Is there any chance we could get a dedicated post added to the locked pre-election poll thread regarding the presidential elections? It would be incredibly useful if that post included links to the exit poll results and the official election results hosted by the Federal Election Commission
I realize this isn't really a topic for active debate right now, but wouldn't it be handy to have all that data sitting there for when the next election cycle kicks off and the discussions start heating up again?
slywolf45 said:You can rant all you want, but the law is perfectly clear.
Sure, maybe it is, but then comes that one day after midnight when suddenly the law isn't so clear anymore, is it? The law doesn't actually define morality; it just sets a specific date, a specific hour, even a specific minute, marking the deadline before which they won't punish a "controversial" act—but once you cross that line, they'll come for you.
So, who exactly is being hypocritical here? Is it the person pointing out that legal reality, is it the one fighting tooth and nail for "the name that shall not be spoken," or is it the one pushing this whole agenda of politically correct speech and banning certain words, thoughts, or statements? 🤔
And honestly, why should I even care if some woman out there feels insulted by my comments regarding an act I have absolutely no way of knowing whether she actually committed or not? If she’s feeling offended, wouldn't that just suggest she feels guilty for something that happens to be "the thing you aren't allowed to say"?
I just don't see how this idea works; you can't exactly expect moderators to be on call 24/7 to babysit a forum. When we get into heated debates—like that recent blowout over Bloomberg's arrest—people are going to want to keep talking. If you start slapping limits on how many posts someone can make, what do you think is going to happen? They’ll just hop onto an alt account or spin up a brand-new thread to keep the momentum going. You'll end up with a dozen identical topics cluttering up the site, and it won't just stay in Politics; the night shift will just move the conversation over to the lifestyle or hobby sections anyway.
The other thing that bugs me about this proposal is how it handles the smaller, niche discussions. You know those threads where maybe five or six regulars are having a deep dive? Some days are more productive than others, and if you cap the number of replies, people aren't just going to stop talking—they're going to migrate to DMs, Discord, or Facebook. And once they leave the platform, the forum just ends up with these massive, awkward holes in the conversation.
It really all depends on your perspective, doesn't it? To me, this feels more like a little side note or an addendum. But honestly, when you consider that Vesna is comfortable calling her own associates "little guys," and the President manages to frame his opponents as nothing more than absolute lunatics, then this kind of cheeky little jab actually comes off as somewhat charming, don't you think?
General religious topics that don't dive deep into heavy theology are always better handled over in the Politics or Social Sciences sections.
If you’re looking to get into the nitty-gritty of theological debates, you should probably head over to the Small Council forum instead.
I'm sorry, but that's just how things operate here.
We don't break religion down into tiny little sub-sections here, and the mods are mostly comprised of people with agnostic leanings—though you'll hear plenty of complaints from Muslims and Jews about that too (they might have a bit more protection, but they don't really police religious content much), not to mention all the various sects. This hasn't changed in ten years, so this is simply the established policy of the forum.
I mean this in the best possible way. Just roll with it.
Could you have just asked them directly? If you had, maybe they’d actually be the ones asking the questions here for once. 😁
Honestly, I almost feel for you, because I went through the exact same thing with my kid, and I might even be tempted to chime in and ask, "well, why doesn't he just step up and handle it..."
driftingmaker said:Where did I ever say I wasn't doing well during that time? 🙂
If you can still be this caught up in it after all these years, then sure, maybe I am. 😍
But seriously, is reading comprehension really that hard? I know you guys can do better than this.
Look, I read perfectly fine; the issue is that you’re operating under the assumption that being single somehow equals being unhappy, just because the person who started this thread mentioned being afraid.
There are plenty of single people out there who aren't afraid—they either simply don't want a relationship, they might want one but aren't interested in what's currently being offered, or they don't even notice anyone is trying because they're far too preoccupied with other major life priorities.
And yet, you've gone ahead and branded all those people as insecure and miserable. 🙂
driftingmaker said:I mean, you’ve got some valid points there, I'll give you that. 🙂
Now, I realize I’m speaking from a bit of a high horse here, but still. 😁
You seem pretty set in your ways, but what happens if that "perfect gentleman" doesn't show up until you're middle-aged, or worse, what happens when he turns out to be anything but a gentleman?
Honestly, why weren't you feeling much better during those years when you were just on your own, before this supposed great man came along? 😕
gentlestag3 said:I guess that makes them a slightly less atheistic country, maybe?🤷
Actually, I’d argue the exact opposite—it’s more like a specific strain of Protestantism. They were incredibly forward-thinking intellectuals, really at the forefront of the Enlightenment. It’s quite a unique case, isn't it? They managed to transition into communism without any sort of violent revolution, though they unfortunately ended up stuck with Stalinism in the end.
Honestly, I feel like you really ought to brush up on a bit of history first; it just makes everything so much easier to wrap your head around, doesn't it?
gentlestag3 said:I guess that makes them a slightly less atheistic country, maybe?🤷
It’s not even the opposite—it’s actually more than that. You’re looking at a milder, less radical strain of Protestantism. And for heaven's sake, isn't this the only nation that managed to adopt communism without a violent revolution? In the end, it didn't even turn out to be true communism; it just morphed into that distorted, twisted version of Soviet-style socialism. I mean, did you guys not pay any attention in history class?
So, you’re really going to sit there and criticize a Bishop who possesses a classical education that frankly goes way beyond any engineering degree, all while you choose to put your absolute faith in journalists who seem to wrap up their entire schooling during three long weekends? Honestly, it’s a bit of a disgrace, isn't it?
gentlestag3 said:I mean, what kind of person stands up at a podium and claims that the religious revival following the shift toward democracy is actually what caused the war?
If there had been any kind of systematic attempt to push atheism, maybe we’d have an atheist population similar to what you see in the Czech Republic. But having only about 5% non-believers isn't really the result of a coordinated effort, I guess.
And honestly, what is the actual purpose of the military chaplaincy anyway?
Most Catholics over in the Czech Republic actually follow an evangelical tradition rather than the Roman Catholic faith. Ever heard of that?
And let’s not forget they couldn't even stream the full sermon; they just served up a measly four minutes out of eight and a half. Tomorrow, we’re diving into some fringe science territory regarding yet another one of those Illuminati-style provocations 🙄 (though this 🙄 little side note is just my own take, since I’ve already posted my thoughts on 🙄 religion elsewhere)
It’s hardly ideal when the media chooses to spin things this way, is it? And does the Church really have much interest in dragging them into court? Not likely—they’d much rather just bury the whole thing under a different headline whenever it suits their agenda. 🙄, well, consider this one a personal message from a Catholic to the Catholic Church.
I honestly think the nicotine might be tanking your blood pressure, though I suppose that would settle down if you actually committed to being a full-on smoker—but let's be real, you're much better off just walking away from it entirely. If you eventually find yourself craving that hit, maybe you could transition into recreational smoking with some high-end brands, provided you pair them with a drink and a full stomach while you're totally relaxed, assuming you're truly desperate for that nicotine rush; but truthfully, you'll be far better off ditching the habit altogether, which'll leave you with more time and plenty of extra cash for other things. 😁
Andy clearly hasn't the slightest clue what kosher or halal food even entails, which makes him either completely clueless or just plain malicious in this instance. 😁 I’d love to invite him down to Chicago so he can see for himself that we’re actually perfectly decent folks who wouldn't dream of hurting anyone—let alone a child—unless, of course, he happens to stumble upon that bottle we spotted earlier this morning.
The issue is more practical: mushrooms get tossed into baskets or bags where they rattle around, causing bits of poisonous caps to flake off onto edible ones, which then end up being eaten. It's a mess. Prevention is always a bit of a gamble when you're hovering right on the edge of safety.
Look, touching a toxic mushroom isn't going to kill you, and neither will eating a grilled meal later if you didn't scrub your hands perfectly. Honestly, it’s no different than worrying about open wounds, scabs, smoking, touching glassware, biting your nails, breathing air, picking at dandelion heads, or leaving your boots in the bathroom only to have the dog sleep there... let's not descend into total paranoia, shall we?
There are plenty of other handy ways to fix up clay-heavy soil if you're dealing with it. Basically, you're looking at ground that’s packed with tiny particles—anything under 2 microns—so you really have to work with it. You could try incorporating leaf mold (just haul some leaves from the woods in the fall to cover your garden beds, then till them in come spring), or maybe use crushed corn stalks, turnip remains, straw, or even mulch. You can even go the "green manure" route by planting specific crops just to till them back in; I usually recommend things like triticale, clover, oats, or rye, provided you plow them under before they actually bloom. Honestly, the absolute best thing you can find is grain hulls from a local mill—that outer casing stays effective for four or five years. Sand is a bit of a temporary fix since it tends to sink into the deeper layers after just two or three years. If you're working with a small patch, you could experiment with sawdust, but you absolutely have to add lime because sawdust is going to acidify your soil. A rough rule of thumb is about two bags of sawdust to two liters of hydrated lime, but you can easily pick up pH testing kits at places like 7-Eleven or local hardware stores. They sell those little packs that let you run about ten tests for roughly $13—which is what I picked up last year while I was traveling through Austria.
placidheron24 said:And if you want a perfect example of why I say that, just take a look at that post from nimblewalker58 on this thread—the one where they went out of their way to label me some kind of dark wizard.
Let’s not start throwing around accusations, shall we? 🙂
nimblewalker58 said:
Time will eventually tell if your little alternative actually holds any water, or if you're just another dark wizard peddling magic potions at some local county fair.
Look, if you’re hell-bent on following the path of Alternative Medicine, you have to be prepared to suffer for it; I mean, isn't being heckled by a crowd probably a lot less brutal than meeting the fate of Giordano Bruno, Galileo Galilei, or Copernicus? Only time will tell whether your "alternative" actually gains any traction, or if you're just going to end up as one of those fringe mystics peddling snake oil at a roadside carnival in middle America.
Kevin Cox said:Where exactly does it say these are negotiations, let alone an uprising? If you just look back at the first post, you'll see what it actually says.
And now you're actually trying to tell me that I'm the one lobbying for you? 😕Is that really where we're at here?
Look, let's just leave this up until tomorrow so even those politically active folks down in Miami can weigh in and see for themselves. 😁 And if there ends up being a poll, you've got my vote. Sound good?
Kevin Cox said:Yeah, we voiced our complaints over there, but it was pretty much a waste of time—which is why I’m actually here now. I mostly want to hear what you all think about this. To me, the core issue lies in that very first sentence of the original post: centralization. It seems to be baked into everything this society does.
Do you really think those reasons justify creating a whole new subforum?
By the way, Andrew Sanchez3, Miami has about 221,000 people.
On the politics side of things? No, I don't support splitting Americans up by region when national interests are on the line (trust me, I'm not some DC elitist). As for Beautiful our Washington, D.C., I don't really jump into the debates there, so I'm not even sure where I'd stand.
There's already a thread going about centralization regarding policy and budget allocation, so if you've got dirt on some fresh budgetary malfeasance, go ahead and start a new one.
Besides, who is your moderator? Why haven't you sent them a PM? They should be the one fighting for your autonomy in that corner of the site; this whole thing doesn't feel much like a negotiation, does it? It feels more like a full-blown rebellion.