There is a difference between approaching a solution with “no, it’s not good enough” and “good, now let’s make it better”. It’s not really different if you strip feeling out of it, but in a greater context, that feeling means something.

I agree with your responses, but you’re overall using the former technique. That will rub people wrong and spark conflict.

Rape is an actual crime in the UK, it’s not a crime by name in New Jersey. They’re being consistent with charges based on the jurisdiction.

…is facing at least 10 years in prison if found guilty of first-degree aggravated sexual assault, second-degree sexual assault, and second-degree endangerment to the welfare of a child…

Those are the legal terms for different kinds of rape.

L O V E
O
V
E

Is what it would be, and the pic is someone obviously making it wrong on purpose

Why would you spread this? That’s the point of these things, to get a reaction out of people and get it seen by more people.

Stop making shit worse

Son of gold would be “goldson”. “Goldman” would be a moniker for someone who worked with gold (miner, jeweler, gilder) or possessed/wore a lot of it.

Some sort of rule about verification may help your cause, and I hope it runs well for you

Without strong and trusted mods, this will be interesting…

Saying that “strikes will cause disruption” is not union busting in any sense of the word.

It’s the consequence for shitty company practices and how workers get to be heard. It’s literally the point of a strike. It’s stating a fact.

Because the term means real things that can be legally fought against. If you misuse the term and teach others to misuse it, it’s is more likely that other people will react incorrectly to challenges faced.

An easy way to undermine a movement is to look at people who are saying factually incorrect things to make their point and say “see? They don’t know what they’re talking about. Don’t listen to them”. And boom you’ve now made it easier to convince anyone on the fence to side against you.

It’s a really easy and common divide and conquer strategy.

If you want to help people while firing them up, then feed them the real information about union busting and how companies are actually doing it.

Union busting is a real and legal thing. This isn’t it. You promoting these lies harms people trying to unionize.

whispers you’re eating polymers. The bad part of gum.

It’s the same statement with extra steps. To pretend otherwise is to be willfully ignorant.

If you eat celery or beans, I’ve got bad news for you

Your first link is about micro plastics, and they even say not all brands have them. So if a product is made of plastic and doesn’t always contain micro plastics (which are found in the air and water and soil and foods), then…polymers might not actually be plastics sometimes. Or in gum, many times.

Also silk, wool, cellulose, protein

Well, not quite. You’d have to have rights to the land to do that. Else someone could ride up and just take it from you.

So then it’s not worse?

Polymer != Plastic. Plastic is a polymer, but not all polymers are plastic. Wtf is this source.

To be fair, the line between those two is pretty thin. One does imply the other. You drawing a gulf between them is silly to me.