I struggled with the nuance of some of these questions like the last one about global military power… lol
Sep 19, 2024
Related Recs
I would disagree with this i'm very much not moderate haha. the scope of the questions on this one is too narrow, I feel like my political compass one is a better representation. both are reductive by nature tho.
Sep 19, 2024
Sorry lol, and absolutely no shade. I can say I’m obviously generally somewhere in the bottom left quadrant (as is pretty much everyone I follow on here). But I’d like to make the point that this compass does a couple of unfortunate things:
1. Flattens what may be someone’s wide-ranging spectrum of principles/values. This is an issue with these kinds of things when surveying large populations to get an average, but in this case it’s also sticky when an individual has values that don’t comfortably conform to the binaries presented.
2. Accepts and presents the deeply-ingrained false binaries of left v. right and libertarian v. authoritarian as political fact.
3. Encourages, overtly or otherwise, people to define their political views oppositonally. Maybe I’ll get into this in a big rec, but this is the core problem with all of our systems!
Variations of this can be helpful though – ones that are designed to help you figure out how you align with candidates/parties in a specific election, for example. This works a bit better in countries with multi-party systems though, so uh…
Anyway, please carry on as you were!
Jul 31, 2024
Top Recs from @taterhole
My dad teases me about how when I was a little kid, my favorite thing to do when I was on the landline phone with somebody—be it a relative or one of my best friends—was to breathlessly describe the things that were in my bedroom so that they could have a mental picture of everything I loved and chose to surround myself with, and where I sat at that moment in time. Perfectly Imperfect reminds me of that so thanks for always listening and for sharing with me too 💌
Feb 23, 2025
May 28, 2025
🖐
I’ve been thinking about how much of social media is centered around curating our self-image. When selfies first became popular, they were dismissed as vain and vapid—a critique often rooted in misogyny—but now, the way we craft our online selves feels more like creating monuments.
We try to signal our individuality, hoping to be seen and understood, but ironically, I think this widens the gap between how others perceive us and who we really are. Instead of fostering connection, it can invite projection and misinterpretation—preconceived notions, prefab labels, and stereotypes. Worse, individuality has become branded and commodified, reducing our identities to products for others to consume.
On most platforms, validation often comes from how well you can curate and present your image—selfies, aesthetic branding, and lifestyle content tend to dominate. High engagement is tied to visibility, not necessarily depth or substance. But I think spaces like PI.FYI show that there’s another way: where connection is built on shared ideas, tastes, and interests rather than surface-level content. It’s refreshing to be part of a community that values thoughts over optics.
By sharing so few images of myself, I’ve found that it gives others room to focus on my ideas and voice. When I do share an image, it feels intentional—something that contributes to the story I want to tell rather than defining it. Sharing less allows me to express who I am beyond appearance.
For women, especially, sharing less can be a radical act in a world where the default is to objectify ourselves. It resists the pressure to center appearance, focusing instead on what truly matters: our thoughts, voices, and authenticity. I’ve posted a handful of pictures of myself in 2,500 posts because I care more about showing who I am than how I look.
In trying to be seen, are we making it harder for others to truly know us? It’s a question worth considering.
Dec 27, 2024