1) Be nice and; have fun
Doxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, and toxicity are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them
2) All posts must end with a '?'
This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?
3) No spam
Please do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.
4) NSFW is okay, within reason
Just remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either [email protected] or [email protected].
NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].
5) This is not a support community.
It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions.
If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email [email protected]. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.
6) No US Politics.
Please don't post about current US Politics. If you need to do this, try [email protected] or [email protected]
Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.
Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu
I have seen a lot of tesla vandalism online the last few days and I'm kind of on the fence about it.
I've seen several examples locally here in BC, Canada.
I think totally warranted at newly purchased teslas going forward. Also it serves as a deterrent for potential future buyers.
But vandalizing a car that is a few years old I think is lame. Those driversare already being punished enough by driving something around that's worth less than scrap.
It is literally vandalism. I didn't write the law. Lol
What law? Where? Has it ever been successfully enforced?
It is not. Writing "wash me" is not vandalism. This is not vandalism. Outside of the courtroom, reality is more important than a legal definition.
Moreover, legal definitions are irrelevant to whether an act is moral. Your fixation on this point in the face of so many people highlighting that no harm has been done again suggests you're not arguing in good faith.