this post was submitted on 23 May 2025
869 points (99.4% liked)
196
17627 readers
679 users here now
Be sure to follow the rule before you head out.
Rule: You must post before you leave.
Other rules
Behavior rules:
- No bigotry (transphobia, racism, etc…)
- No genocide denial
- No support for authoritarian behaviour (incl. Tankies)
- No namecalling
- Accounts from lemmygrad.ml, threads.net, or hexbear.net are held to higher standards
- Other things seen as cleary bad
Posting rules:
- No AI generated content (DALL-E etc…)
- No advertisements
- No gore / violence
- Mutual aid posts are not allowed
NSFW: NSFW content is permitted but it must be tagged and have content warnings. Anything that doesn't adhere to this will be removed. Content warnings should be added like: [penis], [explicit description of sex]. Non-sexualized breasts of any gender are not considered inappropriate and therefore do not need to be blurred/tagged.
If you have any questions, feel free to contact us on our matrix channel or email.
Other 196's:
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I think you're fundamentally missing my point. Litter exists. Someone cleaned it. When you respond by criticizing it, you're just making it sound like you'd rather them leave the litter where it is. I am 100% aware plastics are a problem. You don't need to share sources. I told you I was on the same page with regards to that.
I think we can all agree
littering << not recycling < recycling << reducing plastic usage
and all the first message is a strongly worded reminder of the last two relations, it is not meant to claim recycling ~ littering or recycling<littering.
Why would I criticise someone picking litter from the streets, that does not make any sense. It is a parallel thread on the topic of recycling. Take this message as a correction to the first message if you will.