Can confirm - am poop knife.

Thanks!:-)

Are you implying that the credit is here? If so, where? I am not seeing it.

You are talking about user-level blocking, whereas iirc defederation is an instance-level blocking that also stops user comments too, as well as votes.

The “election” is perpetual. People will vote with their participation.

As it should always be.

Why is “Threats” in double-quotes? The fact that they are “threats” is not in question - these are not “alleged threats”?

I see that it comes from the article, but that only pushes back my question as to why the article does that. It also puts “hard right” and “all-out” (and “holy war” and “race war” and “dangerous” and “evil” and “demonic” etc.) in quotes too, which should not be, but those at least are all more discretionary, whereas putting “threats” in quotes like that calls into question their validity.

He can love his son and also democracy and justice too - i.e. allow his son to go to what will surely be like a resort vacation spa that they will call “prison” (not bc he’s special, just bc he’s rich).

Seems fishy

Not anymore…

I wonder where they went?

Someone writing a wall of text when it is not asked for or appreciated may be being insensitive to their audience. On the other hand, I’ve literally had people ask for it and then someone else steps in to complain, so definitely there are Karens who feel entitled to whinge no matter what you do. Just settle in your own mind whether you are doing the right thing, and let being correct remain your guide as to what to do.

Counterpoint: this is from the NYT so… ofc that’s what they’d say, especially resulting from their own polling audience.

Ironically, blue shirt here is showing that off in reverse: refusing to do due diligence, simply ghosting red shirt with no explanation whatsoever, against the explicit advice of green shirt. Anyone who ghosts may even be doing other people a favor to warn them to stay away from their own toxicity.

Irl caveats may apply ofc - e.g. definitely get far away from an abusive relationship and if need be enter witness protection type of scenarios, but here we are talking more casual circumstances.

I am not the person you replied to but I wanted to echo and extend their statement: you may need to come to terms with the fact that you might not have the capability to help your friend, and it’s even possible that nobody does, unless and until they become receptive to that kind of aid.

I am not saying to do nothing, but do be aware of that, e.g. if you give them money and they gamble it away, will you just keep giving them money until neither of you has any at all? And then repeat for every single one of your friends as well?

Decide what you can do and what you cannot. In any case you may not be able to “save” him - that is something that as an adult he needs to do for himself, and may resent you for even trying?

You are fortunate that it takes “only” 30 minutes.

It is to their advantage to be act surprised, therefore they are “surprised”, see? This was your “opportunity” to show how dedicated you are the company, having worked all weekend long…

Is this the new “Honey Badger Don’t Care” meme?

Y-y-yeah that’s it, t-t-that’s why he’s crying alright. I mean, I’m he’s not crying, shut up! /s :-P