I've been waiting for my third party app to break. Boost finally stopped working an hour ago so I signed up here.

On my experience, 90% of the time there's more to the story than what people claim to be banned for. I'm not saying that 100% of that 90% of the time necessarily justifies the ban. But it usually changes the context significantly.

Talking about surface temperature is pretty misleading.

That hasn't been my experience.

It's still a very mixed reaction if you say something contrary to the dominant opinion.

And still just as likely to get strawmanned if you disagree with an aspect, but still overall agree with the conclusion.

It absolutely does make sense because it is discriminatory. He's absolutely correct.

The mistake that you are making, is thinking that all forms of discrimination are bad. They're not. Most are in fact good. We just don't tend to call them discrimination.

They closer they walk the line, the longer they can drag this out before they're replaced. That means more subscribers move on to other active communities.

It doesn't need to publicly respond. A pm would be sufficient.

That honestly should be the law. If you can't accept it without documentation, you should be required to return it. Of course you can also report it, but that's separate.

I agree. It's absolutely absurd that would say something along the lines of "Fuck, I got r*ped, what do I do?"

I'm of the opinion that you shouldn't censor any words. If you feel the need to censor it, then just don't say it. If you want to discuss it, then be able to say it. You should be able to say something like "X called Y a nigger".

Whether or not it's tolerance isn't directly important.

The mistake that people make is assuming that tolerance is inherently good. It is to a certain degree, but there are many things that you do not want to tolerate. That's where we want to be.

However, many people think of themselves as tolerant and find it difficult to make that conceptual realization.

That article you're talking about isn't about brave as a browser. It was a out the brave search engine.

Being friendly is far more effective than trying to punish people to make them agree with you. Especially when there's no immediate and obvious consequence of their individual actions.

Nope, not at all. You completely misunderstood my point.

I'm not saying the ground suddenly got hotter and everything else stayed the same. In this case, it's just a metric that's quoted because it has a misleading high value especially by people who are just scrolling through.

It's click bait.

A lot of people get stuck with issues like that where there are conflicting principles.

It's not as of right now, but I wouldn't say downvotes are the issue. The reality is that downvote = disagree no matter what rule you create that says it doesn't.

What I'm talking about are the insults, mischaracterizations, and general non productive discussion on comments that others don't agree with.

It seems to me to be worse manners to just leave your snot as leaking out or making you sniffle. Better to get it over with rather than make people listen to that for minutes to hours.

Many users there don't seem to be capable of differentiating those two things.

The waste is purely a polictal problem. It's been technically solved for decades.

We even have an example of safe storage of fission products from a nuclear reactor for over a billion years with no migration into the surrounding environment.

I wouldn't say that at all. Chernobyl was so much worse than this. It wasn't a single first line supervisor who asked one worker to do something who said no at first.

They'd asked multiple nuclear plants to perform that test. Been told that it was not safe to perform multiple times. They finally got an upper management individual at one plant to agree to it. Then they had challenges completing the test and due to plant characteristics that were not apparent to the operators (as well as violating other procedures) the event occurred.

The premise of chernobyl is a series of systemic failures of barriers. Not an addition of a single step not specified in a maintenence procedure.

This was exactly the problem that Charles Murray pointed out in the bell curve. We're rapidly increasing the complexity of the available jobs (and the successful people can output 1000-1,000,000 times more than simple labor in the world of computers). It's the same concept as the industrial revolution, but to a greater degree.

The problem is that we're taking away the vast majority of the simple jobs. Even working at a fast food place isn't simple.

That alienates a good chunk of the population from being able to perform useful work.