I vote for this to become official.
I think it started with people saying "I would like to (do something very illegal) to (some person) in Minecraft." Thinking that saying "in Minecraft" would shield them from any repercussions because they only wanted to do it in a simulated environment. Eventually some people would just shorten it to things like "...in Minecraft" and leave the obvious part unsaid.
But at least that's an option. There is no non-spez instance of reddit, non-musk instance of twitter, or non-zuck instance of meta-stuff to jump to.
I took both of the other respondents suggestions. It only took a few minutes to get approved at both and now I can see Car Talk With Martok again.
I didn't even know that the admin of my instance banning someone would prevent me from seeing posts made in another instance.
That shit kills me. I was reading something on hexbear about some recent anti-gay stuff in Russia. It was all about critical support, and not just Russia. They also talked about critical support for Nigeria, despite them having the death penalty for gay people, because they're "anti-imperialist."
Why doesn't it go the other way? Why can't you give "critical support" to countries making strides in human rights while criticizing their economic policy?
To me, their priorities seem pretty fucked up. Between exploitative economic policy and killing or imprisoning people for existing as themselves, I know which one I'm going to be "critical" of and which one will cause me to refuse support for a country in any way.
I was disappointed when this happened but now I'm glad I can't find it anymore. I had become lazy, just putting it on everything. Now I have a variety of sauces I choose based on what I'm putting it on. There are a lot of good sauces out there. With proper pairing you might not miss Sriracha at all.
The thing I love about this, the thing I always find funny whenever this comes up, is that these midwits are just too dumb to make the obvious argument. The argument that is "in their face" and "being shoved down their throats."
There is a rational, coherent argument to make their point. It's one I disagree with. It's one that, in my opinion, can only be made in bad faith with no purpose other than to be a concern troll, but it's there.
They always bring up Adira, Gray, Jett, Stamets, Culber, and anything else that's gone up their ass but never any of the actual social commentary because they're so thick it went over their heads and they didn't even notice it. You can see it in this thread. They mention the characters and people respond with "but they're just existing, how does that bother you?" They just bring up the characters again to a response of "yeah, we heard you the first time, what are they doing that bothers you other than existing?" And it just goes in a circle.
There was never an episode of ToS where Uhura talked about how hard it was to be a black woman as a bridge officer, because it wasn't. That's the whole point. In the future Star Trek wants us to imagine, a black female officer is completely unremarkable. Whenever they wanted to engage in social commentary about race relations in the 60s they had to invent an allegorical race, time travel, or use some other device to make their point.
The same thing is happening in the newer series. All those characters are just existing. Their sexuality and gender identity is completely unremarkable in the future Star Trek shows us. If those dipshits had two brain cells to rub together they would see the new series are full of allegories about not just tolerance, or even acceptance, but appreciation for beings with non-conforming expressions of self. If any of that did manage to trickle through their thick skulls they probably just twisted it into "yeah, people shouldn't make fun of me for having a relationship with a waifu pillow."
If they weren't so stupid they could easily give a half dozen examples and say "it's too much," "I got it the first time," "focus on something else for a change," or whatever other bullshit justification they came up with to oppose these themes. It would be a bad faith argument that I would disagree with but at least they could pretend they're not bigots, instead of their current position which seems to be "I've got no problem with these people, I just don't want to see them."
If you want to know how bad we're being fucked, search for the PPI, the producer price index. CPI, the one we always hear about, is the measure of inflation to us, the consumer. The PPI is the measure of inflation to producers, what they pay for goods and services to produce the goods and services we buy.
The PPI has been back to "normal" for a while now. Pretty much as soon as the post COVID logistics issues were mostly ironed out. The difference between PPI and CPI changes is pure profit.
We don't get daily articles on the PPI though, I wonder why.
Edit: tell people about PPI whenever you can, online or off, the more people know, the better. It's easy enough to say inflation is just down to greed but being able to back it up by comparing two simple charts will help people really understand.
The footprints of chargers and gas stations aren't the same though. A lot of places I go have a row of 8-10 spots with chargers. No added footprint really, just installed at the front of the spot. Compare that to an 8-10 pump gas station, even without a convenience store. If you removed a gas station and replaced it with rows of spaces with chargers I think you'd get more cars through over a given period of time.
The heritage foundation has a plan. Why come up with your own when someone has already done the work for you?