No one is saying, "Stop all Seuss books from entering libraries". The publisher stopped printing a small subset of books. Oh the places you go will still have plenty of shelf space and be given to every graduating senior for quite a while I'm sure.
What hyperbole. The publisher decided to stop publishing a book. Ebay decided to enforce their TOS that has been in place all over. It's hardly book burning.
Edit: Also, you know there are Americans out there actually burning books like the Quran, right? No need to be outraged over slippery slope fallacious "book burning" when you could spend that energy on cases where real actual book burning has taken place.
You realize that libraries are not infinite in space or capacity, right? Every book in a library necessarily pushes out some other book that could have been in there but didn't make the cut.
Given that, libraries shouldn't be required to carry every book, they should optimize their collections for what their local users want to read. If it turns out that old out of print childrens' books aren't popular, then why should they carry them?
You've made a strawman. I didn't say that all politics must exist in the workplace.
Work is inherently political. There's no escaping that your workplace is making decisions about wages, benefits, access to their products, how they spend their donation dollars, if they support candidates, who they employ, etc. etc. etc. All of these are political decisions that (I believe) are inescapable and also that workers should have input into.
A web design shop could be a co-op or it could be a standard llc with a founder on top. It might make price services to be accessible to everyone or exclusively focus on enterprise software. They might donate to a local politician. Or rent in a particular area of town. Or purchase carbon offsets for their energy use. Etc. etc.
All of these are inherently political decisions. There's no such thing as an Apolitical workplace.
You've misunderstood. Not all politics belong in work, but all work is political.
You cannot escape politics in work, because every workplace is making decisions about benefits, wages, their use of energy, who they hire, who they donate to, how accessible their products are, etc. All of which have a political component.
An aluminum smelter, for instance, uses lots of electricity. How they choose to source that electricity is absolutely a politically linked decision.
I think you misunderstand. I'm not saying all politics belong at work, but that all work involves politics.
I, likewise, am not interested in discussing presidential candidates with my coworkers. But every employer makes decisions about wages, benefits, donations, access to their products and services, energy consumption, their local communities, support of political candidates, etc.
No workplace is an island, and if a workplace is going to engage in those things, I want to be able to discuss how my particular workplace interacts with them. (E.g. if I worked in a factory, maybe I'd want to talk about how the factory sourced energy.)
"Apolitical" is the default. It's another way of saying, "The way things are is fine".
The problem is that this is, in itself, a political stance.
An example could be climate change. If Coinbase is doing nothing to make energy more green (even if that's just writing amicus briefs or blog posts), then they are effectively saying, "The way things are is fine."
Yes, this is my point. The school should buy them. If the school isn't sufficiently funded, the local area should fund the school. If the local area cannot, then we move up the chain. The funds exist, they should be directed at education, housing, etc.
The metagameplay -- rogue reset you, permanently, when you died. Similarly when you die in FTL you have to start all over.
It's both an incorrect term (because, as you mentioned, the overlap with rogue is limited) and absolutely the correct term (because people generally understand what it means, even if they've never heard of rogue).
I think it's important to remember that language evolves, it's more important to be understood than to be correct. Shouting into a hurricane isn't going to stop the storm, no matter how right you are.
If only we were remotely close to giving everyone equal opportunities. Sadly, we've got a lot of work to do before we're there, and to some it's going to feel very unfair when they start to lose their advantages.
This seems like a very strange idea to triple down on. Take or leave the feedback, but I'm not sure you are helped by trying to debate the relative merit of these terms.
FWIW, as a native English speaker I also found your post both needlessly offensive and equally inscrutable.
Our family buys a whole animal from a local farmer periodically. We evaluate how the animal was raised, the sustainability of the farm, etc. to the best of our ability. It's the one exception to my vegetarianism. It results in me eating meat every now and again, but meat I know was treated humanely.
It does make it much easier to 'half-abstain' because it's not an exception I can make easily on a whim at the grocery store. Buying a whole animal takes some planning.
It's been an ideal combination for us -- higher quality meat, considerably less meat consumed, and education to my kiddo about where meat comes from (and what responsible looks like on a farm).
I'm a vegetarian. I love meat. I'd eat meat all the time if I knew it didn't cause horrifying suffering and environmental damage.
I've had the impossible burger (and liked it) as well, and on a highly mass produced burger like the whopper I'm willing to bet it's close to the real thing.
How many of those run on the web as a platform? (A cursory search suggests 'not many' or 'not without some effort'?)
There are some components I'd ideally like to avoid rewriting for my web and desktop applications. (E.g. why should I have to write render code for my friends list component more than once?)