I love how when new waves of people discover old technology, there are always these types of fundamental questions.

Firefox has been here for a long time. Plenty of people use it. Casuals don’t care about what browser they have installed. That’s the entire conversation!

The actual interesting part of these questions popping up is the staggering lack of awareness. We can click your profile, and, as I’ve linked above, see you try Firefox for the first time, ever. Then, you proceed to ask fundamental questions like the one in this thread without referencing that you’re brand new to the software, or that you haven’t bothered to look up previous discussions.

As for being the “reasonable conservative” in the room, well, I’ll let that speak for itself.

Those schemes are more fly by night and don’t last long.

Websites that sell illegal products are almost always based in a place where the product isn’t illegal or enforced.

I’ve actually noticed this too.

Upon asking what the deal is, I’m often met with an “I like when creators get paid” which is righteous but misguided, or “I don’t care about the ads”, which is baffling.

Your comment basically assumes that everyone lives in poverty.

Which, granted, isn’t that far off from the truth, but the reality is that it takes an extremely poor person to think like you - to the extent that someone dropping $25 bucks on mac and cheese for a kid probably doesn’t share your sentiments.

Most excellent.

Are we under any impression that this will have long-term support? Or just a novelty to enjoy while it’s here?

I thought this comment was replying to my OP and was super confused. Deleted my response because it made no sense once I realized you were responding to this dude and not me.

deleted by creator

Who asked?

I’m pointing out a bug. I am not soliciting your opinion on the circumstances of how the bug happened. The fact that you felt the need to completely ignore the pertinent question and instead speculate on the circumstances is mind-boggling and paints you as a busybody with nothing better to do.

Since we’re dishing out advice unsolicited, here’s mine: when someone submits a bug or issue like this, refrain from chiming in if you have nothing related to the issue at hand.

Edit: Also, for what it’s worth, I commented on a community and then blocked it. The entire premise of your criticism is wrong. I don’t understand where your confidence comes from.

On it! Edit: Submitted.

Mission Specialists.

They were given trivial tasks to perform to justify the title. It was in bad faith and should have rung alarm bells. But I anticipate for the luxury thrill-seeker, they may be accustomed to fancy titles for their trips, and didn’t even really think about it.

Trans people are cool. Love em. Full human rights for everyone, end discrimination. This post, though, is obnoxious though.

Sending edicts out to the public is never the play. Use your sidebar. Moderate stuff. Make it cool to not be a bigot. But the second you start doing goofy shit like this, you’re painting a target on your back and coming across way more fragile than you must actually be.

I personally have a policy about blocking any community that has admins who feel it necessary to try to police people’s thoughts. As much as bigots piss me off, this isn’t how people conduct themselves in a place that purports to be a safe haven. You don’t patronize and denigrate the general public out of frustration, unless you want them as an enemy for some reason. The idea you needed you adjust your terminology in retrospect confirms how poorly you wrote your initial message.

Also, I have to say, “We allowed 196 to be here” is a curious statement. What exactly did you allow? Is opening a community a big endeavor? I’ve opened up a bunch, and never have I felt like I was owed someone for doing it.

Ban bad behavior. Don’t try to tell people how to think. We have a word for the latter and it’s not pretty.

Quiche in a pan. Nothing to see here.

There is no set of raw data that cannot be laundered into a new system.

They removed the messages because they wanted to.

But that’s the thing. She isn’t taking the L on this. That’s my point. She seems to just be chillin’, doing fuck all. Everyone knows it’s Musk running it.

This isn’t a case where he needed to bring in a fall guy CEO for a difficult business choice. This is a case where he brought in a new CEO to literally save the corporation, and she’s doing nothing and nobody is blaming her. It’s surreal.

Nobody is talking about it, but does that advertising exec that Musk hired for CEO take a massive hit to her career for any of this?

It seems surreal to have a ghost CEO who isn’t responsible for anything such a large company does. But that’s exactly what’s happening here.

It’s the latter.

Emotionally oxymoronic?

speed racing charge

https://www.videogamer.com/news/reddit-ban-subreddit-user-for-alternative-platforms/