If he very clearly didn’t want a genocide, wouldn’t he have taken action that would prevent it (or as much of it as reasonably possible) from continuing instead of just saying “You gotta stop it Jack!”?

The majority of these self checkouts also rate limit you intentionally or otherwise (likely due to weight checking on the bagging area). I know I can scan a lot faster than they let me given a proper setup

I want to push back on this just a little. Clearly UM isn’t the bastion of consistent good thought, but others that were maligned like return2ozma have been pretty consistent in what they post.

This is to say, “Great, one person is a fuckup. Why are we attributing this to the whole group?”

Feels a lot easier to me since in my mind the analogy becomes “do you kill the dude that’s pulling the lever to a track with many thousands on it instead of the track with some money on it so you can see if the next person will change the lever back”

The person to which you had replied

I gave their profile a cursory look, but I couldn’t find this in the few handfuls of posts I looked at. Do you have a link to a comment or two showing this, maybe I missed it?

Hexbear is where the chapotraphouse users largely have landed assuming they followed the direct line of succession. There probably is some contingent in Lemmy.ml, but not because it was the successor

I would argue that this title implicitly suggests there’s no genocide in Gaza while the other title doesn’t reach beyond the bounds of Gaza.

As to the “wiki is a bad source” I don’t claim to have any knowledge of that poster’s thoughts, but here’s a couple possibilities I’ve come up with:

They thought it was interesting that the genocide was evident to the “ordinary” person that edits wiki despite them thinking it’s typically a bad source

They are just some random ml user whose opinions on wikipedia don’t strictly match that of the concensus of lemmygrad, hexbear, et. al. Since those instances are more united on that stance than I’ve observed Lemmy.ml to be (right or wrong as they may be, not making a judgment here)

Because she’s not trans

I did read it before I posted, thank you. In the same article it cited speculation it didn’t revoke the original for fear it would cause more diehard originalists to splinter and form their own more dangerous group(s), not that I endorse that reasoning, just that there are reasons not to revoke outside of it being a sham PR move.

You mean to tell me that an attack on Isreal largely had Jewish deaths? I’m shocked!! While the stats VS demographics can’t feasibly disprove the angle you’re aiming at, I similarly think it definitely doesn’t prove it either.

If you mean the supernova rave, here’s an article from an Israeli newspaper suggesting Hamas wouldn’t have known the rave was still ongoing and later says, “According to a police source, the investigation also shows that an IDF combat helicopter that arrived to the scene and fired at terrorists there apparently also hit some festival participants” which really muddies the waters about who is responsible for what.

The hostages, that by the large majority of accounts (that I’ve seen, so sure some bias there) have been treated as well as their guards? Or do you mean the ones that got shot by the IDF, or the ones that got blown up by the IDF?

I don’t mean to suggest that Hamas is some perfect beyond reproach organization, but from the actions I have seen of late, they’re largely just fighting against the state forcing them into these conditions.

Like they did in 2017? Wiki link English full text

SCUBA, LASER, JPEG, ROM, etc. all break the “pronounced as the nested word” argument.

I’m down for people to pronounce it however they please (assuming it’s recognizable as gif), but the post-hoc rationalizations trying to prove their side as the one true pronunciation are silly. The only rationalization that makes any sense to me is the “creator pronounces it as jif”, but language doesn’t work that way so even that doesn’t matter as far as “one true pronunciation” goes.