skisnow

For a given individual, sure. If you're trying to do some statistics over a whole group that you have no other record for, it could be useful.

It sounds ridiculous now with everything that's happened in social media in the meantime, but I can see that being a thing in 2006 when the vibe of social media was very different to what it's become now. Back then it was just a tidy little PHP site for you to chat and share photos with friends and family on. Literally nothing appeared in your feed that wasn't a post from a Friend. It was basically a Whatsapp group with a photo gallery feature.

Since Facebook didn't have the baggage it has now, it's much easier to read refusing to join your girlfriend's circle of friends and family back then as a wider rejection of her as a person, same as if you refused to join her family Whatsapp/Telegram/whatever group chat.

I'm not taking her side here, but I wanted to give a bit of perspective for people looking at it through the lens of 2025.

Serious answer, that's not ever what would get prosecuted. What would get you prosecuted in your scenario is e.g. sending a memo to the network of malls you operate saying "do not renew or accept new leases from McDonalds", or to the accounts department of your company saying "do not accept any staff expense claim receipts from McDonalds".

(I'm not supporting the bill by the way, just answering your question at face value)

Yeah. I worked for a US-headquartered multinational in Asia, and we had to do a whole training about how we had to be scrupulous in not doing anything that could be interpreted as a boycott of Israel otherwise the company would be breaking the law.

Continued astonishment at how consistently and repeatedly they self-own with stunts like this. Humiliation fetish is the only explanation.

It’s not uncommon for some sects to write G-d instead of God as a handy workaround, and even then “God” is already a euphemism for the Tetragrammaton rather than His actual name. So in that vein using “G” on its own is probably safe.

A line obscures the thing it's trying to explain. Visually noisy, hard to read.

I suspect that the majority of the population outside of Lemmy would consider shouting "Long Live Chairman Mao" while murdering someone, to be a negative quality.

Yeah, I immediately suspected it sounded just a bit too "Anti-capitalists are all communists and murderers" as a headline.

Thanks for that. It looks from that like a relevant detail OOP missed out is that these thing (purportedly) claim to produce as much oxygen as 15 trees, which isn't nothing.

Came here to post the exact same thing

Yes, what the Democrats need to do is to keep shifting to the right.

/s