Our sensitivity to bitter tastes is proportional to the food's temperature. This is why hot coffee tastes more bitter than warm coffee.
Similarly, why salads taste better when cold. I LOVE cold cucumbers. They taste WAAAAY different than shitty room temp cucumbers.
That being said, food prepared to be consumed hot is definitely something I'd prefer over room temp/cold. The "hotness" of the food itself adds to the experience which I enjoy.
Separation of art from the artist is relevant when the artist isn't getting royalties from the IP. Promotions like these earn that bitch a lot of money.
Whenever you spend money on Harry Potter merch, or anything related to the IP, that horrible horrible piece of shit earns money.
Assuming you have a non zero amount of care for humans, the right thing to do is to avoid any and all financial contribution to the IP.
I absolutely do not work at Tims. But if I did (which I don't), I would be squeezing every goddamn harry potter donut/timbit before serving. I'd be horribly preparing any given Harry Potter item.
I mean, Tim Hortons does ALL of that regardless, but I don't (if I worked at Tim's which I don't). However, if you support this Harry Potter bullshit despite that Rowling bitch's prowling transphobia, then fuck you too.
Please boycott Tim Hortons (at least till this transphobic nonsense passes).
The manager should have Molotov cocktails smashed in their face. /s
The "/s" is there only because it would end up killing them or end up causing irreversible damage. If the above was not the case, then yeah, fuck them.
While modlogs leave a paper trail, they make investigation easier. However, few have the time necessary to routinely check the logs, right?
Removal of a mod and a mod leaving on their own are very different things. Removing a mod is a drastic action. There has to be declarative transparency regarding this instead of people randomly happening upon this piece of information sometime in the future.
Also, a removed mod could be bitter. If they hit first with accusations, then things get complicated.
A moderator holds quite a lot of power. Which is why sadly, power hungry people tend to want to become moderators.
A way to ensure that power isn't being misused is by being extremely transparent. This is the 196 mod team being transparent. I like it.
Does it stir up some drama? Maybe. Is this outcome more preferable over the Tesseract case, where "moderation action" wasn't being made aware to the the user? 100%.
Proportional representation is a bad idea, and in every case where it's been examined on a provincial level when the voters take a long hard look they walk away from it
Won't present the case for PR, as I don't think I can make a better case than the ones already presented by other people. Don't have the energy for it.
I know this isn't a provincial poll as you stated, but still. Also, if other important bills can pass without majority support of the electorate, why not PR? If we agree that the current FPTP system is fair, then why can't reform passed through the same system be considered "fair"?
Would be better for sure to look at the reasons why you want it
I don't to be forced to vote strategically.
I don't want to be totally unrepresented in parliament and my LA.
I don't want a government that DOES NOT have majority support of the electorate passing laws as if it has majority support.
And you had a coalition between the liberals and NDP for 4 years, and that didn't help.
True, sadly. It is also true that the NDP wasn't that strong, and the Liberals weren't that weak.
A precondition for this is a weak liberals, where an annoying snap election ends up drawing votes to the CPC or the NDP from the Liberals. If it's the other way round, where NDP votes go to the libs, then electoral reform ain't happening.
there's been nothing to stop someone in the future from going back to first past the post
Not true. It is very very difficult for a single party to get a total majority in PR. No junior coalition partner would be stupid to roll back to FPTP.
Once PR happens, it would be very very difficult to get it rolled back.
The first time, the majority voted FOR it. The BC Liberals however, set an arbitrary threshold of 60%. Also, in both of these cases STV was specified instead of the simpler and more representative MMPR. The second time, it was STV again. The third time, there wasn't any specification from what I understand.
That being said, there is no moral obligation for PR to be passed through a referendum. PR empowers voters in ridings that sway heavily towards one side. Right now, these voters have absolutely no representation. This isn't "representative" democracy.
If a government can form and make policies without majority support of the electorate, it can also pass electoral reform. Why do we need a referendum for it? Do we have referendums for all controversial policies?
"But a following government can easily roll back PR".
Not really, no. Unless a really really massive wave comes in, PR almost always guarantees no single party majority. No small party would be stupid enough to accept the roll back of PR.
Unfortunately, the implementation of PR is full of misinformation, people not understanding why it is better, and pet desires rather than a desire to improve the status quo.
True. But my question is, do we truly need the people to "understand"? If we do, then we ought to have direct democratic practices for other important bills too (like budgets) like they do in Switzerland. Selective direct democracy for electoral reform, while abusing structural loopholes to pass bills without majority support is hypocritical, is it not. I'm directing this at the BC NDP btw, not you.
Isn't it a voter block that DOES come out to vote usually, but isn't doing so this time, and the only thing that a given political party has to do is to promise and deliver reform to get them to come out?
A given political party would want to maximise turnout of its own members, yes? But if say, a subset of members says, "hey, we won't come out to vote unless you make this promise", that's holding the party by its balls, isn't it?
Usually, getting people out to vote takes a lot of effort. Canvassing, repeated adverts and so on. BUT, if a simple inclusion in the manifesto is going to increase turnout by even a percentage point, then well... that's not so insignificant for the party to just ignore.
Really? For some reason, I really prefer DDG's results over Google's. Too much SEO spam for Google now (especially with AI).
DDG has this Reddit+ stack overflow thing that I quite like!
For generic factual stuff, I default to wikipedia. For opinions, it tends to be Reddit/Lemmy. If I have questions that are more of "tell me why my understanding of XYZ is wrong", then LLMs (the big ones) tend to be quite useful (yeah yeah, hate on me for this as much as you want).
In an environment with repeated interactions, the winning strategy in game theory has always been a tit for tat strategy.
"When they go low, we go high" is just virtue based jerking off.
While this person hilariously failed at what they were trying to do, it still doesn't make what they were trying to do any less nefarious. Them getting bullied and laughed off this community is funny and also necessary to ensure that such actors don't rise without fear of consequence.
Saved comment for future arguments. Thank you so much <3
Sometimes.
Our sensitivity to bitter tastes is proportional to the food's temperature. This is why hot coffee tastes more bitter than warm coffee.
Similarly, why salads taste better when cold. I LOVE cold cucumbers. They taste WAAAAY different than shitty room temp cucumbers.
That being said, food prepared to be consumed hot is definitely something I'd prefer over room temp/cold. The "hotness" of the food itself adds to the experience which I enjoy.
Separation of art from the artist is relevant when the artist isn't getting royalties from the IP. Promotions like these earn that bitch a lot of money.
Whenever you spend money on Harry Potter merch, or anything related to the IP, that horrible horrible piece of shit earns money.
Assuming you have a non zero amount of care for humans, the right thing to do is to avoid any and all financial contribution to the IP.
I absolutely do not work at Tims. But if I did (which I don't), I would be squeezing every goddamn harry potter donut/timbit before serving. I'd be horribly preparing any given Harry Potter item.
I mean, Tim Hortons does ALL of that regardless, but I don't (if I worked at Tim's which I don't). However, if you support this Harry Potter bullshit despite that Rowling bitch's prowling transphobia, then fuck you too.
Please boycott Tim Hortons (at least till this transphobic nonsense passes).
The manager should have Molotov cocktails smashed in their face. /s
The "/s" is there only because it would end up killing them or end up causing irreversible damage. If the above was not the case, then yeah, fuck them.
While modlogs leave a paper trail, they make investigation easier. However, few have the time necessary to routinely check the logs, right?
Removal of a mod and a mod leaving on their own are very different things. Removing a mod is a drastic action. There has to be declarative transparency regarding this instead of people randomly happening upon this piece of information sometime in the future.
Also, a removed mod could be bitter. If they hit first with accusations, then things get complicated.
He should be on fire, not "under fire".
A definite yes by people close to me. Not so much by strangers. I'm good at masking.
Thanks for the transparency :)
A moderator holds quite a lot of power. Which is why sadly, power hungry people tend to want to become moderators.
A way to ensure that power isn't being misused is by being extremely transparent. This is the 196 mod team being transparent. I like it.
Does it stir up some drama? Maybe. Is this outcome more preferable over the Tesseract case, where "moderation action" wasn't being made aware to the the user? 100%.
Ehhh naming stuff after individuals just sounds very icky to me
This is why consumer coops are so so important for stuff like this.
The insurance of a person I'm close to from their coop is around 9% cheaper than other non coop alternatives.
Consumer coops (irrespective of sector) always tend to have top notch customer service in my experience.
Won't present the case for PR, as I don't think I can make a better case than the ones already presented by other people. Don't have the energy for it.
As for public support, 68% support it nationally according to an EKOS poll conducted in 2025.
I know this isn't a provincial poll as you stated, but still. Also, if other important bills can pass without majority support of the electorate, why not PR? If we agree that the current FPTP system is fair, then why can't reform passed through the same system be considered "fair"?
True, sadly. It is also true that the NDP wasn't that strong, and the Liberals weren't that weak.
A precondition for this is a weak liberals, where an annoying snap election ends up drawing votes to the CPC or the NDP from the Liberals. If it's the other way round, where NDP votes go to the libs, then electoral reform ain't happening.
Not true. It is very very difficult for a single party to get a total majority in PR. No junior coalition partner would be stupid to roll back to FPTP.
Once PR happens, it would be very very difficult to get it rolled back.
The first time, the majority voted FOR it. The BC Liberals however, set an arbitrary threshold of 60%. Also, in both of these cases STV was specified instead of the simpler and more representative MMPR. The second time, it was STV again. The third time, there wasn't any specification from what I understand.
That being said, there is no moral obligation for PR to be passed through a referendum. PR empowers voters in ridings that sway heavily towards one side. Right now, these voters have absolutely no representation. This isn't "representative" democracy.
If a government can form and make policies without majority support of the electorate, it can also pass electoral reform. Why do we need a referendum for it? Do we have referendums for all controversial policies?
"But a following government can easily roll back PR".
Not really, no. Unless a really really massive wave comes in, PR almost always guarantees no single party majority. No small party would be stupid enough to accept the roll back of PR.
True. But my question is, do we truly need the people to "understand"? If we do, then we ought to have direct democratic practices for other important bills too (like budgets) like they do in Switzerland. Selective direct democracy for electoral reform, while abusing structural loopholes to pass bills without majority support is hypocritical, is it not. I'm directing this at the BC NDP btw, not you.
Isn't it a voter block that DOES come out to vote usually, but isn't doing so this time, and the only thing that a given political party has to do is to promise and deliver reform to get them to come out?
A given political party would want to maximise turnout of its own members, yes? But if say, a subset of members says, "hey, we won't come out to vote unless you make this promise", that's holding the party by its balls, isn't it?
Usually, getting people out to vote takes a lot of effort. Canvassing, repeated adverts and so on. BUT, if a simple inclusion in the manifesto is going to increase turnout by even a percentage point, then well... that's not so insignificant for the party to just ignore.
Really? For some reason, I really prefer DDG's results over Google's. Too much SEO spam for Google now (especially with AI).
DDG has this Reddit+ stack overflow thing that I quite like!
For generic factual stuff, I default to wikipedia. For opinions, it tends to be Reddit/Lemmy. If I have questions that are more of "tell me why my understanding of XYZ is wrong", then LLMs (the big ones) tend to be quite useful (yeah yeah, hate on me for this as much as you want).
Then you have the American getting an STD from their fin Dom and blaming it on the Canadian
In an environment with repeated interactions, the winning strategy in game theory has always been a tit for tat strategy.
"When they go low, we go high" is just virtue based jerking off.
While this person hilariously failed at what they were trying to do, it still doesn't make what they were trying to do any less nefarious. Them getting bullied and laughed off this community is funny and also necessary to ensure that such actors don't rise without fear of consequence.
Your cat's arm looks like a dick.
Yes, I'm the same person who saw the dick and commented last time (different account).
No, don't change your pfp please. It's too funny.