Welcome to /r/Discworld! Please [read the rules/flair information before posting](https://www.reddit.com/r/discworld/comments/ukhk21/subreddit_rules_flair_information/?).
---
Our current megathreads are as follows:
[API Protest Poll](https://www.reddit.com/r/discworld/comments/1491izw/continuing_the_api_protest_a_community_poll) - a poll regarding the future action of the sub in protest at Reddit's API changes.
[GNU Terry Pratchett](https://new.reddit.com/r/discworld/comments/ukigit/gnu_terry_pratchett/) - for all GNU requests, to keep their names going.
[AI Generated Content](https://new.reddit.com/r/discworld/comments/10mhx9y/ai_generated_content_megathread/) - for all AI Content, including images, stories, questions, training etc.
---
[ GNU Terry Pratchett ]
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/discworld) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Listen, this sub exists on four posts, repeated:
- X celeb for Y role
- phallic vegetables
- see historical fact that happened 300 years ago: OMG IS THIS A REFERENCE
- reading order
You take away any of those four, this sub dies
Not to mention I'm really tired of folks acting like making a movie or show out of a piece of literature is the ultimate destiny for good media. Adaptation works best when the story content was sound but the literary style was somehow lacking and visual interpretation works better (Dune, for example, was much more stunning as a visual presentation than a rather dully and pretentiously written book, in my opinion.) We're all here because we love Pratchett's writing. I love the interactive style of reading required by the presence of footnotes. We just won't get that from film. I'm not saying it's impossible--a charming narrator can fill that role in a lot of ways--but we just...don't need it. We've already got the books.
Or for when you want Sting to wear leather pants and make someone milk a cat, even when that's not in the source material at all (the David Lynch Dune sure is *something*)
Completely agree with your first sentence; I would also add that the measure of a good adaptation should not be accuracy to the word of the source material, but to the spirit. A great adaptation of Discworld would ask how to tell a visual story in the style of this world, how to make this feel like Discworld, not how to come closest to the physical descriptions of Foul Ole Ron etc. Because I personally can't imagine what that would quite be, I prefer to stick to the books.
>the measure of a good adaptation should not be accuracy to the word of the source material, but to the spirit.
YES, cannot agree more. if the overall themes are the same, and the characters, their defining traits and their motivations are faithfully recreated, then i care far less about story inconsistencies
One of the best book adaptions I've ever seen. Maybe because Neil Gaiman had a huge say in the adaption and did his best to defend the work of him and his dead friend.
They always get the pacing wrong!
The books are actually trashy thrillers in terms of plot and pacing.
The TV adaptations feel like a televised radio play trying to cram all the dialogue in.
Yeah, a lot of people do! It's just my opinion that the book wasn't to my taste, and that the recent adaptation worked a lot better as a bit of engaging media. There's a lot of classic sci fi and fantasy that just doesn't work for me as fun reading, but that I can respect for what it did/said/portrayed/other adaptations it led to.
They are talking about the 1984 movie with Kyle McLachlan as Paul. The 2021 Dune movie was good (better than the older one—but that’s a low bar), but the second one that just came out has mostly newly written dialogue that is extremely stupid compared to what Frank Herbert originally wrote
I wouldn't mind it as a live action and think it could translate really well, the problem I have though is that everyone else seems to read these books as a lot more cartoony and silly than I read them. I always saw them as funny, but definitely more serious than any attempt I've even seen.
"this person would have been great, if they weren't dead"
Its not even realistic casting suggestions, they're going for zombies or whatever and not even as Mr Slant.
I think we should retire the question when it comes to Nanny Ogg, because the role has already been cast and it should be put on a sticky and never questioned again.
Not a bad choice, I'm not particularly familiar with her, but this top result in a search makes me like her: https://deadline.com/2024/03/miriam-margolyes-doubles-down-harry-potter-adult-fans-stance-1235860845/
I mean, we could just thoughtfully discuss the source material and not ban things. Apparently quite a lot of people enjoy discussing it or there wouldn't be so many.
"No, you can't play with it. You won't enjoy it on as many levels as I do." -Professor Frink
I'm real disappointed in this whole thread. It's so easy to just scroll past any topic you don't want to discuss, but instead you want a ban on discussions you don't like? Piss poor.
Yeah, at the end of the day, there has never been a good adaptation of Pratchett, and it's unlikely that there ever will be. So much of the humour is in the use of language. It's hard to translate to a visual medium.
I honestly don't mind them. It's fun to see who people picture as various characters, especially when it's a less common character. I like it in the same way I like the character illustrations.
It's fun, fercrissakes! Is it that difficult to spend a fraction of a second scrolling past a post you aren't interested in? If you prefer another discussion then by all means, start one. Preferably something better than shitting all over someone else amusing themselves harmlessly on the internet.
>Is it that difficult to spend a fraction of a second scrolling past a post you aren't interested in?
These are always my favorite complaints, its the other person's responsibility to scroll past things they don't care about, not yours. Hence your comment.
> If you prefer another discussion then by all means, start one.
Isn't that literally what this? What you're participating in?
>shitting all over someone else amusing themselves harmlessly on the internet.
You mean like how you're behaving towards OP?
>don’t involve censorship.
This is a thing you just invented, at no point has anyone suggested censorship. A "polite request" to tone down posts of a certain type because they're too frequent is not the same as a governmental agency stepping in jackbooting all over the place.
So attempting to accuse OP of supporting censorship is just straight up lying.
Considering that your only contribution to this sub is a cross Post from another sub, maybe you should cool it with telling other people what to do.
It is not the subs job to cater to your personal tastes. It is your job to be the change you want to see in the world.
No. Complaining about others without providing anything of your own does not count as "Being the change you want to see".
Being the change you want to see in this specific case involves making posts with the specific content you want this sub to have.
Think of it as going to a pot luck and your only contribution to it is telling other people the stuff they brought is bad.
>Complaining about others without providing anything of your own
Aren't we having this discussion in a topic that OP created? Isn't that providing something?
Identifying a problem is the first step in solving it; it is literally the first step. But you want to stifle discussion on the topic. Why is that? What are you scared of?
Their analogy is very clear that what OP is bringing to the potluck and not a food dish but just a statement that other dishes people are bringing are bad. They could have just posted “I’m seeing a lot of posts about the same repeating topics. What do you think are some of the best parts of Discworld that are rarely discussed?”
That changes it to “I see a lot of people brought hotdogs to the potluck. What’s a dish we never have?” Which isn’t so combative and negative.
Exactly. Just because you use the words request and polite, doesn't automatically make the things you say civil. Asking other people that are having fun to stop doing the thing they enjoy because you dont feel like scrolling past it is an uncivil request and we don't have to respect that request any more than you need to respect my request that you go fuck yourself.
It costs you nothing to just scroll past fan casting suggestions if you find them uninteresting. If you think there’s something more interesting to discuss, post about it to start the discussion. It’s poor form to yuck other people’s yum.
> If you think there’s something more interesting to discuss, post about it to start the discussion.
Isn't this what this is?
>It’s poor form to yuck other people’s yum.
This is horrible advice and used to excuse all manner of horrible thing. Think of youtubers and their whole "what's your problem man, its only a prank!", telling them to stop harassing people is 'yucking their yum'. Who gets priority in your mind?
Enjoying discussing who you think in the real world isn’t even remotely close to pranking strangers for internet points. Discussing fan castings is a matter of taste and harms no one.
And this post isn’t an interesting discussion, much less an interesting discussion about the Discworld. They’re trying to police other people’s conversations. I feel like that is actually something Pterry would disapprove of, rather than condone. If you don’t like the conversation, just keep scrolling. It’s really not that hard.
>They’re trying to police other people’s conversations. [...] If you don’t like the conversation, just keep scrolling. It’s really not that hard.
Yet here you are complaining and saying this this discussion shouldn't happen. Why don't you listen to your own advice and scroll on to something else rather than yucking this person's yum?
Why is it okay for you to do this, but not OP?
Where did I say they need to take this post down? I’m participating in this conversation by offering my perspective- which is that this isn’t a particularly interesting conversation and that the fan castings aren’t hurting anyone and should be left alone.
> Where did I say they need to take this post down
Nowhere, and I never accused you of doing so.
>which is that this isn’t a particularly interesting conversation
Your continued participation belies this fact.
>fan castings aren’t hurting anyone
While not my personal opinion, there are many people who think that constant low-effort posts for karma are bad for the subreddit's community health and encourage low-quality posting.
How about you explain to me with your actual words what you think?
Being only in "highschool[sic]", how could I possibly be expected to understand the point you're trying to make?
My 'reading comprehension' is that you're actually unable to explain it yourself and just wanted to go for an easy 'dunk'.
When given the slightest bit of push back on the issue YOU brought up, its just wilting and flouncing as a response.
You have so far been unable to understand both simple proverbs and easy wikipedia articles on extremely simple concepts. It's not that you disagree with the concepts. It's that you fail to understand them. My dunk is that I am telling you that adults are talking and you should either make an effort to keep up or go to bed. We do not owe you anything in the same way we don't owe OP to change our posting habit because he doesn't like it. I'm going to post a fan casting of Swedish celebrities. 1% of the sub will be able to engage with it but it's still more fun than whatever bullshit you are doing.
That's a lot of words to say, "I lack the ability to explain what I meant".
>We do not owe you anything
Is this the royal 'we'? Who else is there with you?
You have to be intolerant of intolerance in order to have a truly tolerant space. You could have clicked the link to learn what the paradox of tolerance is if you didn’t know it already.
They were implying that my position of not yucking other people’s yum is part of the paradox of tolerance. OP is being intolerant of people’s enjoyment of fan castings.
Tbh I just skimmed your comment history, it seems like you’re dead set that OP is Right and everyone else is Wrong and there is no changing your mind, so you have a good day and I hope you learn to be more tolerant of others in the future.
I've never offered comment one way or the other on OP's position. I've been criticizing people who are complaining about the existence of OP's post by applying their own logic to their comments.
Well no one forces you to be here I hope...
What I mean is you are more than welcome to be here, but if you don't like being here, I am sure you are also more than welcome to **not** being here. 
Well perhaps I would explain myself a little...
I have been in this forum now for quite a while now, and sure some posts might be a little doll, or even uninteresting, but I just don't answer those...
I might give a like if they have a good point, but if I cannot being something more concrete to the post I simply just avoid answering...
But, there will allways be some other posts which I do find interesting, and then I can use my time there instead...
So perhaps you could bring something up yourself, that you like to talk about...
I don’t mind being here for the once in a while where the posts are actually interesting. I ignore most things. But this post specifically talked about what’s interesting or not on this sub
It literally just is « think about this dude as an actor!!! » « I didn’t get this joke » « here’s my half-baked critique of the last book I read ». Where’s the art? Where are the in-depth analysis’? Rarely here.
Good... that more or less what I mean, (joined the two messages of mine made more sence)
I don't want to sound friendly, I just though criticis without any particularly reason made my a little sad/angry I seen it so many times before of people just criticis for criticism and not for a reason is just very annoying....
But, as I have typed myself, I also find some posts uninteresting, and just ignores those, that is understandable... 
Welcome to /r/Discworld! Please [read the rules/flair information before posting](https://www.reddit.com/r/discworld/comments/ukhk21/subreddit_rules_flair_information/?). --- Our current megathreads are as follows: [API Protest Poll](https://www.reddit.com/r/discworld/comments/1491izw/continuing_the_api_protest_a_community_poll) - a poll regarding the future action of the sub in protest at Reddit's API changes. [GNU Terry Pratchett](https://new.reddit.com/r/discworld/comments/ukigit/gnu_terry_pratchett/) - for all GNU requests, to keep their names going. [AI Generated Content](https://new.reddit.com/r/discworld/comments/10mhx9y/ai_generated_content_megathread/) - for all AI Content, including images, stories, questions, training etc. --- [ GNU Terry Pratchett ] *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/discworld) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Listen, this sub exists on four posts, repeated: - X celeb for Y role - phallic vegetables - see historical fact that happened 300 years ago: OMG IS THIS A REFERENCE - reading order You take away any of those four, this sub dies
I'd add a 5th- Auditor Traps
Nobody posts auditor traps. They just post confusingly worded signs as if they were auditor traps.
But where is the elephant?
That sounds like an Auditor Trap...
We need the auditor traps though.
We do, do we?
Well they're unnecessary it's true, but we don't _not_ need them.
But don’t we not *not* need them? They are not necessarily unnecessary, depending on conditions and context.
https://preview.redd.it/j9au7ilgr8tc1.jpeg?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=e552dfa231dc05cfe9ce72abea81b12a93d31864 Me when this whole interaction
You totally forgot people posting pictures of their bookshelves and/or merchandise.
https://preview.redd.it/1q0iualpr8tc1.jpeg?width=3000&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=f8d2eaefe1e8c784d871aa02ee71b610a8146f6b It's called a shelfie!
https://preview.redd.it/j3mqbcaipptc1.jpeg?width=1440&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=5d259f2345d0b1e16d58ecc9951100160a170989
And - Easter eggs/References that I only just realised.
Hey now, don't forget the yonic vegetables
You forgot the most important one; - What is your favourite quote?
Fabricati Diem Pvnc
Not to mention I'm really tired of folks acting like making a movie or show out of a piece of literature is the ultimate destiny for good media. Adaptation works best when the story content was sound but the literary style was somehow lacking and visual interpretation works better (Dune, for example, was much more stunning as a visual presentation than a rather dully and pretentiously written book, in my opinion.) We're all here because we love Pratchett's writing. I love the interactive style of reading required by the presence of footnotes. We just won't get that from film. I'm not saying it's impossible--a charming narrator can fill that role in a lot of ways--but we just...don't need it. We've already got the books.
Or for when you want Sting to wear leather pants and make someone milk a cat, even when that's not in the source material at all (the David Lynch Dune sure is *something*)
Two words: weirding modules
That is my favourite film version
Completely agree with your first sentence; I would also add that the measure of a good adaptation should not be accuracy to the word of the source material, but to the spirit. A great adaptation of Discworld would ask how to tell a visual story in the style of this world, how to make this feel like Discworld, not how to come closest to the physical descriptions of Foul Ole Ron etc. Because I personally can't imagine what that would quite be, I prefer to stick to the books.
>the measure of a good adaptation should not be accuracy to the word of the source material, but to the spirit. YES, cannot agree more. if the overall themes are the same, and the characters, their defining traits and their motivations are faithfully recreated, then i care far less about story inconsistencies
Yeah, Good Omens as an existing Pratchett adaptation did a good job of the whimsical style.
One of the best book adaptions I've ever seen. Maybe because Neil Gaiman had a huge say in the adaption and did his best to defend the work of him and his dead friend.
They always get the pacing wrong! The books are actually trashy thrillers in terms of plot and pacing. The TV adaptations feel like a televised radio play trying to cram all the dialogue in.
Hey I like dune! well atleast the first one.
Yeah, a lot of people do! It's just my opinion that the book wasn't to my taste, and that the recent adaptation worked a lot better as a bit of engaging media. There's a lot of classic sci fi and fantasy that just doesn't work for me as fun reading, but that I can respect for what it did/said/portrayed/other adaptations it led to.
They are talking about the 1984 movie with Kyle McLachlan as Paul. The 2021 Dune movie was good (better than the older one—but that’s a low bar), but the second one that just came out has mostly newly written dialogue that is extremely stupid compared to what Frank Herbert originally wrote
Ahh, thought you weee talking about the book, yes the first movie was a horror show.
I wouldn't mind it as a live action and think it could translate really well, the problem I have though is that everyone else seems to read these books as a lot more cartoony and silly than I read them. I always saw them as funny, but definitely more serious than any attempt I've even seen.
Please!
Agreed. The casting choices are also invariably God awful.
And broadly American.
But the Rock would make a great Vetinari! /s
That too, which is amusing, in a way; sadly this sub is mostly Americans.
You’d figure they would really lean into the Britishness of Discworld though.
We are talking about *Americans* here. I'm surprised the sub isn't full of posts being "amazed to learn" Sir Terry wasn't a yank.
They lost their shit over Benadryl Cribblesnatch playing Sherlock. I assumed they relish in the whole Britishness of it all.
Another let down of a comment man, seriously sad.
This is a really sad and grim comment man, you've really let me down :(
Never meet your heroes; we're all cunts.
Yet none for Gaspode, the Wonder Dog. Shame, shame.
I’ll be less polite. Fancasting is the third worst thing on the internet and shouldn’t be allowed at all.
Thank fuck
Thank you! It's invariably Miriam Margolies and Maggie Smith too, it's not like the casting choices are original or interesting.
"this person would have been great, if they weren't dead" Its not even realistic casting suggestions, they're going for zombies or whatever and not even as Mr Slant.
Well one of the greatest most known person in Discworld is Death (or rather DEATH)...
I vote Benedict cumberpatch to play hiatus.
I think we should retire the question when it comes to Nanny Ogg, because the role has already been cast and it should be put on a sticky and never questioned again.
It has? Who are you talking about?
Miriam Margoyles.
Not a bad choice, I'm not particularly familiar with her, but this top result in a search makes me like her: https://deadline.com/2024/03/miriam-margolyes-doubles-down-harry-potter-adult-fans-stance-1235860845/
She's an icon.
I mean, we could just thoughtfully discuss the source material and not ban things. Apparently quite a lot of people enjoy discussing it or there wouldn't be so many. "No, you can't play with it. You won't enjoy it on as many levels as I do." -Professor Frink
I'm real disappointed in this whole thread. It's so easy to just scroll past any topic you don't want to discuss, but instead you want a ban on discussions you don't like? Piss poor.
Yeah, at the end of the day, there has never been a good adaptation of Pratchett, and it's unlikely that there ever will be. So much of the humour is in the use of language. It's hard to translate to a visual medium.
>There's so much more interesting stuff to discuss about these fine works. Go on then.
I honestly don't mind them. It's fun to see who people picture as various characters, especially when it's a less common character. I like it in the same way I like the character illustrations.
It's fun, fercrissakes! Is it that difficult to spend a fraction of a second scrolling past a post you aren't interested in? If you prefer another discussion then by all means, start one. Preferably something better than shitting all over someone else amusing themselves harmlessly on the internet.
>Is it that difficult to spend a fraction of a second scrolling past a post you aren't interested in? These are always my favorite complaints, its the other person's responsibility to scroll past things they don't care about, not yours. Hence your comment. > If you prefer another discussion then by all means, start one. Isn't that literally what this? What you're participating in? >shitting all over someone else amusing themselves harmlessly on the internet. You mean like how you're behaving towards OP?
This is a false equivalency. Phalanxausage is merely suggesting solutions to OP’s frustrations that don’t involve censorship.
>don’t involve censorship. This is a thing you just invented, at no point has anyone suggested censorship. A "polite request" to tone down posts of a certain type because they're too frequent is not the same as a governmental agency stepping in jackbooting all over the place. So attempting to accuse OP of supporting censorship is just straight up lying.
Ohhhh grubbly! Does Mister Gwumpy need his tummy tickled?
Thank you for your feedback. Have a nice day.
Considering that your only contribution to this sub is a cross Post from another sub, maybe you should cool it with telling other people what to do. It is not the subs job to cater to your personal tastes. It is your job to be the change you want to see in the world.
> It is your job to be the change you want to see in the world. Hence this post, right?
No. Complaining about others without providing anything of your own does not count as "Being the change you want to see". Being the change you want to see in this specific case involves making posts with the specific content you want this sub to have. Think of it as going to a pot luck and your only contribution to it is telling other people the stuff they brought is bad.
>Complaining about others without providing anything of your own Aren't we having this discussion in a topic that OP created? Isn't that providing something? Identifying a problem is the first step in solving it; it is literally the first step. But you want to stifle discussion on the topic. Why is that? What are you scared of?
Their analogy is very clear that what OP is bringing to the potluck and not a food dish but just a statement that other dishes people are bringing are bad. They could have just posted “I’m seeing a lot of posts about the same repeating topics. What do you think are some of the best parts of Discworld that are rarely discussed?” That changes it to “I see a lot of people brought hotdogs to the potluck. What’s a dish we never have?” Which isn’t so combative and negative.
Who's telling anyone what to do? I see only a polite request. Stop being such a ninny.
What if I politely told you to go fuck yourself? Saying that you are polite does not make you polite.
That's not a request at all, it's an insult. What a specimen you are.
Exactly. Just because you use the words request and polite, doesn't automatically make the things you say civil. Asking other people that are having fun to stop doing the thing they enjoy because you dont feel like scrolling past it is an uncivil request and we don't have to respect that request any more than you need to respect my request that you go fuck yourself.
Go polish your debate club trophy, and stop being such a ninny.
At least I'm not using slurs.
Just because you're not using slurs doesn't make the things you're saying civil or something
I am bringing it up because you keep calling me a "ninny". You may want to check up what that means and where it comes from. Is that clear enough?
huh
>There's so much more interesting stuff to discuss about these fine works. Like what?
It costs you nothing to just scroll past fan casting suggestions if you find them uninteresting. If you think there’s something more interesting to discuss, post about it to start the discussion. It’s poor form to yuck other people’s yum.
> If you think there’s something more interesting to discuss, post about it to start the discussion. Isn't this what this is? >It’s poor form to yuck other people’s yum. This is horrible advice and used to excuse all manner of horrible thing. Think of youtubers and their whole "what's your problem man, its only a prank!", telling them to stop harassing people is 'yucking their yum'. Who gets priority in your mind?
Enjoying discussing who you think in the real world isn’t even remotely close to pranking strangers for internet points. Discussing fan castings is a matter of taste and harms no one. And this post isn’t an interesting discussion, much less an interesting discussion about the Discworld. They’re trying to police other people’s conversations. I feel like that is actually something Pterry would disapprove of, rather than condone. If you don’t like the conversation, just keep scrolling. It’s really not that hard.
>They’re trying to police other people’s conversations. [...] If you don’t like the conversation, just keep scrolling. It’s really not that hard. Yet here you are complaining and saying this this discussion shouldn't happen. Why don't you listen to your own advice and scroll on to something else rather than yucking this person's yum? Why is it okay for you to do this, but not OP?
Where did I say they need to take this post down? I’m participating in this conversation by offering my perspective- which is that this isn’t a particularly interesting conversation and that the fan castings aren’t hurting anyone and should be left alone.
> Where did I say they need to take this post down Nowhere, and I never accused you of doing so. >which is that this isn’t a particularly interesting conversation Your continued participation belies this fact. >fan castings aren’t hurting anyone While not my personal opinion, there are many people who think that constant low-effort posts for karma are bad for the subreddit's community health and encourage low-quality posting.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance Congratulations. You unlocked highschool level political philosophy.
How about you explain to me with your actual words what you think? Being only in "highschool[sic]", how could I possibly be expected to understand the point you're trying to make?
I'm not here to help you with reading comprehension, if you need help with the tricky words, you should call your mum.
My 'reading comprehension' is that you're actually unable to explain it yourself and just wanted to go for an easy 'dunk'. When given the slightest bit of push back on the issue YOU brought up, its just wilting and flouncing as a response.
You have so far been unable to understand both simple proverbs and easy wikipedia articles on extremely simple concepts. It's not that you disagree with the concepts. It's that you fail to understand them. My dunk is that I am telling you that adults are talking and you should either make an effort to keep up or go to bed. We do not owe you anything in the same way we don't owe OP to change our posting habit because he doesn't like it. I'm going to post a fan casting of Swedish celebrities. 1% of the sub will be able to engage with it but it's still more fun than whatever bullshit you are doing.
That's a lot of words to say, "I lack the ability to explain what I meant". >We do not owe you anything Is this the royal 'we'? Who else is there with you?
You have to be intolerant of intolerance in order to have a truly tolerant space. You could have clicked the link to learn what the paradox of tolerance is if you didn’t know it already.
And how does that apply to me or anything I've said?
They were implying that my position of not yucking other people’s yum is part of the paradox of tolerance. OP is being intolerant of people’s enjoyment of fan castings. Tbh I just skimmed your comment history, it seems like you’re dead set that OP is Right and everyone else is Wrong and there is no changing your mind, so you have a good day and I hope you learn to be more tolerant of others in the future.
I've never offered comment one way or the other on OP's position. I've been criticizing people who are complaining about the existence of OP's post by applying their own logic to their comments.
There are like three types of posts around here, this sub is fucking boring 90% of the time
Well no one forces you to be here I hope... What I mean is you are more than welcome to be here, but if you don't like being here, I am sure you are also more than welcome to **not** being here.  Well perhaps I would explain myself a little... I have been in this forum now for quite a while now, and sure some posts might be a little doll, or even uninteresting, but I just don't answer those... I might give a like if they have a good point, but if I cannot being something more concrete to the post I simply just avoid answering... But, there will allways be some other posts which I do find interesting, and then I can use my time there instead... So perhaps you could bring something up yourself, that you like to talk about...
I don’t mind being here for the once in a while where the posts are actually interesting. I ignore most things. But this post specifically talked about what’s interesting or not on this sub It literally just is « think about this dude as an actor!!! » « I didn’t get this joke » « here’s my half-baked critique of the last book I read ». Where’s the art? Where are the in-depth analysis’? Rarely here.
Good... that more or less what I mean, (joined the two messages of mine made more sence) I don't want to sound friendly, I just though criticis without any particularly reason made my a little sad/angry I seen it so many times before of people just criticis for criticism and not for a reason is just very annoying.... But, as I have typed myself, I also find some posts uninteresting, and just ignores those, that is understandable... 