Look, I’m going to criticize you for your well-intended but impractical behaviour, mainly because of the immediacy of the high-risk problem rather than considering your point of view as a futile long-term proposal, but know that taking time to bother with criticizing you by forming new sentences and paragraphs is because there is value in arguing with you for a bit rather than simply forgetting about you like we do with the nutcases supporting Trump. Anyway, here comes my main points:

1. With the time left before the elections, your previously understandable efforts to promote and establish a 3rd party to become a major contender has failed. All I’ve seen on discussion platforms like many politics communities in Lemmy or R*eddit have failed to plant the name of a single 3rd party in people’s memory, and I’m reaching to this conclusion by the lack of specific naming of the 3rd parties in these discussions, which should a good indicator of visibility of those parties.

2. İımproving the adoption of a 3rd party in such a long-standing battle between 2 parties is a long and difficult effort. Toiling against the difficulty for a better alternative is commendable and a good thing, but if your long and hard toil is in risk of being to to the trash bin by the Republicans in the next election, you make sure your other neighbor the Democrats keep the dictatorial Republicans at bay while you keep toiling to get closer to fruition, even if you don’t like the Democrats either in the first place.

3. 3rd parties don’t have time to gain any impactful ground within the time left. Even if all of them increase their votes and chairs and have more than 50% of the votes in the decision making with all 3rd parties combined, your government structure enables firmly-united minority groups to pass or fail decisions when the majority is undecided and disunited, which can easily be said on most matters about competing 3rd parties. A united 30% can beat a disunited and illusioned combination of a 5+5+5+10+15+5+10=55% if 2-3 of these decide to not act together with the rest on a decision.

4. While it can be a risk of authoritarianism to put any party far ahead of another, it is much less with one that mostly acts in the favor of its citizens than it is with one that openly advocates for indefinite hold of power through all-but-unnamed authoritarian actions. You can still think and put forward the evidence of Democrat wrongdoings and most of the leftist people will agree with you, but when you advocate for a divided fight against the threat of Trump or claim a less known party that can even be rivaled by another less known party in terms of current chance winning the elections, you can be considered inexperienced at best and a division instigator at worst, both very understandable because both are very plausible in politics.

5. Similar to 1, I am considering that most of you who keep suggesting 3rd parties don’t even know about what those parties advocate for, did and/or do, who they are funded by, who they are talking with, who they are cooperating with and who they are opposed to, the whole scheme I mean. Again, reaching to this from lack of presenting information in these regards about these parties. All I hear from those advocate 3rd party votes is just that they don’t have Biden or Trump, nothing else. “We are not our competitors” is what the Dems or Republicans supporters also say, but they say it as one point among many other points they make.

I’m not claiming any knowledge to support or debunk your knowledge or internet-fu of the U.S. parties, I am just a citizen of Turkey who has just surface knowledge of some U.S. political parties but also someone who went through the same “vote for a 3rd party, vote for another candidate in the leftist party” in the last few months before the election last year. It is a worse lack of show of governing power than Biden dozing, gazing off and stammering. Do you know what it is? It is an openly declared invitation to the bickering but prey-focused wolf pack by showing you’d rather eat the grass over there instead of here or mate with this uncooperative herd animal instead of that uncooperative herd animal.

Go toil for the Green party, go toil for another party. Take part in local promotion of these parties, help spread knowledge about them. But instead of eyeing for popularity by aiming to double your votes from 1% to 2% this election, do it on one where the wolves are starved and separated after consecutive and heavy shepherd dog victories. That is when you are safe to build lasting support for whatever you stand for.

Basically trivia to make noise, nothing else. Advertisement is advertisement, even if the game is probably like 10 years away at this point.

Yup. Prime option to put out a little terrace or a roof window where you can ground yourself with the roof in peripheral vision while looking at a nice vista.

Yes. This looks like how I start my minecraft houses as a stock functional 4-walls-rooms and then start doing many smaller additions or removals to make them fit the flow of the environment or at least not look like a modern apartment block.

Oh boy, in that concept, at least in style and somewhat in philosophy, I have another, a completely popular anime to recommend: Cowboy Bebop

Not to compare, but I remember I had put a few olden (20 years old at least) lego bricks from my childhood together and made a support castle underneath an XFX brand 6700 XT with 3 fans.

Failed, go to horny jail.

Labeling one side as terrorists while both are employing the terrorism has just a difference of political power, and that is even in some parts of the world only. Also, lets not forget the side that is not officially labeled a terrorist organization has been employing the terrorism to a greater extent with much more intensity for 3 quarters of a century and only for vile outcomes rather than as crappy tools for an understandable cause.

The non-intense part is an actual requirement for land development. I don’t think their zionist settlers would like the experience of trucking beach house materials under fire or while facing blockades. Those are reserved for the aid convoys.

In practicality, and this life-and-death is a matter of practicality rather than preference, betrayal beats zealous genocide support.

Even as someone from outside, I can say the U.S.’ best bet is Biden again. His international politics are no different than most U.S. presidents that came to office in the last century, but at least U.S. citizens are getting a nice end of the mostly shit-ended sticks for a change. And that goes for all the current immigrant peoples in the U.S., too, although for many the reason for leaving their homes can be traced back to deep-rooted U.S. foreign policy.

What do they have with Trump? Persecution during immigration while their home countries will be kept bombed to hell or stripped and exploited by the ongoing U.S. policy.

I’m not porposing or defending any approach here, where do you draw the line between the decision to address the underlying issues and catering to creating isolated environments to shelter the marginalized groups, tho?

I get that taking a breather in a safe environment to help with self-esteem and love is critical so as not to sink below that threshold of constantly feeling overwhelmed that is different for everyone, and I’m in no way seeing a one-day thing as anything else, but as public coordination events, how do you draw the line between the two I mentioned above? First example of going beyond giving breathing room to making a segregation comes to mind as the “pink buses” in which only women are allowed to be feel safe from men that some right-wing politicians bring up from time to time as a similar topic on addressing the cause vs treating the symptom or even causing different problems under such intention.

Oh no, not at all. First, you need to download the dependencies tho. Start with downloading more ram.

Tbh, uBlock Origin + brain.exe has been carrying the heaviest load for years for me. Windows Defender would catch 80% of the occasional slips where brain.exe wanted some risks, too.

Well, if you allow CELL to gobble up that one android…

Same here after all these years and a whole slew of anime. Haven’t seen Detroit Metal City, tho. Will check it out.

Thanks a lot, this makes a whole lot more contextual awareness for the situation.

Thanks for the detailed explanation about publicly traded companies, but what I wonder is the privately owned ones being forced to sell out, if there is such a thing.

For example, lets say Proton is owned by a few shareholders or just one, and it is not openly traded unless the shareholders make personal agreements to sell out or anything like that. If Google came with a truckload of cash and told these shareholders to sell their shares to Google, can they simply refuse the offer no matter how big is the pile of cash or the benefits of the offer, or do they have to find a legal reason to keep their shares? I mean, even the question sounds stupid and the answer should be “yeah you can just keep your share and run the company however you like, as long as you don’t go public listing”, but with all the concerns about the buyouts talked all around this last few years, the premise looks like it is hard to hold out.

What is this buying out talked about something not escapable if not some legal reorganization is made? It has been being talked about other companies, too, and it sounds like if you have a form of a company, you can’t legally refuse monetary offers from someone to buy your company.

Is there such a legal mechanism that forces an owner to sell out if an offer is made, or is this more about proofing a company against CEO/shareholder personal sell out decision?

Is it hard to interpret running to Russia has the core benefit of not being extradited to the U.S. almost certainly, or at least with higher probability than any other country?

They meddled with the Islamic countries beyond what befalls them, and they helped the worst of the extremists come out in the instability they helped create.

Besides, being some of the worst offenders on climate pollution per capita by far and making someone else’s homes burn to global warming first was bound to create these refugees whether those ecuador countries were stable and tried to counter the local symptoms or not. I’m not saying advancing the comfort of human living is a sin or anything zealous like that. All I’m saying is that glossing over personal and corporate consumption while neglecting apt measures in favor of decoy policies and trying to reflect the blame somewhere else was bound to have the problem become bigger and more apparent.

They reap what they have sown over the last few decades. Trying to put up a gunship and gunboat barrier over Greece while bribing the corrupt Turkish president to keep over millions of Syrian refugees, let aside others flooding illegally in groups of hundreds from Afganistan, Pakistan, Lebanon, etc. will work so far to keep the facade on.

Rising fascism in Europe is not a defense against the religious extremists. It is due to desire for continuity of personal comfort and freedom in the face of reckoning day, by ensuring those who they fucked over can’t come near and try to share in their abundance of resources.