Yes. I agree.

I wish! You‘re amazing.

Why am I not surprised that you of all people would educate us today?! :)) thanks for this awesome example.

Thanks for answering.

Just to clarify: I don’t think the DSM-V is wrong and I think it is an excellent source.

But if the DSM-V says that „…can’t be diagnosed while autism…“ does sound like the adhd/autism thing and this is what I think gets people worked up.

That also may be the reason why someone said you treat it like the „bible“ which is a metaphor for using it too strictly as in „the dsm-v has been wrong before and only represents todays knowledge and could be changed tomorrow. Dont use it as sole reference“.

And as I said as well, you did reference the minimum timespan which is afaik not the way autistics experience this kind of thing. So they really only don’t like the „you cant say selective mutism because dsmv says not autism“ thing.

Sorry for repeating the same thing but I wanted to get the angle right to reduce misunderstandings. I hope I did a decent job.

This is wild. I‘m happy I don’t come in contact with this. I would definitely ruin myself due to repeated and persistent noncompliance.

I appreciate that you took the time. The long duration of the disturbance is certainly something autistic people (usually) don’t experience.

But the fact that it is cited in the dsm-v does not mean it is true. A couple years back you could not have adhd and autism at the same time it was either or.

Thanks again and a have a good one.

Ok, got it. Thats neat.

I‘m not sure I understand what you mean. If I wanted to move a section I would cut and paste it. What alternative don’t I know about?

I use nextcloud notes. They are .md and work wonderfully imo. You can either edit them through nc or through the editor on linux (or vs code on windows). Tried obsidian, never got into it and its not open source.

Donezo! :)

You are absolutely correct. Well, the first step would be that you and I (and maybe pp?) make a community on lemmy searching for exactly these people (to organize) and educate the rest. What do you say?

Its people being people I guess. They’re all weird. Some good weird, some bad weird. Thank you for taking the time to critique the article so I don’t need to read it. :)

This is insanely important information! Thank you! I was asking myself the exact same thing as op and I even made a couple groups myself just to see them fail. Your account was most helpful. Thank you.

I begin to really like you! Probably the first person I have ever heard say that except myself. The open source community is pretty much the first one that is 100% stakeholder value (the people who use it, make it, more or less).

I figure that should be the same everywhere. No single figure that bankrolls a bunch of people and gets filthy rich while they barely get by.

I agree. What do you think would help?

I have heard of a law or precedent that put CEOs under the reign of the shareholders instead of the company, customer and society.

Do you happen to know what legislation did that change? Maybe that needs to be overturned.

Edit: I found at least the term. It is called shareholder primacy.

The groundbreaking finding is that it is in fact not ok go blame the victim. /s

It is obvious for those without ingrained ableism (who therefore dont blame people for being unable to fight against companies that employ psychologists)

tRy fAcEbOoK sTyLe!

In this case, we might slightly misunderstand eachother but seem to be mostly on the same page.

I still dont think the majority governs themselves well because we would be happily living in anarchy then.

Yes, that is correct. People „should“. As they „should drive more carefully“, „smoke less“, „eat healthy“, „consume thoughtfully“ and so on.

We both know this is why we have the rule of law. People are not and will never be fully self governing as long as we have the system we do. We are much too stressed to make the right decisions every time. We used to be able to drive without a seatbelt on, to take cocaine whenever we wanted. Didn’t work very well. It’s simple psychology. Some of us govern themselves mostly well, others dont. That doesn’t mean they can be held responsible for their inability to do so. They need to helped with measures to keep harm away.

so none of the bystanders should help them either

I don’t understand this. Telling someone to vote with their wallet is not helping. The equivalent would be that a victim was „told“ to defend themselves. I am saying we shouldn’t put the responsibility on the victim but the aggressor.

just like with most things in life

That I can agree to. Taking action is hard. But I would say that it is easy to broadly judge „most people“ while this very article says that in the case of social media, the boomers‘ blame for example seems to be ill aligned. Not the people are to blame but the mechanics.