I thought I was being a reductionist but it seems from that article I might be closer to the truth than I thought. It’s weirdly disappointing that it simply boils down to some childish tactic of pretending to be confused by the results, instead of there being some obscure legal precedent.

Can someone better versed in US politics give a quick rundown on how the fake electoral scheme actually works? I’m aware of the physical steps involved but I don’t see how the scheme doesn’t just fail at the first hurdle. In what world can a person not assigned as elector send in their own certificate and not be immediately disregarded? To my mind it sounds like this:

Mrs Krabappel: I’m the fourth grade teacher and have counted the votes for fourth grade class president. Martin Prince wins with 2 votes.

Miss Hoover: No, I’m the real fourth grade teacher and I declare that Bart Simpson wins with 2 votes.

Principal Skinner: There’s no way of discerning who the real fourth grade teacher is. My only option is to ignore the results of the vote and decide by fiat.

Sorry but that knife screams “mall ninja.”

They’re the same picture.

Depends on your frame of reference. When traversing the surface of a globe, your described concept of a straight line isn’t intuitive.

Forgive the ignorance, but are regular OBGYN appointments a thing in the US? From the media I’ve consumed it appears so. I know people with actual gynaecological issues like endometriosis, and even they find the idea of regular checkups without a cause weird.

”For a comment.”

In this day and age, who hasn’t made incredibly specific ultraviolent threats against an elected official while constantly reassuring others that they are serious/making a promise to enact these threats? Did this upstanding citizen simply forget to cite his first amendment rights to the agents?

The is me with my PhD thesis. I wrote it, submitted it, planned for an absolute grilling in the Viva, got waved through the Viva with just minor corrections for grammar, went overzealous with corrections, submitted for review, got accepted, finally graduated.

It still makes me sick to look at it on my bookshelf.

This really makes me grin, as I’ve argued these “theological debates” on multiple sides depending on which splatbook I’m into at the time. I’ve definitely been on both sides of the Caine vs Prime Archmage debate.

Jarl Balgruuf energy.

We both know who cares. Who would derail a discussion about bigotry by making pedantic observations on grammar or language?

Do they have a different tattoo or are you referring to the one circling their arm? It looks like the inscription on the One Ring to me, though I definitely could be wrong.

Conversely, a lot of people abstain from drinking. Entire cultures abstain.

Ah shit. Reading is hard sometimes.

A pint is 568ml.

Edit: the extra 30ml might be accounted for with the patented Guinness widget, a little ball of nitrogen gas that ruptures and forms a foamy head when the can is cracked.

GPT4 is wrong and it doesn’t require a price per litre comparison to prove it.

4 cans at 440ml cost £4.50. Therefore 12 cans at 440ml cost £13.50, £1.50 less than 12 cans at 330ml.

The fact you made such a connection says a lot about you.

I agree on a personal level. FOSS software is much more convenient for my usecase of writing papers/typsetting notes, some automation, writing a program that works for me, and browsing/videos.

On the level of someone working in academia, it can be incredibly inconvenient if not outright impossible to implement. I can manage if I come across a bug in some FOSS software in my personal usage. An enterprise encountering an error with some utility whose support forum is a discord server: completely unacceptable. The entire printing service being offline because CUPS is temperamental: completely unacceptable.

Enterprises are the core customers of these inconvenient pieces of software with subscription based models.

On a phoneline service that I have to call about twice a month, you also get a frequent click and a second-long pause in the music, that makes you think you’ve connected to an operator. Given how the service is outright malicious to its users, it wouldn’t surprise me if that was hard coded into the system to keep callers on edge.

That’s the thing: you’re proving the idiom in the way that you’re arguing. Naively, one would expect that comparing fruit is easy; after all, they’re both fruit. Two nations have supposedly, in an official capacity, made the same statement (which I don’t believe without you providing a source, and yes the burden is on you).

The thing is that these are all superficial observations on complex entities. The idiom of comparing two fruits is a common idiom in many cultures, and it’s not for want of an internet commenter pointing out that they’re sweet, have seeds, and are similar colour.

General point: practice making pithy arguments based on well researched points. I’m struggling to see an actual point in the drivel you’re writing. It isn’t a reading comprehension issue; I read and write dense academic articles for a living. Short, pithy sentences are simply better writing.