You’re listing specific examples that literally no one has a problem with. Yes, if you’re moving large equipment you need a large tool to do so. The general public doesn’t do this, like… Ever. The dude in the photo has almost certainly never towed anything with it. These kinds of vehicles serve a purpose, but the vast majority of them are sold to people who will NEVER use it for that purpose, who just take up excess room in lots and on the streets, rolling around with visibility that makes a fucking TANK look like it’s got a clear line of sight.

There’s a whole host of political and cultural reasons that these vehicles are as popular as they are. Almost none of it is actual, practical requirement. No one cares about the worker using the tool to do a job, we’re pissed at the pavement princesses who drive around like they own the place without doing an honest day’s work in their lives. Hope that cleared some of the confusion up.

To me it’s like… Piracy is ethically neutral. Not really a good thing not really a bad thing. Streaming services are dealing with the devil, and my name’s not Faust, so I’m out. Pure evil.

Yeah, I pretty much hung up my flag for a few years. It was good, you could find the thing you wanted at a reasonable price.

Now, on principle, the only streaming services I will pay for are independent ones. Dropout and nebula off the top of my head. Sorry, Netflix et al, not sorry in the slightest.

Easier. Cheaper. A better experience. There’s no reason to keep dealing with these particular devils at all.

Oh, simple. It’s never about the issue, it’s about the opposition.

That’s fine, I’m enjoying taking up his time, and reminding everyone I can that they support child fucking if they support Trump. It’s funny.

Do you really believe the shit pedo incl chief tells you to?

They supported a pedophile. Not much more clear cut evidence of being a pedo lover.

Whatever you say. Try not to fuck any kids on your way out of here.

Okay pedo lover.

Bet you voted for a child fucker twice.

There were absolutely some projectiles.

That’s your only contribution? Cool. Objections duly noted.

Proofreading your own work without a significant time gap is pretty useless. You’ll catch a few obvious errors, but approaching the same problem in the same mental space tends to lead to the same thought patterns, tends to lead to making or overlooking the same mistakes.

You’ll do a bit better reapproaching the subject a few days later. It’s almost, but not quite, like reading a new piece of writing. In my experience, comments are set and forget, unless you’re obsessive like me and enjoy rereading your old shit.

By far the most effective proofreading, though, is an Editor. There’s a reason it’s a paid position for anyone who makes a living writing. A completely different person will read the text more as-is, without accidentally interpreting it how they INTENDED it to be written. This will catch far more errors, but isn’t really practical for shit posting in social media. The closest you’ll get is someone calling out a typo or grammatical error.

As long as the intent of the message is clear, it passes the bar for acceptable social media content. We’re not writing PhD theses, we’re just having fun discussions. We’re not writing a paper meant to be readable to someone independently, we’re engaging in dialogue and can easily ask the other person to clarify.

TL;DR high-level proofreading and error correcting isn’t really as viable on social media as it is formal writing, nor is it really necessary as long as the message received is the message intended.

Implying management is human work?

The important act is giving. If you think a dude on the side of the road needs $20 and you’ve got it to spare, there’s no downside to doing that. They may not use it how you like them to, but they will use it how they best can. Sometimes that’s food, sometimes that’s drugs, to keep them from actively offing themselves.

If you think a charity has a decent track record and can better use those funds to serve more people, donate it there. They’ll use it how they beat see fit, whether that’s food, shelter or enforcement of policies. It may not be how you want it used, but that’s okay.

Ultimately, give what you can, however you can. Once you’ve given the money, you can’t determine how it’s used, so be okay with your act of charity simply existing by itself, not in comparison to another hypothetical “best” act of charity.

Presumably they’re only carrying guns they have ammo for, or guns they want others to think they have ammo for. If you got it, may as well use it, and if others _think you got it, they may not be so quick to use their own. Also ammo isn’t _that hard to make.

I mean, yeah, privacy isn’t really a thing in our digital surveillance age. Doesn’t mean I’m not gonna make it as hard as possible for them. Make em work for it.

No problem, friend. Certainly not the first thing my mind goes to when I consider eating my date :p

A date is a type of fruit, kinda similar to a plum.