The argument being made is a rather poor one. In the example given, the waiter walked 10 feet to you, I would agree that you shouldn’t have to tip.

I’m ambivalent on tipping culture, if we can institute a fair minimum wage then I’m fine with getting rid of it, if not then shut up and tip. All that said, the things we tip for has gotten way out of hand. Tipping used to be 15% for good service while some people were giving 20% because prices had remained low. Now with food prices increased businesses and wait staff are encouraging 20-25% and tipping options are being added everywhere.

My rule of thumb now is 20% for standard wait service (taking my order, bringing my meal, refilling beverages, and cleaning the table afterwards). If any of those elements isn’t being fulfilled then I do not give a percentage, though if someone is going around filling drinks I’ll probably leave a dollar or two. I also don’t give a percentage tip for drinks that don’t come with free refills, instead I will calculate the 20% tip without those beverages (typically alcohol) and then leave $1 per drink.

And then he’ll either walk away glad he dodged a bullet or slip drugs into her drink and probably not face any real consequences. People don’t seem to understand how the Rogan/Musk/Tate loving Trump supports think. Just a reminder, a higher percentage of women voted for Trump in this election than last so I don’t think the political right is going to be significantly impacted by this.

It’s kinda hard to call that a threat. It’s more accurate to say it’s an accusation that the guy is a terrorist.

Personally I think that small talk is also regional. Some places small talk might be discouraged at a store while other places it might be encouraged. The same might be for the subway, a restaurant, the bathroom, etc, depending on the country or culture it may be totally ok or exceptionally discouraged.

I’m not convinced that the people posting these aren’t propaganda accounts anyways. The account was made in May of this year, has only 4 posts which are all about Israel, and the way they are phrasing their responses sounds like a foreigner. This could be a college kid that protested at school or it could be a 35 year old man in Istanbul for all I know.

Wouldn’t it be much better if no-one gets hanged or genocided?

Wouldn’t it be much better if we lived in a world where asking “Wouldn’t it be much better” magically made complicated and unrealistic things happen. You didn’t even bother to write a decent response, you just jumped straight into a whataboutism.

Nope, the thread they were responding is this one (https://lemmy.one/comment/13175909) which is about the two parties (specifically whether higher turnout would benefit one party or the other). Someone else replied saying that it’s about the system being broken (itself a strawman). This guy made an attack on the person, but was still focused on the two party system. Then you made a strawman as well.

It’s not really a strawman argument, it’s closer to an ad hominem. In fact, the argument you are making is closer to a strawman.

“A straw man fallacy is the informal fallacy of refuting an argument different from the one actually under discussion, while not recognizing or acknowledging the distinction.” -Wikipedia

Saying that “if you can’t tell the difference between the two parties is a you problem” is attacking the person not the issue. Saying that the difference between the two parties isn’t the problem (when that’s what is being argued) and instead it’s the system is by definition a strawman. Using the strawman to make the discussion about the futility of voting in a flawed system just goes to show how much of a strawman it is.