Omnificer

It's weird to me that vanilla and chocolate have a similar history and applications but vanilla got designated as plain and boring at some point.

I'm not able to find it again, so it may be entirely bunk, but I remember reading something about the Japanese during early interactions having a stereotype that Europeans didn't bathe. Obviously this contact was past the medieval stages, but then that makes me ask "Did hygiene become less popular later?"

So, now I'm curious whether this memory is:

A) Pop culture contamination/made up whole cloth, i. e. an author who believed medieval people didn't bathe and extrapolated it to the 1500s.

B) True, and hygiene did become less popular with Europeans (seems unlikely).

C) Born of the fact that people who have been at sea for so long are not a good representation of overall hygiene.

D) Born from a another factor unrelated to hygiene, but perceived as such by the Japanese. Maybe differences in sweating or diet or something.

E) Some combination of the above.

Wait until you see the more recent lore that explains that Gamma radiation comes directly from super hell and there's magic involved. It technically doesn't make what is in the encyclopedia untrue, but it wildly recontextualizes it.

I check Standard Ebooks regularly and primarily get my public domain stuff from it. It is slow to get new content, but that's just the price to pay for free volunteer driven content.

The Ebooks are really well formatted and consistent. They've even got copies formatted especially for kobo readers. I don't actually know the difference between epub and kepub myself but it's nice to know it's meant to work with my e-reader.

I know there's some kind of small drama about the more technical aspects or style guides the volunteers are supposed to use, but whatever that is it's never impacted my ability to read the books or caused obvious breaks in the visuals.

Ah, that makes me feel better. I've probably heard of it before, and just never looked into it.

The implication of this being that I am behind the times, stuck on outdated tech, and didn't even know it is uncomfortable.

I'm confused, what Democrat politicians or campaign staff coordinated removing those communities from Reddit? And why would Democrats even need to? Those communities broke sitewide rules egregiously and frequently. Considering how long they were allowed to keep going, it seems more likely (though I'm sure not the actual case) that Donald Trump's campaign coordinated with Reddit admins to keep The_Donald open.

That's pretty crazy. Do you have examples of Reddit admins directly working with Democrat campaigns or politicians to remove content? I don't think Hunter Biden's dick pics count, as revenge porn is already illegal.

Edit: For anyone confused as to how my reply relates to the above post, the above used to be a claim that Reddit worked with democrats to remove content, but is now edited to say something completely different.

There's not much to it. They simply believe that as the strife causes conflict over resources the factions will "naturally" align along racial lines. They also believe that people "naturally" cohabitate better within their own race.

This does require ignoring all of human history and the brutal conflicts that have occurred within racially homogenous regions. But I'd never accuse white supremacists of being intelligent or genuine.

Basically the difference between being legally supported as opposed to simply not illegal.

South Africa recognizes same sex marriages, where-as the other places allow same sex relationships legally, but don't recognize the marriages.

There's also significant input from American Evangelicals contributing to these laws. For instance, Scott Lively an evangelical anti-gay activist, helped push for Uganda to penalize same-sex relationships with the death penalty. And Islam only makes up 13.7% of Uganda.

As horrendous as this ruling is, I'm also pissed at the pro-forced birthers that are upset by this ruling. It's so intellectually dishonest to object to this ruling when it uses the same justifications they use to oppose abortion.

These people pick issues to be passionate on but never actually put in the effort to research. And not just whether their position makes any sense, but what the downstream effects of the position would mean.

The politicians who write these anti-abortion laws are even more lazy. This is literally their job and they should have seen this coming. They could have put in exceptions for IVF from the get-go but they didn't, because they are more interested in winning points than writing effective legislation.