I’m inferring from the language of the post that OP is against this policy change, but I’m not sure I follow the argument. Why is it problematic that Plex is asking for money?

This shows that Trump is nothing more than a simp, not that Putin is any kind of master.

I agree with what you’re saying and also it feels worth pointing out how pervasive the rhetoric of profitability has become.

We don’t talk about the military running at a loss, or the department of transport, or any other part of the government. We talk about their cost, because that’s really what it is. Services don’t “lose” money, they cost money.

Fortunate that the constitution explicitly makes protesting legal, right guys?…

Other way round. Genocide is a type of ethnic cleansing.

No, ethnic cleansing does not necessarily imply killing. It is the forced depopulation of an area, which can be by means of deportation, economic pressure, threat of violence, etc. Genocide is the most extreme form of ethnic cleansing.

You’ve got two Cleopatra stories mixed up there.

She was said to bathe in ass’s (donkey’s) milk.

She killed herself by holding an asp (snake) to her breast.

What do you think it would take?

The difference between $100 million and $1 billion is 90% of $1 billion.

People who have less than $100 million are much closer to the middle class than they are to being billionaires. We should be trying to recruit them to our side, not condemn them.

Not going to disagree with that, but you’re responding to somebody who obviously has no background in physics, and it strikes me as a reasonable balance between conceptual (“hand wavy”) and detailed enough.

This is an excellently written response.

The word you would use is “steep”. It means to put something in a liquid to extract its flavor into the liquid.

Maybe you were thinking about “braise”, which is when you half cover something in a liquid and cook it all just below boiling, but then the liquid turns into a sauce.

Who said it resulted in no difference in voter turnout?

Are you saying his killing was justified?

Yeah, that seems like a reasonable approach.

By comparison, North Carolina attempted to implement a voter ID law in 2016 that was eventually overturned by the Supreme Court because it deliberately targeted black voters.

No, this article is talking about things like rejecting registration based on minor clerical errors like ink color, rejecting provisional ballots arbitrarily, and restricting the availability of ballot boxes. That sort of thing.

On the voter id question, by the way, the argument isn’t about whether or not you should have ID to vote, it’s about whether you can get ID in the first place.

Most countries in the world either issue IDs to everyone or allow you to prove your identity with things like bank statements and utility bills, or just somebody else who can vouch for you. The problem with US voter ID laws is that they only give you a few options for acceptable documents, and then make it hard to get those documents.

If you’re going to try and call somebody out like that, you should do your homework.

The only times since 1998 (the first year of data for Ukraine) that Russia was deemed less corrupt than Ukraine were the stretches from 2000-2004 and 2011-2015.

Ukraine performed better than Russia 1998-1999, 2005-2008, 2010, and 2017-2023. They were a cumulative 20 points better on corruption than Russia over that time.

No, I’m talking about the 2004 elections. In case you’d forgotten, Russia was so upset about failing that they attempted to assassinate the rightful winner. When Yanukovych eventually gained power, he was so transparent about wanting to turn Ukraine into an authoritarian vassal state of Russia that parliament removed him and undid his efforts to convert the presidency into a dictatorship. And then he fled to Russia.

You did not. You hinted at a point without stating it directly.

Are you saying that this corruption charge is disingenuous and intended to redirect attention from other issues? Because if so you need to make that explicit and then support it with evidence. Otherwise it sounds like you’re parroting known disinformation.

Ukraine is actively trying to battle their corruption, with this being a step towards that end, however small.

Meanwhile Russia is famously more corrupt than Ukraine, has been since long before Maidan, attempted to pervert Ukraine’s elections to install a corrupt leader under their control, and then invaded in an attempt to expropriate Ukrainian land and resources when that attempt failed.

What point are you trying to make here?

I see why you’re getting at, but I think you’re mistaken.

Rage-bait works by evoking a reaction. It spreads because people become incensed and then feel the need to share the reason for their anger.

This is the opposite of reaction. It is a calm response to the OP explaining why they are reacting to rage-bait and inviting them to reconsider their posting.