I don’t think I get what you mean when you say “Walled Garden” in this context. Can you elaborate?

Interesting. Ugh, I feel the need to go peek at it now, but I also expect to really not like it. Oh well, here goes.

Yeah, I’m not a fan of the microblog format, but I’m pretty sure everyone here is going to agree that Mastodon is the superior Twitter replacement.

Zac Efron.

The girl I was crushing on in high school crushed on him really hard as he appeared in High School Musical. I spent wayyyy too much of my youth trying to emulate Zac Efron as a result. Eventually, that whole style just kinda became my whole style. Seems like a good fit.

Oh no, now we have to ban them all?? What a shame!

/s

Sorry, was definitely reading this 90% asleep as I rolled out of bed. Thanks for the extra link anyway.

Can you pass a link?

Yup, found the round earther.

I can’t tell if this is real life or sarcasm…

Did I really miss the memo on this one?

If that’s really how that works, then I can see why the expense has been kicked down the line so long. I worry this allocated money won’t be enough then and that we’re probably talking “show” money vs “getting things done” money.

Yeah, but every dollar spent on repaving roads is a dollar that can’t be spent on lead pipes.

I suppose the example I’ve provided is flawed in a sense though. Probably a better example would be that an intersection gets torn up to replace pipes, but the local town council insists on using his brother’s asphalt company. “They might cost twice as much for the repavong, but I promise, it’ll be higher quality” kinda junk.

Like, it feels like this should be the kind of money to put a real dent in the problem…but I worry that the corruption of local governments and the associated contractors will probably soak up a lot of this on tangential things (e.g. lead pipes crosses under this really old road at one point; guess we’ll need to tear up the road for 10 miles in each direction of the cross under point and then repave the whole thing, just to be sure)

Edit: modifying example for clarity.

So that’s what people keep telling me will happen, but I watched a More Perfect Union video once and now my recommendations are completely clogged with urban planning and union organization things (I’m primarily a watcher of edu-tainment things, e.g. sci show, CGP Grey, Knowing better, etc)

Au contraire Mon ami, I think the community has mistaken what I mean (probably my fault, I didn’t think my original comment through very thoroughly and accept responsibility if I communicated it poorly).

I mean to imy that Biden has made good choices in his appointments, but that his ability to speak and his general lack of charisma are the reason he’s not trumping Trump (pun intended) in the polling for the upcoming election.

I would define Trump as a strong, but bad, leader due to his charisma and ability to take ownership for his people’s actions (even if he takes “liberties” in defining who “his people” are). In my workplace, I would want someone who speaks highly of the actions of me and my team.

I don’t see that from Biden.

As such, I would not describe Biden as a strong leader, but with the caveat that “Good” and “strong” exist on independent axes of the “leadership chart”.

I would argue that what you’ve described is a good leader.

To me a strong leader is someone who gets out front of their team and acts as a strong face for their team. That means that the team is getting all the accolades and recognition for their good work, that is keenly running damage control for their mistakes, and that is talking up their team at all points.

I feel Biden is failing as that strong leader.

Unless you’re chronically online, you probably aren’t aware of the recent actions of the NLRB nor of some of the other wins the people Biden appointed over the term of his presidency. He’s not out there blasting some of the absolute W’s his team has gotten, and I think that’s showing in the lackluster polling Biden is getting atm.

The implication of what I’ve said that I want to be clear on: a strong leader isn’t necessarily a good leader, nor is a good leader necessarily a strong leader.

The downvotes I’m getting says the wider community disagrees with this assessment, and in my mind that is what it is. I feel that not recognizing this distinction makes one more inclined to overlook how their voting peers can be swayed towards strong but bad leaders (e.g. Trump) and will thusly make said person less able to influence their voting peers to change their vote.

See, I’m almost convinced that it isn’t even Biden. Like, Biden is not a strong leader at all…and I think that’s been a great thing (at least for domestic policy).

It feels like he’s gotten out of the way of the competent people who actually “run the show” in all the myriad departments of government and just let them do their thing.

Not in the slightest. I feel the same way.

Not JFK, which I hear is a terrible one as well.

I’m down with this actually.

Dulles is by far the WORST airport I’ve ever been to/through. If we’re gonna name anything after Trump this feels most fitting.

Naw, it’s actually one Kinda Gallon; a Kinda Gallon of course referring to the average of the masses of a gallon of water, a gallon of beer, and a gallon of whiskey.