I can’t find any info on it elsewhere. I don’t have an Instagram account so I can’t check out the organisers’ feeds for any reports.

Good to hear!

(That said, always remember to check of independents before voting. A few of them are recent Coalition/Labor party members who left over a certain issue, some are just as bad. Luckily I’ve seen more good than bad ones)

At some point you have to leave the past in the past and build a more equitable world for all, today.

Yep.

Unfortunately, some people confuse equity with “just treat everyone the same, I don’t need to do anything about the things my ancestors stole”. That leaving the past in the past means ignoring its continuing impacts. As long as systematic disadvantage from stolen land and oppression is ongoing, it’s not the past - it’s the present.

While unwritten, I have been relaxed when it comes to Aussie users posting these particularly notable examples and there haven’t been any complaints from locals. As long as they don’t flood the place like they did before.

Telling lefties to write “FREE GAZA” on their ballots instead of voting would have a much higher barrier to uptake than telling them not to vote

I would be interested to know if there are groups more vulnerable to this, and how to reach them. I naïvely hope that people who care about the ongoing genocide or even just progressivism in general would have learned that there are pro-Palestine parties and independents on most ballots.

For what it’s worth, dont fall into any resignation that we mirror the US. Yes, we do in far too many ways, but take Clive Palmer as a simple counter example. Dutton doesnt have the (for lack of the correct word) presense and charisma of Trump either.

Furthermore, parties outside of the Coalition and Labor are on a sharp rise. We don’t have the US FPTP system where the only viable choices of president are (frankly) another two bad candidates, evidenced by the lower US voter turnout for both parties. Here, the crossbench is a real option, growing year on year.

My point being, our material and legal circumstances are different. Education can actually make enough of a difference to at least move forward, even if it’s another shit Labor reign.

Yeah, you’ve gotten the idea.

I haven’t tested, but I believe it’s also a pathway to allow us to use our Lemmy accounts to leave comments on PeerTube videos, to up/downvote them and to subscribe, on ways that make sense to us as Lemmy users and which make sense to the PeerTube users seeing our comments on their videos.

What’s the point of blaming dead generations? That doesn’t achieve anything for society. Guilt doesn’t fix things.

If my dad stole your car five years ago and I inherited it, I wasn’t involved at all, but you still had your car stolen. Would it be fine for me to say “I’m not a thief, you should blame my dad” and keep driving it around?

Of course, a car is a trivial example. Seizing entire communities’ land, kidnapping and massacring them, for starters, is obviously a bit harder to forget about after a few generations, because the consequences still impact people today.

Sometimes it’s not even about denial of what happened, but rather a mindset that the past doesn’t affect the present anymore.

I often-enough hear people saying things along the line of, well, past generations took the land but society is better and less racist now, we collectively apologised, and my family weren’t even here at the time, so we have no obligation to do anything now. Almost like if my dad stole your car ten years ago, died after, and I say well I’ve never stolen anything in my life, it was my dad’s car, this car is mine, stop complaining about the past. It doesn’t make sense to start acting like equal treatment is fair after so much is stolen and so little is given back. But I know people who believe morality is that own individual behaviour, whether they are doing hurtful acts, and disregard their own position in society, how they got there and who suffered to allow that to happen.

Guilt isn’t what people are asking for, guilt actually doesn’t do anything useful, but rather we need people to realise that it doesn’t matter that we personally didn’t commit massacres and seize land, because the consequences of those acts still disadvantage current generations of the victims, and it’s not resolved if we dismiss the consequences as someone else’s sins.

My guess (I don’t know for sure) is that Mastodon is interpreting all posts in “/c/perth” as a thread with #perth added to it, and for example, all the /c/asklemmy’s will be seen by them as #asklemmy (regardless of which instance’s /c/asklemmy it is). So if they follow #perth, they’d get all our /c/perth posts.

I haven’t looked into inter-format federation much but as we’ve seen, it can get funky. Consider this (pseudo-)community: https://aussie.zone/c/[email protected]

It’s really Lemmy reading this PeerTube video channel as a community, so we can basically subscribe to and comment on a video channel from here!

Thanks, luckily there are also a few in Aus too, including https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_Council_of_Australia who have been important in providing a voice to mainstream media which isn’t just a Zionist mouthpiece.

pretty arrogant if you ask me.

Consider our perspective: we’re on https://aussie.zone/ (a Lemmy site) making normal posts to https://aussie.zone/c/perth .

aus.social has decided to federate this community and interpret this post as a Mastodon post that you’re seeing. We didn’t choose for that to happen, most of us didn’t even know that was happening, and for us, it’s not nice to see someone coming over and blaming us for what Mastodon has done and threatening to mute or block us.

Your concern is real and valid, but we’re not the ones causing it and we can’t fix it. It’s a Mastodon problem.

Rare /r/sydney win:

[Mod reply]

Yeah, I knew this one was coming - x.com has been on the blacklist since December 2023. We’re not taking it off.

Zionists pretend to speak on behalf of all Jews, but never have [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Zionism#Early_Jewish_anti-Zionism] and certainly don’t now - all the Palestinian rallies I’ve seen have a notable contingent of anti-Zionist Jews protesting alongside them. For an extreme example, you can find plenty of cases of Orthodox Jews burning flags of the Zionist State even decades before this conflict.

It’s important not to confuse the Zionist Regime with the Jewish peoples of the world, just as one doesn’t conflate neo-Nazis with all Europeans. Both the Zionist movement and anti-semites (esp. Nazis) intentionally try to push this false narrative for their own separatist goals, and it’s important we recognise and counter it.

That article is worth a post of its own for awareness, I reckon. That’s not trivial.

T-intersection

Good point, and you’re right. That statement I made was not well thought through.

example 2

I agree that two lanes become one centre lane (and it’s possible that I interpreted the last photo example wrong with the photo quality).

What would you think if a car on the centre lane put their left indicator on? Personally, I would assume they want to enter that side road or a driveway. That’s my reasoning for why I don’t believe an indication would be appropriate.

I think neither is obliged to indicate here, they’re both continuing fully in the direction of their lanes. The lane changes, and just as you don’t indicate in the T intersection example when the lane curves left, you wouldn’t need to indicate as the lanes blend (rather than one merging into the other, which to be honest, doesn’t benefit from an indication either).

So in your interpretation, when two lanes merge, whether or not indicating is required would depend on the precise configuration of the lanes?

Yep. It also lines up with my general interpretation of indicators themselves, that they’re a way of saying ‘I want to begin moving in this direction, instead of straight’.

In your example picture, I see that as the centre lane remaining and the left lane gradually merging into it, just like the OP image but longer.

In that scenario, would only the left, neither, or both be required to indicate, in your opinion?

My interpretation of law: Left only must indicate.

My opinion: it’s obvious that the left has to merge in, they ideally shouldn’t even have to indicate, but if a driver in the centre lane is tired and oblivious then they might not realise that and get caught unaware so just indicate anyway to be safe. Middle should not indicate, because that makes it seem as if they want to turn off into a side road or driveway (if one exists) or over on the shoulder.

The majority of the world has always been in a bad mood because 90% of planet has always been poor, struggling, doesn’t have enough, live in poverty, are hungry and are generally not happy.

On one hand, there is absolutely harsh struggle around the world for the vast majority of the world.

On the other hand, it’s not as if most people are never in a good mood. Australia’s state broadcaster (ABC) had a show where people in small or disadvantaged groups answer anonymous questions, and when it came to Sudanese Australian refugees, a few were saying that life in Sudan was often happier despite their material struggles. IIRC a main part was that they had a collective culture, in some places outside of the cities even a communal village culture, and where good fortune was cause for celebration. Some contrasted that with our largely individualist, money-centric culture here.

All that to say, money doesn’t buy happiness, poverty doesn’t guarantee sadness. Money and other resources really really help, but it’s far from the whole picture.

Which clause there would compel the bike to indicate?

2 d) / 3 d) are “entering a marked lane, or line of traffic, to the left/right” but this line is directly ahead of the bike.

How would the bike indicate in this scenario? With a left indication while not changing direction or lane? I would interpret that signal as them wanting to leave the road on the left side after the merge and indicating it impatiently.