vonbaronhans

It does make a little sense, when you consider that one of the goals is to demotivate fascists from voting at all.

Straight facts don't dissuade fascists. They have every argument and deflection in their back pocket ready to go. Trump is a rapist/racist/traitor? Fake news, fake news, fake news.

But... Trump is weird? That hits them right in the ego. They're not a principled policy-based voting base, it's a cult of personality. Even if they want to say he's NOT weird, it's not a fact, it's an opinion. So all it takes is showing a bunch of really strange gaffes, irrelevant rants, and incoherent ramblings, and you just might get would-be Trump voters to feel too embarrassed to vote for him.

It's a long shot, but based on what I've been seeing, it appears to be effective so far. We'll have to wait and see.

Boy howdy

Except the US constitution does not include that language. The "a wall of separation between church and state" phrase most notably comes from an 1802 letter by Thomas Jefferson to the Danbury Baptist Association. Not a legally binding document by any means.

I imagine you're thinking of the Establishment Clause of the Constitution which forbids the US government restricting the free exercise of religion.

I believe, iirc, the Supreme Court over several decades has affirmed and reaffirmed the overall position that the US government must remain secular and not favor a particular religion. Which is effectively what you're getting at.

I'm unclear what your title means? Is it like, mods are saying thinly-veiled homophobia isn't worth moderating? Or am I missing it entirely?

The framing of the article's headline is bad, but the problem is that because people in starter homes can't trade up, first time buyers can't buy starter homes. Ultimately, the problem is that MORE people are stuck renting.

And that's purely descriptive. The people in the starter homes are not to blame, in any moral sense. But people read blame into it because emotionally resonant headlines get more clicks, so they frame it that way.

people ~~are lazy~~ have busy lives and want to put their time and energy into things that aren't learning a whole new technology skill.

FTFY.

DDG is just Bing. At least as far as the core search algorithm goes.

Unfortunately, my experience is the opposite. I tried to use DDG for about a month and consistently found myself giving up, Googling instead, and finding a relevant stack overflow page or reddit thread or whatever on the first page of results.

The "people want to hear about celebrities" part is relevant to the fact that interests drive a big part of the audience to the site. Meaning, you and I both want celebrities to be off Twitter because if we can convince them to go elsewhere, that would be an effective way to cripple Twitter.

Complaining that people like celebrities when they're not "relevant to your daily life" doesn't really do anything to further your goals. It just makes you sound like an asshole who isn't relatable to the kind of people that we want to listen to us.

Like it or not, people are interested in celebrities. I wouldn't call that irrelevant in the attention economy.

For weed I think we'd be fine.

I tried to read Foucault in grad school. His writing is just the worst, like it's intentionally trying to be difficult to read and understand. When other people describe Foucault's ideas to me, they seem cool. Wish I could actually understand the original stuff though.

Maybe I'm just an idiot, I dunno.

Nice it is!