Sure is funny how responding to on-demand prompts requires available attention, and attention isn't tracked when assessing the role requirements - just when we're deciding whether or not to fire someone.

There's no point enacting legislation that nobody has the capacity to actually comply with. etc.

It... looks like Ackerman is trying to get a group of people whose job relies on them understanding what a citation is to effectively say that citing an instance of a hate crime is itself a hate crime... and if they don't he's going to accuse them of hate crimes.

Is that... correct?

It's just unfortunate that he'll use this failed failure as an excuse for why he can't be held to account until we get to Elon or Trump levels of self delusion and everyone can see it for themselves.

How dare a non-profit observe their stated goals and mission in the face of people with lots of money considering themselves integral to Real Business, huh.

Can't wait until people look back and be like "wow how did we miss all the red flags about that guy".

It's a little sad that this is the correct answer, and that people will say it's obvious in retrospect after wasting so many resources.

That the guys who think they hold the reins of power don't have a fucking clue what they're talking about.

Every time management do some malicious compliance shit like this where they misinterpret the advice they've been given that would otherwise help the running of businesses so completely they invent a new form of abuse, yall act like it's the first time ever.

This is, yes, in part, the process of euphemism and dysphemism, a known process of linguistic evolution. Calm down, call them out on it if you don't think it will be effective and care about their outcomes, or let them make the mistake and suffer for it if you do.

What about when I do that and it autocorrects it and says "searched instead for this other more common phrase"?

Your sentiments are just gunna make people madder at google. If that's the aim then good job i guess?

What 'natural immunity'?

You need to establish that something exists BEFORE you rely on it.

You only hear from the ones who didn't.

They wont listen to the ones who did. Ask me how I know.

I'll go a step further - the actual study alludes to a 'unknown factor' that must be there because a correlation exists.

That unknown factor might be... proximity to one of the UK Biobank's collection facilities.

It is extremely premature to say there is some kind of genetic factor here.

I'm not doing your school homework for you
The fact i'm shaking my head at your bad math and willing to tell you doesn't actually make me responsible for your unwillingness to learn.

Mate.

Your emotional dislike of taxes is not an economic philosophy. Your observation about insurance being inadequate to stop disasters is obvious, other people who aren't management already understand that.

This is simply not how national economies work.

Stop using household analogies. Your children do not pay you taxes.

The media in Australia are owned by a very small group of vested interests who have resorted to fearbaiting the elderly to maintain a market share.