Edit: The admins have told me if I don’t say this was an accident then they will remove the post.
It’s is verifiably an accident. It is also extremely convenient for the people she threatened.
Edit: The admins have told me if I don’t say this was an accident then they will remove the post.
It’s is verifiably an accident. It is also extremely convenient for the people she threatened.
I didn’t use the word because I was trying to bypass filters. I like the word.
Plusgood, comrade, BB would be proud of you keeping your prolefeed clean of crimethink.
I’m literally saying the Russians had a reason to kill this woman and could have done so, but OK comrade.
I wasn’t commenting on that, just your advertising-algorithm-authorized Newspeak
No shit.
So why bring it up as a response?
Why not? Why do you feel compelled to apply peer pressure to make sure other users’ language conforms to that which you approve? Who can say.
Edit: perhaps I’m just going about this all wrong. Let me ask you: are you trying to help me? Do you think my life would be improved if I used the word “assassinate” in this context instead of “unalived?” Or is it just that it grates on your nerves so much to see people use terms that are commonly used to get around filters that you feel obliged to correct me so I won’t do it in the future, materially improving your life? Because this issue seems to be really important to you and I’d like this conversation to end amicably. Maybe you can convince me why it’s in my best interest to not use this word and words like it.
It grates on my nerves because it’s a capitulation to capitalist censorship. The only reason “unalive” started gaining prominence is because YouTube and tiktok find mentions of death and killing distasteful and will demonetize and hide videos and channels that use those words. It just bothers me how sanitized online discourse is getting and “unalive” is a particularly childish version of that. A woman died, potentially by assassination, and you chose a cutesy weasel word to describe it, that rubbed me the wrong way.
Well, you’ve made an assumption and I get it now, but it’s wrong.
Aside from Lemmy and Reddit, and mostly Lemmy these days, I’m not on any social media at all. I’ve never been on TikTok. I quit Facebook a year after I joined it - horrified by what it was doing - in 2007. I’ve never been on Twitter, I’ve never been on Twitch or Instagram, I’ve never been on any site where I had to avoid a filter, ever. In my life. Before reddit it was something awful and before that usenet. I’m fucking old.
So I didn’t use the word because I am capitulating to capitalist censorship. I used the word here - and iirc I have used it in the past - as what I thought was simply a wry euphemism implying state-sponsored spycraft/murder. I consider the word assassination to be too “bottom-up” of a term - citizens assassinate presidents, not the other way around. Murder is too generic, murder is what criminals do or people do in crimes of passion. So I used “unalived” because I’m talking about a state actor doing something to a citizen.
I did not know that it carried any other meaning, nor that it came to prominence from circumventing censorship algorithms. I would have had no way to know.
Edit: I would never use some goofy shit like “seggs” for “sex” ffs, so I do see people here and on reddit who are in the habit of circumventing filters - but there’s nothing about “unalived” that screamed anything other than “wry euphemism” to me.