celeste

I was wondering how they reached such wildly different numbers.

The governor’s office referred CalMatters’ questions to the state’s Health and Human Services Agency. Rodger Butler, a spokesperson for the agency, said CARE Court has reached more than 10,000 people – a conclusion the administration came to by adding together the 5,484 petitions filed as of June, plus the 4,887 people who first engaged with CARE Court but ended up getting services elsewhere.

But he acknowledged that math could double-count people, as some individuals may have been the subject of a petition and then received services elsewhere. And he acknowledged that it includes people who had their petitions dismissed without receiving services, and those whose petitions are still being processed and have yet to receive services.

Marketing was her main skill, wasn't it?

I prefer the purity and simplicity of the standard piss fetishist.

The incident took place Aug. 30 while Sinema, I-Ariz., was out of town, according to charging documents. Matthew Ammel, 39, allegedly contacted Sinema and demanded that she post a video to her X account. He told her that if she declined to do so, he would damage a painting every 10 minutes, according to the documents.

Sinema told law enforcement officers that she refused, prompting Ammel to take down about 22 paintings and throw them into the swimming pool, according to a probable cause statement.

The headline had me imagining a way different crime. Like, him drugged up and running through the house with a bat. Not this...art hostage situation?

Yup!

https://exronmusic.com/2026/05/17/dancesafe-announces-staff-layoffs-amid-financial-crisis/ bummer. Guess they're moving to a chapter based method

The photos, which circulated as advertisements for a sex store in San Francisco up until 2020, depict Gallant modeling in a leather posture collar and metal chains. The pictures were first reported by the New York Post.

Good for him!

“The photographs are authentic and were taken during a private, consensual photo session involving Chris and his then-partner, with whom he was in a committed four-year relationship,” Gallant’s attorney told the Post of his work as a model. “These photographs have no bearing on Chris’s record, qualifications, judgment, or ability to serve.”

So, absolutely nothing wrong, then.

Text. I think the answers on this kind of social media are going to skew that way.

Time to quit the life of crime and start a career in J-Lo impersonation. There's got to be a market, right?

I agree with the other comments that it's probably about memory more than anything, especially in faster paced communication like an in person conversation.

In like, a blog post intended for lots of people to read, it's contextually dependent. Probably? Like, if they're reviewing the movie, they're talking about how the actor filled the role. In a plot description, it's more natural to say the character name. If the actor is named then, it could be intended to imply the actor never disappeared into the role. "Then Chris Hemsworth snuck into Whosville dressed as santa and stole all the presents with his dog Max" implies that the person talking never entirely saw Chris as the Grinch.

But, yeah, in immediate one on one talk, I assume it's the name that comes to mind first. The famous person is memorable. Though, if you got a very strange mental image, you can also consider the possibility that the speaker was making a joke, like I was with "how chris stole christmas" up there. The quality of the joke is separate from whether it was intended as one.

I would assume a kid that age doing it had some kind of disability and move on. A binary ok or not is irrelevant, because it'd be none of my business unless they want to shake my hand.