• 6 Posts
  • 1.64K Comments
Joined 2年前
cake
Cake day: 2023年10月11日

help-circle













  • Warl0k3@lemmy.worldtoMemes@lemmy.mlVictor OrBAN
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    edit-2
    4日前

    What were you even trying to say, though? You may have had a point, but contextless photos of current world leaders very situationally make a point on their own, and this doesn’t seem like it was one of those situations. It just reads as a halfhearted attempt to post bait, because you didn’t explain your intention with posting it.


  • Than their required use. Gendered crash test dummies have been a thing for a long time, but AFAIK prior to this there was no anatomical requirements at all, including children (?). Obviously it’s huge to include this since IDK a single woman who doesn’t have troubles with the extremely male-focused design of all modern cars (fucking seatbelts do not play well with tits (how is this still a thing) women can’t adjust mirrors to be useful since they sit below the sight envelope, blind spots, etc), but this is a bit sensationaist of a headline…



  • Warl0k3@lemmy.worldto196@lemmy.blahaj.zonerule
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    9日前

    Noun: […]
    3. One who knew a specific decedent.
    “She was from a large family and had many friends, so the funeral was crowded with mourning survivors”

    Via wiktionary.

    Did you really just not look this up, at all? Seriously, this is an extremely common usage of the term. Why are you so defensive about this? For that matter, why do you think arguing semantics at all is relevant to the discussion at hand - beyond just making you look like you’re arguing in bad faith?



  • Warl0k3@lemmy.worldto196@lemmy.blahaj.zonerule
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    48
    ·
    edit-2
    9日前

    I used to be pretty neutral about it -people are obsessed with all kinds of weird shit, why is this any different- but then my cousin did some truly horrifying national news making shit (and then in an unrelated incident, another family member was murdered incredibly publicly…) and… oh boy. The truecrime community is full of some of the truly most self-absorbed, main character syndrome people. A particular favorite was when someone who’d been hounding a family member for details, and who was subsequently blocked for it, dug up their address and wrote them a physical letter asking for details, in pink ink.

    Just. How tone-deaf do you have to be to think that’s at all appropriate? what the fuck?

    I like crime, it’s interesting, but in 99% of the true crime I’m interested in nobody gets injured. Weird how the “truecrime” podcasts never seem to feature, like, elaborate fraud schemes, you have to go to the financial podcasts to find it (and oh boy are they awful in new and exciting ways!)