By definition, an agenda is "a program of things to be done or considered" which does not equate to wanting to do something. It more closely resembles a daily planner or task list.

So in as much as you and I have an "agenda" when we get out of bed, you are right, the person submitting the PR did likely have an agenda of waking up and going about their day. There isn't a 'woke agenda' at play here, however, as the person I replied to seemed to imply.

Along with potential reasons mentioned in this post, right wing folks also have fewer obvious places to go troll now that twitter is just filled with them and Hershey's or whatever. Perhaps they are coming here looking for trouble specifically.

It's also possible they've always been here and have just found more reasons to engage recently. Either way, the amount of bad faith discussion and derisive language is frustrating and upsetting.

I have just been blocking individuals if I find myself getting frustrated, but I also took a long break from social media because I felt like the discussions about Gaza were bordering toxic, so I'm not sure my approach is sustainable.

Imagine you have been purposefully targeted for harassment or excluded from activities in the past due to your preferred pronouns or perceived gender. Seeing "he" with that context would likely feel excluding, which is a reason someone without an 'agenda' would want to see it changed.

I am not traveling to go see this one, but did for the one that went across the US a few years ago. I thought it was really cool and would go again if it weren't so far away. The way the hot Tennessee day got so much cooler, the way the evening bugs came out, the birds stopped singing, the shadows looking like they had a bite out of them, all together with being able to see the suns corona for a couple minutes made for a really really cool experience for me. It was also a big party/camping trip with friends so that helped too.

I could see it not having that impact for everyone, but I figured I'd share.

I'd argue that, while reductive, "it's bad" is probably a pretty safe takeaway from this, given that the article says if you are of a healthy weight and activity level that you can get away with eating a less balanced diet. Most people in the areas interacting with this post aren't probably doing that exercise and weight thing, so the carefully balanced diet it is for us. Based on North American red meat consumption this is likely much less than the reader currently eats, so they should probably cut back.

Internet translation of that resoning: "it's bad don't eat it".

We had a mold issue stemming from a shower vent not connecting to the roof and just dumping humid air into the attic so we wanted to fix that. Found rotten newspaper from the late 40s as insulation mixed with vermiculite under a thin layer of cellulose, which we treated as asbestos and had that professionally removed. Under that found a whole spiderweb of live knob and tube which wasn't connected to any devices, was disconnected from many of its knobs, and was missing insulation in many places while it was draped loosely over some metal plumbing up there.

The project started as a disconnected shower vent causing mold, and ended up with a whole rewire of the lighting and outlet circuits in the house. Wild stuff.

We were also swapping out the breakers for ones up to code since we had messed with the circuits, and one a/gfci breaker just kept tripping. Found a light fixture that had evidentially been sparking away up there for who knows how long.

Feels really good to have had eyes on every box in the house and know that what's there now is leagues safer than what was there before.

Their coffee tastes the way it does because of how they roast it, it's a purposeful style thing (that tastes terrible and is horribly overpriced imo).

Their roasts are also darker than they say. Everything they have is dark roast, with their 'blond' coming in closer to a medium.

People go nuts over the sugar, caffeine and perceived status, it has nothing to do with the taste of the coffee. As a fellow black coffee drinker, my recommendation is to avoid Starbucks unless you happen to be near a union store where the coffee is guaranteed to taste more like freedom, but still like ashes soaked in oil.

In case you want more details: The way coffee roasting works is you move beans around in a real hot container, and you try to keep them to a specific point on a temperature graph at each moment as they roast. A different roaster would roast them a bit slower, but Starbucks just blasts those beans with everything they have, then they don't stop until the beans are burnt. This gives them their "signature taste". This is largely because of Howard Shultz, the guy who drove the company to be a cafe, and until recently the CEO. That's his preferred coffee taste and that's what he demands the company makes.

Is that true? That sounds like something someone would just say with no factual backing. I read a fair bit recreationally about pre European societies and I haven't seen some universal truth about screwing each other over for some action.

There were and presumably are many societies that treat procreation and child rearing completely differently than we do today. Once you stop looking at your neighbors kids as "theirs" and seeing them as "ours" there isn't much drive to compete with them.

If only it was just teenagers, physically grown ass men and women do this too. Have had some I thought were good friends cut me off from talking to them "because I didn't have an iPhone".

We recently got a chip drop and cardboard/mulched the entire yard in prep for a more food and natives oriented lawn (and to kill the grass). The neighbors and family are incredulous, but the enormous earthworms we keep finding seem to enjoy it. When the leaves started falling we started mixing them with the mulch, even asked some neighbors for their bagged leaves.

I think they'll understand better when it starts taking shape. And anyway, it's not their lawn, who cares!

Among other things, I take issue with "men build social order, liberal democracy, nearly everything else...". This is simply not true, social order has existed in many forms since people existed, liberal democracy has existed in many places run primarily by women or in mixed gender groups, and men do not exclusively build the world.

Yes, men are experiencing a mental health crisis (at least in the US where I am most familiar), and it has been largely ignored by government but not because women are deemed more important, but because we do not support mental health of anyone. To say no one cares and no one is doing anything about it is like saying no one cares about the lives of our children because we haven't solved school shootings yet. People know it's a problem, people want it to change and to fix it, but our system of government is not reflective of the people's opinions. (This is part of what makes up poorly conceived rhetoric about men ruining things, "if men created our liberal democracy and society as you say, surely it's obvious it is not working out too well").

It's normal to feel upset and defensive when you see a group you identify with suffering. It's not okay to take those negative emotions and direct them towards other groups, be they gender, ethnic, social, or otherwise. Remember it's in the best interests of those who oppress to keep the oppressed fighting amongst themselves.

I'm with you in parts, but some products are definitely made to a lower standard than they should be. There's reasons why they are made to that low standard (money for shareholders being the primary motive in most cases), but that doesn't excuse the waste they are creating and the bad situation they are placing on consumers.

We are faced with a false choice, choose either cheap and disposable or expensive and repairable. Most don't have the money right now to afford the repairable option and then take the more expensive in the long term disposable route. This keeps more money flowing to the company, and it keeps the consumer unable to buy the better option.

In the past there was not a disposable option, perhaps not an option at all, and the base cost was higher, but consumers had more money to buy things with. People also made more money than they do now relative to cost of living. There was also a member of the family at home sewing clothes and cooking meals, that's a lot of free labor. I deep dove into budgets from 1914 and sears catalogs but it's perhaps too much for this (though it was interesting).

I'll close with an example about clothes dryers (USA). They are incredibly simple appliances, they are made up of a rotating drum, a blower, a heater, and a control system for timing and temperature selection (basically another timer). In older models this did not break often, and when it did it was standard parts and quick labor and it's working for another 5-10 years. Newer designs have proprietary parts and chips that change from year to year. This means if your chip breaks you're done and you need a new appliance. The chip doesn't bring much new function to the appliance, and it certainly isn't anything that couldn't be done with an off the shelf part.

The difference is things were designed to be repaired before and now they aren't. We can still design things that way but we choose not to. There's no huge extra cost associated with a replaceable battery or an off the shelf control chip, companies just choose to push disposable because it makes more money. That push is bad for people and bad for the environment, and to combat it we can buy repairable, but we should also push back on companies trying to make a quick buck and support right to repair where we can.