In a written statement, the ADL said the decision by Wikipedia was the result of a ”campaign to delegitimize the ADL” and that editors opposing the ban “provided point by point refutations, grounded in factual citations, to every claim made, but apparently facts no longer matter.”
You of all groups should know that the last part of your statement is a common right-wing dog whistle that gets used when someone doubles down after their "facts" get rejected for bigotry and/or inaccuracy. By using that phrase, you've automatically cast doubt on the legitimacy of your actions and statements. At best you're ignorant of a common dog whistle, which is embarrassing for an organization who should be well-versed in this kind of thing; at worst you've signaled to everyone that you're potentially peddling "alternative facts", which casts doubt on everything you've done in the past. Either way, you're ultimately hurting the Jewish people by making that kind of statement.
Mira Sucharov, a professor of political science at Carleton University, said Wikipedia’s decision represents a major opportunity to reflect on why the ADL is facing scrutiny and rethink communal approaches for fighting antisemitism.
“This is a sign that the Jewish community needs better institutions,” she said.
They really do, and I feel bad for them. The places that should be defending them seem more than happy to ignore them or even throw them under the bus in the name of Zionism.
Like, okay, personal beliefs on Zionism aside, if your organization is tasked with defending a group of people, you should ensure your actions aren't going to endanger, delegitimize or otherwise encourage bigotry against said group. That means that even if you're a Zionist Jewish organization, if your task is to fight against bigotry towards Jews, you shouldn't be ignoring non-Zionist Jews nor should you be dismissing their views. Instead, you should be listening to what they have to say, condensing it and releasing it in an manner easy for non-jews to understand (which means providing political, historical and religious context, because many people, myself included, don't understand as much as they think they do about Judaism).
In the current context, you should be giving people statements from Zionist and non-Zionist Jews about Palestine, and attempt to include non-biased historical, religious and political backgrounds for events that are occurring.
I think ethnically Jewish people could make an honest argument that they should have some portion of Palestine based on historical origins (I think it's a weak arguement, but I think you could argue for it). However, that doesn't excuse the way that the IDF and Israeli government have treated Gaza and the West Bank.
You can criticize the Israeli government while also believing that ethnically Jewish people should be able to have a country they have control over. Other countries do this all the time (get criticized for poor treatment of the "outside" ethnic group(s)), why is this somehow different for Israel? Why aren't we allowed to criticize Israel? I can talk about how France, a white, French ethnostate, is mistreating Muslims without being a racist bigot; I should be able to talk about Israel the same way.
My biggest complaint about Sims-likes is that the visual style always looks too serious. It gives me the feeling that whatever I'm going to do with my not-Sims, it's gonna be something that makes me regret my real life.
You wanna know what I did the last time I played the Sims 2 though? I repeatedly held parties at my Sim's house and then lured the guests into a room they couldn't get out of. I also used the moveobjects cheat to collect police cars whenever a cop showed up to shut the party down. By the time I was done I had amassed around 70 urns, many hysterical immortal Sims (Sims with households can't die while visiting someone's house in the Sims 2), 4 Police cars and a fire truck.
The Sims has a mischievous air to it that tickles the devil on your shoulder and begs you to listen to them. None of the Sims-likes I'm aware of seem to have the same air.
It is copyrighted lol. That's why you don't see that specific design much anymore. I was sure I read somewhere that the design was in copyright hell, which is why it isn't used anymore. Looks like I'm wrong.
Edit: actually, after looking more into this guy, the design is public domain. He made a whopping $45 off the design while others have made millions.
One of the longest-ranged kills in history was performed by Carlos Hathcock with a Browning M2, so putting a scope on one doesn't seem totally out of place if you're trying to hit single targets at long-range. That said, Ukraine claimed the #1 spot last year, so I doubt anyones gonna set a new record with a Browning. I'm sure he can try tho!
Maybe? I guess when I think of asocial vs anti-social, I think of someone who is apathetic towards social interaction vs someone who doesn't like socializing and only does it because it tends to be a mandatory part of society. As such, I'd think someone who's asocial would be indifferent to a host cancelling, while someone who's antisocial would be happy or excited by it.
Edit: I am aware that anti-social tends to have different connotations when used generally, but in a social setting I tend to think of antisocial being opposed to socializing.
The comic made me chuckle; but why has introversion become synonymous with being anti-social or asocial? My understanding is that it's entirely possible to be highly social and introverted, because being introverted just means you gain energy from being alone. It doesn't mean you hate social gatherings or don't like having friends; it just means you discharge when socializing and recharge during alone time (and the opposite is usually true for extroverted people).
I wanted to point that out as I seem to be a social introvert. I like socializing and love being invited to things (even if I'm not available or it's something I don't like doing, because it means someone remembered that I exist), but my battery wears out fairly quickly when doing so. Strangely, I used to be very extraverted, but at some point I swapped to being introverted.
Edit: I guess I will say that the thing the comic gets right is that usually I won't hold it against someone for cancelling. However, I don't get excited about it, and might even be disappointed if it was something I was looking forward to, but I usually am okay with it.
Oh, is that what they're trying to say, that OP is making fun of the middle class? I thought they were being unhinged and saying that these were things that upper-class white people have and use to view themselves as "superior".
Are there any benefits to having a static IP, aside from self-hosting purposes? Is it somehow faster or more responsive? I'd think dynamic IPs would be better (ignoring self-hosting) because at the very least, they'd allow you to dodge (d)dos attacks (which can happen with games, people sometimes get salty enough to attack other players IPs if their IP is exposed).
The asymmetrical internet speeds are intended to keep hobbyists and small businesses from self-hosting, thereby driving traffic to larger companies. I wonder if ISPs get any kind of kickback from large companies like AWS, cloudflare, or digital ocean. Like, reduced hosting costs for their websites and internal cloud services.
Takes tinfoil hat off
The reality is that it's probably a lot cheaper for ISPs to make connections asymmetrical because it effectively lets them pump up their download speed numbers for free. However, ISPs really should give customers the option to custom allocate bandwidth. Instead of saying X upload, Y download, you get X Mbps maximum and can choose the upload/download split.
and the plugin dev is also using the clicks to make money via affiliate
That's actually kinda brilliant and I'm jealous. I might actually install it just to reward his intelligence. I can't blame him for doing it, I'd do it too if I was in his shoes; I wish I'd thought of it first.