I first encountered Sandra Ann Shaw in 2018 in a Walgreens when she stuffed a bag of M&Ms into her pants and walked out. I was in awe of her brilliant financial strategy of not paying for things! I’ve followed her financial wisdom ever since and without her I wouldn’t be where I am today (prison)
Can’t speak on Chicago but Madison has a lot of very active residents. There are a lot of popular bike paths, parks, and walking trails throughout it. They also have UW and Epic and are small enough for that they have a meaningful influence in making the population skew younger. So it makes sense that its population would generally be healthier than other cities’. There is a lot more alcoholism though.
C’mon, he probably is leaving important details out, but “if people treat him badly, he must deserve it” is hardly fair.
The government is allowed to suppress your constitutional rights in cases where it’s narrowly tailored to a legitimate government interest (the strict scrutiny standard). This may seem suspect, but it allows the government to do things like prevent people from bringing guns into schools or planes, or spreading private information or harmful lies about others, or being overtly loud when their neighbors are trying to sleep. It does require a high burden of proof from the potential violating body, so it’s not done casually.
For red flag laws, I imagine temporarily seizing the guns of someone who a judge is convinced is a significant danger to themselves or others would meet this standard. From what the other commenter said, it sounds like it isn’t done casually in practice. We are missing parts of the story that may make it seem prudent.
PJ does this a lot. The original post article was claiming that SA was being used as a ‘genocidal strategy’, which is an extremely bold claim and would need to show not only evidence of SA happening, but a coordinated and premeditated intent in order to drive Israelis from Israel.
No, the article stated “Israeli legal and gender experts” are claiming something like that, as reflected in the title. It also mentions “Hamas has denied its forces committed sexual violence against women or mistreated female hostages.” The article is reporting on the claim, the evidence used to support it, and the limited amount the UN has actually been able to verify. It distinctly doesn’t confirm it, because as you pointed out the burden of proof is high and doing so would be very irresponsible when it cannot be substantiated. PJ meanwhile doesn’t claim anything more than the article does, at least in their post. In fact, it looks like the entire post including the title is directly lifted from the article.
The pull-quotes PJ is pointing to are acknowledging instances of SA - and really only acknowledging what little evidence beyond first-person accounting there is - but explicitly not ‘systemic and coordinated’ SA.
Agreed, neither article proves the Israeli claim. The UN report does disprove the Hamas claim that none of their forces are committing sexual violence, but it does not prove that it is systemic as the Israeli group asserts. That is an important distinction. I haven’t seen PJ actually claim that it was systemic but they could be implying it by seemingly trying to use that quote as a contradiction to OP saying that it’s an Israeli lie.
OP was pointing this out, even in his replies with PJ that he linked. PJ was ignoring the distinction and trying to bait a stronger reaction, and ended up banning OP as a result.
It’s true that PJ didn’t acknowledge the distinction. They may not have realized that was the source of the pushback. But regardless, I still don’t think that’s enough to say the ban was retaliatory. Mass-downvoting a community’s posts is reason enough to ban someone from it. It’s essentially brigading and even one user can be pretty disruptive with small communities. That’s why I wanted to know if OP had been acting in a way that qualifies for a legitimate ban or not.
PJ has been on a tear the last few days, and was clearly not in a place to be acting as a mod. He’s been starting fights and baiting people all week and deserves some mandatory time off.
I don’t follow Lemmy politics enough to remember much of PJ’s history other than that they are a big enough contributor to be a familiar name and that they were involved in some drama with 196. If they’re going through something recently that’s making them lash out, then I hope it gets better soon. They didn’t seem particularly irritable from this interaction though.
Yeah the door face is where the buttons and floor indicator are typically. Plus, other people might join the elevator before you get to your floor. Assuming you would rather be facing them then showing them your back it makes sense to turn around right away.
There are some social conformity experiments on youtube about getting people to face the “wrong” way though.
PugJesus is apparently banned from this instance, so they are unable to defend themselves on this thread. They did talk about it in this comment chain for context.
Allegedly OP downvoted several posts from the community in question after having their comment removed and PugJesus banned them from that particular community in response. PugJesus pointed out that if it was an emotional overreaction to the comment, they could have just as easily mass-banned OP from the other communities they moderate instead of just that one. And while it’s not relevant to this judgement, it does seem like OP’s source citation agrees with PugJesus’s “western propaganda” that there is evidence of sexual assault, but not enough to call it systematic.
So I guess a few questions for OP:
Did you downvote posts from that community?
If so, how many? And do you not consider that participation?
If not, can you think of a reason why PugJesus banned you from just that specific community?
And for clarification around the removed comment, it’s not clear what you were calling lies/western propaganda. Did you mean just the BBC article that PugJesus linked, or also the NBC article cited by your source, or the central UN report discussed by them?
Also, let me know if I got something wrong about the chain of events leading up to this. It’s tricky to jump between a bunch of links and keep it straight.
5 million years, because bread tastes better than key
21 Every living thing that moved on land perished—birds, livestock, wild animals, all the creatures that swarm over the earth, and all mankind. 22 Everything on dry land that had the breath of life in its nostrils died. 23 Every living thing on the face of the earth was wiped out; people and animals and the creatures that move along the ground and the birds were wiped from the earth. Only Noah was left, and those with him in the ark.
Oh, it’s Sunshine again. Just going to copy another comment I’ve made about her last time I saw she was involved in some drama.
Sunshine has a history of power tripping, and is able to avoid attention for it by using alts. As Beaver, they put the lemmy.world vegan community in trouble with admins over that vegan cat food drama, then later banned respected members of the community for “downvoting vegan comments”. They were ostensibly de-modded when another mod spoke up, but if memory serves they actually still had their Sunshine alt on the mod list months later.
Someone else provided some more context here, but it seems that post was deleted. Or at least I can’t access it anymore.
While trying to search for that post I saw that more recently, the admin of VeganTheoryClub accused her of harassing them across multiple accounts until they abandoned their account and closed their instance.
So anyway, I go with PTB by default. But I would say in cases where the original ban was legitimate, using an alt for ban evasion would itself be a bannable offense in my eyes.
In case you were wondering:
The Yellowstone Volcano Observatory monitors volcanic activity and does not consider an eruption imminent.
Interestingly, the buildup of magma causes the plateau to be uplifted by about 1 in. per year on average, which is one of the ways we monitor it. NASA studied how we could go about preventing an imminent eruption by cooling the magma, but another scientist said we could accidentally trigger it by trying. We may have to wait for something else for our next extinction event though. Yellowstone going off again soon would be a bit ahead of schedule.
Most of the other articles were just fleetingly topical to a conversation or book or something. Cymothoa exigua is interesting though. It’s a fish parasite that severs the tongue of its host and effectively replaces it. I think I looked at it from another thread where people were posting their favorite deep sea animals.
It’s annoying that people are downvoting you just for asking an honest question. I think the anti-ai sentiment is strong enough that in many communities, people just oppose it in any context. The arguments I usually see against using ai are:
All are real concerns, but I agree that making memes should be an effectively harmless use of it even if you otherwise oppose it. 1 and 3 aren’t really applicable to your average meme. 2 could apply depending on how you measure it, but most of the cost of ai is from training, not generation. For someone using the tool and not developing it, that training is a sunk cost they are not responsible for. I’ve seen estimates that you can generate about 9 images with the energy it takes to fully charge a phone. I think that’s more than worth it if you share it with a few other people to enjoy.
Also 101% of the population is a Democrat or a Republican.
As bad as things are, most Americans are not living paycheck to paycheck. It looks like that 60% figure comes from a single survey from an online banking company in 2023. The Fed reports the majority of US adults have had at least 3 months of emergency savings every year since 2018.
my ducks barn owl chicks? in a row. ordered. disciplined. behaving predictably.
your ducks kestrel chicks? scattered. in disarray. waddling aimlessly. desperate for a leader to impose structure.
pathetic.
Yeah they are $3.85 (before tax) for a pack of 4 from the Aldi near me. And they taste good too. Of course they are going to be more expensive at a restaurant, but that’s true for nearly everything.
I’m always surprised to hear people unimpressed with others on dating apps. A couple of my friends have shared their “feeds” and I was struck by how many good-looking people are out there. But they would swipe away from just the smallest turn-offs becoming deal breakers. Like if I saw these people in real life, I would think of them as average looking at worst, many being remarkably attractive. This is in the 20s to mid 30s range like the tweet. I definitely understand deciding you’re incompatible based on politics or religion or culture but most of the time it would be for minor quirks. It felt like they were spoiled for choice in my eyes.
But then again, they’re in serious long term relationships with conventionally attractive and supportive partners now so maybe being picky pays off. At the time, their reluctance to settle was a very frustrating experience for them.
In America, literally 99% of livestock is factory farmed. Here, the idea of animals living a life that is anything but miserable on a farm is largely a myth. If you don’t expressly know how the livestock animal that was used for meat was treated, you can safely presume it was tortured.
People are demonstrably ok with animals being mistreated. They continually endorse the abuse in the industry when there are other options available to them. It is simply not important enough to people for them to bother changing their behavior.
From the Wikipedia page, emphasis mine:
Intuitively, it makes sense the police would not be able to search someone’s home for guns without a judge’s permission. It would be hard to say that there was a compelling emergency just from going through things that someone had said or things that had been said about them.
I didn’t see a federal supreme court case that ruled on red flag laws specifically, but it sounded like there were some state supreme court rulings that found them unconstitutional. So it is at least contentious whether they meet the strict scrutiny standard or not.