I know, I’m saying I was pleasantly surprised to hear that the campaign wants increased turnout in the first place.

Never knew republicans thrived on increased turnout. Glad they’re still sticking with this democratic principle ig.

According to the modlog someone else (admittedly a slightly trollous user) posted this with the title “Jill Stein ally says the Greens’ strategy is about making Harris lose the presidency” and got banned for it based on rule 1. I thought removal was reasonable but apparently the rule says “If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive.” Could someone clarify how the alterations to the title didn’t make it more descriptive?

I only know this because I was searching for certain keywords and stumbled upon comments in the deleted thread.

Nearly all social media apps teenagers use accept such ads, BeReal is just cheaper because it has less users.

I’m on mobile and it was working last time I tried

Just use https://GitHub.com/bpc-clone

I’m done explaining.

(Internet slang, derogatory) An effeminate or unmasculine man.

A thought-terminating cliché (also known as a semantic stop-sign, a thought-stopper, bumper sticker logic, or cliché thinking) is a form of loaded language, often passing as folk wisdom, intended to end an argument and quell cognitive dissonance.[1][2] Its function is to stop an argument from proceeding further, ending the debate with a cliché rather than a point. Some such clichés are not inherently terminating. They only become so when used to intentionally dismiss dissent or justify fallacious logic.[3]

soy boy

Dubliette is referring to the thought-terminating cliché that every major US party doesn’t want to abolish capitalism (the economic system centered around capital, private ownership, etc.), ergo we’re all liberals.

Freeze peach doesn’t mean you can call people "fag"s. By using that word you’re 1. insulting those who express their gender as they wish 2. calling us names

Also, my point is that there is precedent for laws to geopolitcally restrict open source. I agree that there is a real security issue.

I didn’t link to that!

How is this a conspiracy theory‽

why the fuck are we using that word here? just read the article yourself, “auteur de war” sans nees

I’m giving an example of sanctions applying to software.

Some old folk are reminded of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Export_of_cryptography_from_the_United_States

Yeah. Why is everyone saying this is removing their contribution credits? It’s just a list of active maintainers…

📎<[It appears that you have double posted. Would you like help?]

deleted by creator