Here’s the thing. I’m a mod for a small-time community for a niche interest, !castles@lemm.ee I’m also on Mastodon, and was before my Reddit exodus. I follow #castles as well as a few other related topics on Matsodon, so I get quality toots, such as this: https://mastodon.scot/@McNige/110926238926867959, that I wish I could just crosspost over to my community. Currently, I have to repackage the toot, which isn’t a huge problem, but currently I just drop them a note on Mastodon that their content has been posted elsewhere on the Fediverse. What would be nice is if people who comment on the Lemmy post also get fed into OP’s toot. More sharing, more connection, more activity.

On the flip side, I’ve subscribed to @castles@lemm.ee on my Mastodon instance and, while it’s good to be able to follow posts in feed form, it looks like ass: Lemmy post crossposted to Mastodon I realize I should try this with Pixelfed, but I haven’t made that leap yet.

I don’t know, am I thinking crazy here? I’d think we’d want everything in the Fediverse soup interoperable in a more seemless way. Is this a feature request or am I missing some way to do this better?

  • Arotrios@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    11 months ago

    Kurt Vonnegut advises doing exactly what you’re doing with your RPGs. The end of that lecture touches specifically on it.

    I completely understand about keeping that part of your work private. I have done much the same thing for the same reasons with the vast majority of my creations, and you’re wise to protect the part of yourself that keeps your imagination flowing.

    That being said, should you reach a point where you’re ready to share work (RPGs, writing, or just things that inspire you), the magazine is always open to you.

    Re: Philosophy - I agree on the difficulty of the writing. I’ve read some small amount of Sartre (Being and Nothingness), but I remember being frustrated at the density of the arguments, which often seemed an over-articulation of the obvious for the sake of precision - and the entire work felt like a response to work we hadn’t covered. In my college classes, it was presented as existentialism (in fact, we went from Descartes to Hume to Sartre), and now, looking at it’s place in phenomenology, I feel robbed that the connections to Husserl and Heidegger weren’t properly illustrated - the historical context would have helped me finish the book. Looks like I’ll have to give it another shot :)

    • Anafroj@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      Oh wow, thanks for that video, that was brilliant. :D

      Indeed, if you had a teacher who made your class read Being and Nothingness without explaining phenomenology first, it feels like punishment or something. :) Not that Husserl and Heidegger are easier to read, but at least they don’t presuppose other readings to be understood. That being said, I kind of get it, existentialism can be seen as its own thing, especially in Sartre’s non-philosophy work (he wrote several novels and theater scripts). But not through Being and Nothingness. 😂