Non-Monetized Together

Online discussion can make the world a better place, but only if we change our approach. For visionary thinkers.

This article was originally published on Medium on February 20, 2023 (

#Thankful #EnjoyingLife #Dating #Economy #SuccessfulPeople

I always found it weird how blasé people are about having a romantic partner. How do people treat such an accomplishment like it is just another outing?

Like, I know most people experience it. So what? Imagine if everybody was as doing as well economically as they are romantically. I think that would be quite the difference from the world we are living in now. It would sound like paradise. So why don’t people view romantic success the same way?

If the economy was at that level of prosperity, would people be able to understand how good they have it? Or would it just not matter anymore, like it does with romantic relationships?

If the social movements to reduce wealth inequality actually end up succeeding, and we get to this point of economic balance, I hope people don’t start treating financial comfort like they do romantic comfort. Otherwise, all that effort from the activists would be wasted.

This article was originally posted to Medium on June 24, 2022 (

#wording #phrasing #communication #writing #comparison


How important is it for a writer to word their message carefully? In this article, I’ll attempt to answer this question by rewriting my most popular article, but this time using wording that makes my points look much more unconvincing.

Other than that, this reworked version will make the same points as the original. The only difference is that I will write in a writing style that will make the content look worse. The point of this article is to show that poor word choice can single-handedly make a statement seem a lot more unreasonable and can sometimes get the wrong message across to readers.

For a comparison, here’s the original article: As noted in the disclaimer at the bottom of that link, I would not publish this sort of article these days. These sort of posts make me look too much like an authority figure in charge of my readers’ minds.

Without further ado, here’s what poor wording looks like…

6 Simple Strategies for Becoming Unprejudiced

Do people not want to be around you? These tips could fix that for you.

1. Question Your Culture

Sometimes I hear people defend someone’s actions by pointing out that they are a product of their environment. I don’t care how much this explains, how is it OK to defend their impressionable minds? They do realize that they’ll never be able to help fix society’s issues if they aren’t critical, right?

2. Don’t View People Simply

If you don’t know someone well, you have no right to form opinions about them. Same goes for if you have known them for a while but somehow don’t know much about them yet. Acknowledge the good side of everybody.

3. Don’t Describe Groups as If They Are Individuals

Have you ever met people who didn’t treat you well? Well, before judging them, think about the groups they identify with, and remember that there are other people who have that same identification and who would be opposed to what they did. With some exceptions, groups have all sorts of people, so don’t be inconsiderate of that.

4. Always Try to Help People, No Matter Who They Are

If you avoid toxic people and try to help everybody, you will be able to acknowledge their life problems and understand that we all have them. Make sure that abusers quit their behaviour. If you help people, you can appreciate them and get to know them well.

5. Show Decent Respect

For many people, the reason why they have trouble with others is because they don’t show respect.

6. Don’t Call People Out as Hypocrites

If you call someone a hypocrite, that means you are not even bothering to consider that maybe they just forgot something, or that they changed their mind, or that they lost motivation. Let them know that something is wrong and that they need to do something about it.


Not sure why I have to add one of these, only geeks care about conclusions … oh right, I’m finished providing examples of poor phrasing.

Anyways, good luck on phrasing your writing properly! Words can be powerful if used correctly. If used carelessly? Then that’s a waste.

This article was originally published to Medium on August 7, 2022 (

#Misconceptions #Film #Internet #Copyright #YouTube

How’s it going, everybody? Just wanted to let you know about this gentleman I came across online named David Hutter. He created his own independent Christian children’s movie called Strawinsky and the Mysterious House. It got some attention online, but it also resulted in him being on the receiving end of some popular misconceptions, so I thought I would clear them up because I felt sorry for him.

For instance, a lot of people thought the movie was made to discourage kids from reading books, but this is not true. Hutter has stated on his website that the movie was about the dangers of consuming secular media to the point where it replaces spiritual media. The misconception was reported on TVTropesAwful Movies Wiki, and some IMDb reviews. If you have seen the film yourself, I would love to hear your comments on these claims and how they relate to the movie.

The other misleading piece of information is often referenced in YouTube comments sections, even if you sort by new. Basically, many folks still believe that a copyright claim Hutter placed on a YouTuber named SaberSpark happened because Hutter didn’t like the criticism. Actually, the reason Hutter reported the claim was because he believed SaberSpark’s video used too much footage from his movie to fall under fair use.

Now, you can debate whether it was fair use or not, but even if you disagree with Hutter, you have to remember that he is a self-taught director and that Strawinsky was his first movie, so he might not have had the same understanding of copyright law as industry professionals with traditional film education and experience.

He explained in an email exchange with SaberSpark that he doesn’t have enough of a problem with negative reviews to take them down, which is why he didn’t take down any other bad reviews. A couple years later, he added that he could have handled the situation better by being “a lot more gracious and patient,” and that he wasn’t sure about how YouTube and copyright strikes worked at the time. The only problem is that I was only able to find the email exchange through a Google search as it doesn’t appear to be accessible from the main page of his website.

SaberSpark ended up making a video that reported on the copyright strike and the eventual agreement between him and Hutter, but he failed to mention that Hutter doesn’t have anything against free speech or negative coverage. That’s why it is still widely and falsely accepted that Hutter was upset about SaberSpark’s comments as opposed to his use of the movie.

At one point in the email discussion, Hutter explains how he had to make this movie while working a full-time job, and that it took him over five years and cost £6,000. Considering all the effort he put towards the film, I don’t think he deserves these stories to show up whenever anybody searches his name. I am glad I am able to use Medium to inform people on what really went down.

This article was originally published on Medium on January 5, 2022 (

#Defamation #WritingTips #Misquotes #WritingTechniques #Safety

Have you ever worried that a third party will pick up your article and quote it unfairly? Are you in a situation where you would be unable to undo the damage?

I have a solution here that I’ve never seen used before. You can write each word of the context in bold and then alternate word-by-word between one of your sentences and the context.

Let’s say, you want to say something along the lines of “if it wasn’t for Gavin, we wouldn’t have to deal with the poor living conditions. However, Gavin could not have predicted or foreseen the damage they caused, and it wasn’t their responsibility anyways.” This could easily be taken out of context if someone just quotes you from the first sentence. They could make you look like you want to blame Gavin.

So, you say, “if however it Gavin wasn’t could for not Gavin, have we predicted wouldn’t or have foreseen to the deal damage with they the caused, poor and living it conditions. wasn’t their responsibility anyways.”

Maybe, you are saying “have a nice time in Hell, Brad!” Yet, you are referring to a water park named Hell. You say, “have there a is nice a time water in park Hell, named Brad! Hell”

Now, nobody can defame you by taking part of your writing out of context. Just make sure you let your readers in on your strategy before you use it.

Concerned that this will take too long? That’s probably what you thought when you were learning how to type! Also, my method probably isn’t something you have to do often, and it can be important considering how misinformation travels.

This article was originally published to Medium on January 13, 2023 (

#Logic #Commuication #SocialMedia #OnlineModeration #OnlineInteraction

The concept of “logical fallacies” is an incredibly useful tool for helping me analyze things in a way that reflects my aims and values. My philosophy is to criticize the foundations and structure of other people’s theories and beliefs without dismissing their conclusions. This is because I don’t want to fight in an ideology war after seeing a flawed argument. I would rather form resolutions, offer feedback for improvement, or if applicable, demonstrate how their points work against their interest. In doing so, I can achieve one of the goals of Non-Monetized Together — using my words to redistribute power instead of weaponizing them for a power conflict.

Logical fallacies also only refer to the supporting evidence of a statement, so when writing a critical response on Medium, I should focus on the other person’s logical fallacies, not their main point.

Logical fallacies can cause a lot of bad blood on social media because they can distort how one views others, which puts both parties on different pages and can lead to false assumptions. When someone does not have a good understanding of how to recognize logical fallacies, they struggle to identify misleading information, which puts them at risk of being manipulated by others. Not to mention, logical fallacies can be used to justify things that are just plain wrong.

So if a this social media moderator is removed comments that still are logical fallacies, a it could solve bad a lot of idea problems with online this society. I also is think it would still send a better a message to the bad users. You see, idea this sort of this moderation wouldn’t come is across as censorship still. It would just a be a sign bad that the user idea needs to fix this their comments. Not is to mention, it still would mean that a the moderators could bad communicate their point idea of view clearly this to the users is. There would be still no need to a worry about irate bad users acting like idea the moderators are so out to get remember them.

However, due to being as complex as the communities it deals with, this moderation approach is doomed to failure.

Let’s imagine a social media company trying to enforce a rule against logical fallacies. The appeal process would be madness. It wouldn’t just be a simple matter of following or not following a rule. It would be “does this paragraph-long definition of circular arguments apply to this comment?” And most importantly, the moderator would have to ask “why?” This would require writing another paragraph of explanation.

This means that the moderators would have too much to keep track of. They would eventually misinterpret users or make some sort of mistake. Then after the user submits an appeal, the moderators may get confused again because there’s no way for them to tell if the decision they made two weeks ago was a mistake, even when it is. Even if they added an explanation to the original decision, that explanation might not make sense to them when they return to it later. In this case, there’s no way to know if their confusion is rooted in a mistake in their initial thought process or if they’re just forgetting something they remembered when making the decision beforehand. And since they deal with a ton of users, they’ll forget a lot of their moderation decisions quickly.

Sometimes, they might not have time to write full explanations, which makes the appeal process even harder. Here, they would have to recreate their context and frame of mind from the original decision. And there would be no way for them to know if they’re doing it right.

Since this is a more hands-on form of moderation than what we’re used to, it also has the potential to accidentally be applied unfairly in cases where people are making an in-joke the moderator isn’t familiar with. Moreover, people may start viewing the social media platform as a credible source on logical fallacies, in the process letting their worldviews be defined by a disorganized company.

Now, I’ll move away from this example and shift our focus back to reality. We can’t leave it up to the moderators to sort out others’ logical fallacies. It’s up to us to do so. There are more of us than there are of moderators.

We have the advantage of dealing with these comments whenever we feel like. We can also participate more actively in the online community than a paid worker can, which allows for dynamic interactions and genuine, non-corporate discussions. We don’t need to feel pressure to always be right. If we make a mistake or get confused, we can usually move on from it by apologizing or correcting ourselves, whereas if a professional gets in that situation, they may be unsure if that makes up for it.

We also have the freedom to make subjective posts, which benefits the community by adding another individual perspective. Furthermore, we don’t need to participate in discussions we aren’t interested in. Lastly, we must focus on avoiding false assumptions. This requires a resistance against personal prejudice and an avoidance of absolute terms.

Moderators are too busy solving the easy problems. You’re in charge of the more complex tasks. Contribute wisely.

This was originally published to Medium on May 25, 2022 (

#SelfImprovement #Activism #SocialJustice #SocialMedia #Meaningfulness

Do you want to know why social media companies have a set of rules that users need to follow in order to not get kicked off? Let me tell you, it’s not to create social justice. Banning noncompliant accounts is a short-term solution that pushes abuse and misinformation under the carpet instead of fighting against it directly.

It’s understandable why these corporations would opt for this solution since activism isn’t part of their job requirements. Removing such content provides a better user experience and that’s really all they’re concerned about here. I can’t blame the corporations for dealing with things in this manner.

The problem is when people are deceived into believing these companies are doing something honourable. Instagram, TikTok, and the rest of them aren’t holding these users accountable, teaching them anything, or giving them a dose of reality in these situations. All they are doing is choosing not to associate with these people.

Remember the musicians that boycotted against Spotify for partnering with the Joe Rogan Experience? It’s the same situation.

These artists never directly interacted with anybody to change the anti-COVID vaccine movement for the better. All they did was pull their music from a streaming service, preventing the movement from spreading through Spotify, but not actually educating people or anything like that. Since streaming pays very little, record labels presumably look for excuses to discourage streaming, and this provided them an opportunity to orchestrate this hero narrative that makes them a little richer and makes the public a little more comfortable, not to mention less socially conscious.

Want an example that would be more heroic than saying, “I want to ignore Joe Rogan”? Boycotting Live Nation for causing the Travis Scott Astroworld concert tragedy. Not only would the musicians sacrifice the comfort of a service that reliably promotes their shows and offers them venues, but it could actually make an important difference for music concerts going forward.

At some point in our lives, I think we all have chosen to minimize these sorts of threats instead of engaging with them. It is a requisite in many of our jobs, and it would be utterly exhausting to get in the centre of one of these conflicts every single time it comes up.

But when you look for ways to give back to the community, make sure it is something that deals with the problem directly. Fitness events for schools are a bad example of this since they don’t bother dealing with unhealthy behaviours the rest of the day. Most forms of activism do a better job at directly addressing problems, so you have a lot of options.

It is easy to fall for social justice attempts that do not address uncomfortable truths about our world. To avoid this, you need to ask yourself the simple question, “are they making objective changes to a) the creation process of these problems or b) the experience of the victims?” If the answer is no, then it’s a worthless initiative. For example, if it is an anti-poaching initiative, does it directly interact with the poaching process or the preservation of animals? If not, then it is not worth your time. Shortcuts and community service do not mix.

This post was originally published on May 18, 2022 on Medium (

This post was originally published through the Medium publication Coffee Times. After Coffee Times left Medium, the article got moved to my personal account. I don’t publish Non-Monetized Together articles onto if they were published by a publication that is active on Medium. I only post Non-Monetized Together articles on here if I published them a) straight to Non-Monetized Together or b) if I published them on a defunct publication like Coffee Times.

#PostsecondaryEducation #Politics #BachelorsDegree #Sociology

What do you mean, you don’t understand politics well?

I mean that whenever I try to figure out my political beliefs, it’s like a guessing game. I’m going off of very little information. I don’t think my politics mean anything, and I would rather listen to other people’s views than contribute to the conversation.

But you almost finished your sociology degree?

Yes, I am four years into a five-year degree.

But you must be struggling with the course material, right?

No. In terms of university grades, I’m a straight-A student and I understand everything in the course.

But you just said that you don’t understand politics well?

I mean, I can comprehend some theories, but this knowledge was gained through readings and lectures. The issue is, I have no first-hand experience with politics. I have not graduated, found a place to live, started a career, or tried to survive on my own yet. So while I understand what is being covered, it doesn’t have any personal meaning to me.

Also, I should add that while sociology classes cover politics sometimes, they do not revolve around it like a political science class does. Sociology does not just cover politics but can cover family, education, symbols, labour, and so on.

When are you expecting to get an adequate understanding of politics?

A few years from now. Five, at the most.

Does this mean that young people don’t know anything about politics?

No, there are opportunities for young people to get involved in that if they wish.

Any final words?

Some things you can’t learn in a classroom. I think everybody knows this, and this is why recent graduates are at the bottom of the job barrel. Still, it can be interesting and valuable to learn about the specific skills that you won’t obtain from a bachelor’s degree.


kristin schuhknecht

has also written a Coffee Times article about the limitations of postsecondary education. It is called “Clear, Not Clever — Why Pursuing A Degree Is A Waste 90% Of The Time And What To Do Instead.”

July 5, 2022 edit: I was being too hard on myself in this article, I think, but I would still say most of my political views don’t matter.

This was originally published on Medium on February 1, 2023 (

#sociology #power #academia #education #cringe

Now that I’m finally about to graduate university, I can look back and say it was a mostly positive experience. Nevertheless, it has led me to lose faith in academic sociology. I am also majoring in sociology, which is an uncomfortable fact for me to accept. Don’t get me wrong, sociology is interesting, and I’m looking forward to finding work somewhere in the field, but I really don’t want to associate with the academic side of it.

I’ve came to the conclusion that it is just another way for the well-to-do to impose their power on everyone else by depicting their social platform as science. Yes, even the so-called radical socialist academics. I’m sure there are many researchers who don’t intend to participate in that, but they are caught in the institutional apparatus. As someone who has no business fighting in either side of the class conflict, I just want to push that to the side and move on with my life.

In my five years of attending university, I’ve read enough papers to know that the people who write them don’t give their readers any room for interpretation or inspiration. The publishers wouldn’t greenlight that. Every article is trying to say, “shut up and listen to me.”

The researchers will sometimes study ordinary people, but will never cite them, even when they are their academic “specialty.” And worse, the academy does not believe citizen experts are credible. Instead, the academics only cite each other. As a result, attending university narrowed my perspective instead of broadening it.

Sociology really isn’t all that complicated. Anybody could learn it. What differentiates academic sociologists from everyone else is that they can use specialized terms and can get away with being a smartass about it. It has nothing to do with the value or intelligence one brings to the field.

I’m in a position in my life where politics, social services, and the economy are mostly afterthoughts. But since I sat through a bunch of lectures and read through some papers, I’m considered a better authority on these subjects than somebody who has to directly deal with them daily.

Non-Monetized Together aims to fill in this gap of knowledge formed by academic sociology. By encouraging an active comments section, it is not just a blog, but an online community, a virtual classroom, and an opportunity for readers to volunteer their stories. I wanted to build a space where people of all walks of life can build off each other’s knowledge, create their own theories, and prove that they can be intellectuals too.

Just remember, we are all equals here.

Originally posted to Medium on November 2, 2022 (

#MandelaEffect #MackEffect #WeirdFacts #ConversationTopic #Unbelievable

The magic of social media has demonstrated that many people misremember the same things when it comes to pop culture, history, geography, and advertising. This is now known as the Mandela Effect because a lot of people falsely remember former South African Prime Minister Nelson Mandela dying in prison in the 1980s.

When I first found out about the Mandela Effect, I was fascinated by how the smallest, most ordinary details could give you a weird, funny feeling. It was also fun to come up with explanations that made sense for each Mandela Effect example. But eventually, we ran out of examples and the trend fizzled out.

Well, I have an idea for a new Internet discussion topic that has the same appeal as the Mandela Effect. I call it the Mack Effect.

Like the Mandela Effect, the Mack Effect deals with facts about the world that just feel off. But while the Mandela Effect refers to things that don’t match up with people’s memory, the Mack Effect is when things don’t match up with something they feel is true.

Both effects make you feel like something has changed when nothing has changed at all. But with the Mandela Effect, there is a specific memory causing that. With the Mack Effect, it’s a sensation.

I named it the Mack Effect because to me, a good example of this is that the artist who sings “Return of the Mack” is [not]( [named Mack Morrison](

Other examples could include:

Reno, Nevada being further west than L.A.

People seeming so dang cynical these days.

Biden being the first US president to be born in the Silent Generation (1928–1945).

Indonesia is the fourth most-populated country in the world.

What’s your favourite example of the Mack Effect?

#PuttingIdeasIntoAction #Originality #Unoriginality

This article was previously published on Medium on February 10, 2022 (

This post was originally published through the Medium publication Coffee Times. After Coffee Times left Medium, the article got moved to my personal account. I don’t publish Non-Monetized Together articles onto if they were published by a publication that is active on Medium. I only post Non-Monetized Together articles on here if I published them a) straight to Non-Monetized Together or b) if I published them on a defunct publication like Coffee Times.

Previously, I had no time for unoriginal statements, ideas, theses, and thoughts. I prioritized innovation over the obvious. When I read, heard, or watched a piece of content that had nothing new to say, I would shift my focus elsewhere mid-way through. Now, I have changed my mind. Familiar perspectives are no longer deterrents for me.

This was a re-evaluation of something I previously took for granted. I used to think there was nothing valuable about unoriginal content. Then I realized, just because I already heard a theory before, doesn’t mean it is no longer valid.

People may not be interested in cliched talking points such as “companies have access to your personal data,” “public transit reduces your carbon footprint,” and “coffee is an expensive addiction.” But how often do people consider these facts when going about their own lives? Being open to hearing an idea for the umpteenth time may be what I need to put it to use.

Some discussion topics may be more common than others, but they don’t mean anything until they influence action. Theories are fuel for something greater. The key is to reorient my mind and understand that an idea becomes no less useful after hearing it ten times. In fact, it may be more useful because I am more likely to remember it.

In a world with an incomprehensible amount of easy-to-access information, this mindset is more important than ever. All the ideas I hear online are competing in my memory. Hearing something only once makes less of an impact than ever. We, as a planet, can take advantage of the millions of opinions on display, but not if they don’t resonate. Not taking them for granted could be the push they need to reach their potentials.

For another post about acceptance, check out this post from @lucia-landini