OfCourseNot

I always thought that about Jessica Fletcher. Too many people dying around that woman.

Right? It's just a shiny conductive plastic.

It depends. How dark is the kid's skin? Are they in a poor neighborhood?

You are just rejecting reality then. You've said YouTube or other big social media to be the 'virtual town squares' but they are not, they are virtual malls. Also real life town squares can have rules imposed by the town council too.

They have plenty of other places to go with their content, some platforms aren't for them and that's ok. But they don't want to express themselves shouting from a soapbox in the town square, they want to sell their content in the mall and these particular malls just don't sell that kind of product.

I don't think freedoms are opposed here. Creators have the freedom to express themselves that freedom just doesn't force anyone to give them a platform. They can use their own or another one that's willing to host their content, which there are many, and then if they, creators or platform, are legally punished it would be a violation of their freedom of expression.

There is not a fundamental right to use other people's platform for your expression. That's not what freedom of expression means.

Or the pg tips approach: 'd'ya know what? No more tag or thread for ya now you've got to fish and pinch the baggy out of your scolding tea ya wanker'.

Yeah maybe not even non-standard as much as non-formal in this case.

I wanted to mean 'different from what you learn in English class in school as a kid' so non-formal, non -standard, dialectal, slang, misspellings, same-sounding words...

More or less my point, languages are weird with lots of arbitrary idiomatic things—'would rather' but 'had better'.

After posting the comment I've thought 'wait, it makes more sense for it to be should' so my guesses are a bit off today.

That'd be a contraction of 'would' in this case, wouldn't it? As an ESL speaker I used to find these grammar 'mistakes' (for lack of a better word) made more difficult for me to parse the sentences. As with code 'written once but read many times' would apply here.

But isn't that example absolute 'misandry rage bait' tho? I had to look it up (because I haven't been so terminally online lately) and, after skimming through some discovery channel results, it seems like exactly that.

Those videos just cherry pick the answers that are gonna give them more 'engagement', I do believe that 'I prefer to encounter a random bear rather than a random man while alone in the forest' to be a rather 'misandrist' (just plainly dumb honestly) answer, and I don't believe this is what a majority of women think. So I see it as obvious bait to drive those that like to cry misandry when they are forced to try women as equals to the comments.

Quick edit: if the question would have been 'who have hurt you less?' Or 'by whom are you less threatened on a daily basis?' then 'bears' is definitely a reasonable answer.

It might not be written literally like that but for Microsoft not letting third party developers write kernel drivers for windows would be considered abusing their position in the market very fast. The problem isn't they allow kernel drivers, this is just ms throwing all the balls they can, is that they certified this very driver, as tested and stable. Without this certification most IT teams would've been more reticent to install crowdstrike's root kit in their systems.