter]

I am not a huge X.com user, but it seems to me that the people that I found interrupted discussions on RPG for too many causes were the first to leave. In many cases I even supported their view on whatever cause they espoused but it seemed that the RPG discussions were dragged to the cause instead of the game.

Maybe I am now missing some people that went to bluesky, but the discussions now are way more enjoyable to me.