5 seconds before a good one gets fired, they’re a bastard? What about 5 days? 5 months?
What about someone with all the good intent in their heart 5 minutes before they put on a badge? The second it touches their uniform they instantly become a bastard?
Your ridiculous position melts the second you think about it critically.
Liability Hot Potato
Caller doesn’t want to accept liability just in case Something Happens to the kids.
Call-taker doesn’t want to accept liability just in case Something Happens to the kids.
Comm. Center supervisor doesn’t want to accept liability just in case Something Happens to the kids.
Dispatcher doesn’t want to accept liability just in case Something Happens to the kids.
Patrol supervisor doesn’t want to accept liability just in case Something Happens to the kids.
Patrol LEOs don’t want to accept liability just in case Something Happens to the kids.
The end product of this bureaucratic nightmare is harassment-by-proxy, where the cops show up to tell a lady kids aren’t supposed to play outside and everyone gets to go home not feeling like they were responsible for the insanity.
- Ex-cop, occasionally insisted on not responding to ridiculous calls that got cancelled when I pressed the issue, was eventually fired
I’m 99% sure I was going with their official documentation, which you linked just there.
I can’t speak for what I read or how I interpreted it ~6 months ago, other than to say I understood upgrading was not supported and I was SOL that mine broke.
No, I’ve never used “sloppy backports” (as the only warning of lack of support I can currently find lists as a problem) and I knew that back then too, so that wasn’t the issue.
The truth is we have no idea whether or not the post was racist; we only know that one of the moderators of that community thought it was (or wanted others to think it was).
If it was really racist, I’m glad it’s gone and I’m glad they’re banned.
If not, the opposite.
But like I said, we’ll probably never know the truth. DMing the involved parties could just result in them lying about the content of the post.
The minute a D is, on balance, worse than an R, I would vote against them (i.e. for the R).
If the Rs are enthusiastic about supporting genocide and the Ds are toying with going against it? I’ll vote D.
If the Rs are enthusiastic about depriving minorities of their rights and the Ds are meekly speaking out against it? I’ll vote D.
etc. etc.
Too true, but when you see a kid crying about their spilled ice cream, do you go “Haha, cry harder dipshit!” Ice cream doesn’t matter, right?
Or should you just be kind to others as your starting point?
How can I look for what a specific user got banned (wihtout searching the entire history) ?
Assuming I understand your question (it wasn’t written very well):
You can’t, but if it’s recent at all like this, you don’t even have to scroll. On desktop, you click the three dots and there are two options for Moderation History that should give you some idea.
The good news is on Lemmy you can check to see what the moderators claim they did wrong, assuming they didn’t write “None” for the reason like some of the garbage tier moderators do.
In this case, they allege some of this user’s posts were racist.
That’s not what their moderation history says they were banned for.
What compromise?!?!? Your “vote blue no matter how many people it hurts/kills” is the reason why the “reactionary right” has the base that it does.
Never said that
No it isn’t
The right has its base because they know they can be increasingly extreme and their supporters will still fall in line while the left will purity test everyone to no end, driving voter apathy and infighting.
🤷
I felt the same way and held my nose to dive in to rolling release as a result.
All I know is I was ready to go through the process to go from 12 to 13 and their documentation was full of disclaimers saying that it’s not officially supported.
I did my best, and it broke.
All I know is I was ready to go through the process to go from 12 to 13 and their documentation was full of disclaimers saying that it’s not officially supported.
I did my best, and it broke.
Isn’t Debian pretty clear that they don’t support upgrades and it’s likely to break if you try?
Likewise, frankly. To a propagandized person, everything reasonable seems like insanity.
It’s either that or you see the obvious flaw in your logic and pulled the eject handle because you couldn’t respond.
I don’t know you so I don’t know which it is.
I just hope if it’s the former, and you meant to be participating in good faith, that you realize that the definition of “imperialist” absolutely applies to NK, SK, Russia, and China. You’re doing mental gymnastics if you think or claim that’s not the case.
You can start out at “they’re imperialist but it’s okay” if you want, but anything else is just factually wrong.
$10 says they still think AI is great at counting things.
The thing is, anyone already against these folks was already against them. If your hate-o-meter is maxxed out, it can’t increase.
Anyone already supporting these folks either never heard about it through their echo chamber news source of choice or simply doesn’t care.
That’s kinda the state of (American) politics in 2026.
why is north korea imperialist in your opinion?
Because they aspire to (and occasionally have proven to) fit the widely-accepted definition described above.
Why isn’t it, in your opinion?
this is what modern imperalism looks like.
Your comment carves out your own pet definition, asserting that financial dependency equates to people getting bombed. While not ideal, it’s far from comparable.
If you define words like “imperialism” however you want, of course you can craft perfect boxes to fit countries you don’t like but exclude countries you do like. You’re just piggybacking off a word you know people don’t like.
now take anti-imperialist countries like russia or china.
As I said above, both of those countries are very obviously imperialist, and opposing another imperialist country does not make them anti-imperialist.
Just say “Russia are The Good Guys and the USA are The Bad Guys” and you will be speaking from your heart instead of redefining terms to propagandize.
Here, I’ll bootstrap some empathy for you:
If I personally feel like “murderer” should mean “someone who thinks Russia and China are anti-imperialist,” does that mean it makes sense to call you a murderer? Or is that an inherently dishonest form of communication, and starting off a conversation calling you a murderer without clarifying I’m using a secret non-standard definition is ridiculous?
What you’re missing is that politics is compromise, by definition.
I don’t like that the Democrats don’t align with my beliefs perfectly, but I’d rather vote against Trump than whine about the Democrats not being perfect and stay home, which is what a massive portion of American voters did, thanks in large part to the “Why bother when the Democrats are just as bad?” messaging that is completely a PsyOp that helps Trump whether you’re doing it on purpose or not.
That’s exactly how it worked for my agency.
They were dragging new hires in and ordering them to sign away the union without knowing anything about them.