Currently reading Robert Anton Wilson’s Cosmic Trigger II꧇ Down to Earth. This is a somewhat autobiographical trilogy, though mixed in with a lot of spiritualism, conspiracism, and some philosophy. I am mainly reading it due to my interest in discordianism. If you want to read part of it to check it out I would suggest reading down to earth, as it is far more readable than Cosmic Trigger I꧇ Final Secrets of the Illuminati.
This is the way
layouts is easy, but I’m afraid it does not support dictionaries, so that might be a dealbreaker for you
You would like unexpected keyboard for your phone then. It supports en–dashes, em—dashes and non-breaking spaces without needing a symbol layer.
I just switched to a keyboard that has both em- and endashes, so I am slightly irritated that using them would make my writing look like ai now
Because everyone uses whatsapp. For most there isn’t really an option of not using whatsapp. Though more and more people are switching to signal nowadays, which is good to see.
Which is why we use plural for singular second person, obviously
E: I am not gonna continue this prescriptivist argument any further. There are certainly cases where “they is” is correct, but that does not discount the singular “they are”. This is my stance and remains my stance. You believe whatever you want, have a nice day.
Yeah? The pronoun is what causes it to be plural. This is how the grammar works. I don’t understand what your argument is here.
Transcription: Image of a tweet by pbsnews posted July 11th, 2025. The tweet reads “A State Department employee shared with PBS news an image from inside the department”. The image includes a piece of paper taped to a mirror with the words: ‘colleagues, if you remain, RESIST FASCISM. Remember the oath you vowed to uphold.’" Attached to the tweet is an image, that contains aformentioned piece of paper, taped to a bathroom mirror. The bathroom stalls are visible in its reflection.
Link: https://xcancel.com/NewsHour/status/1943805242543390807
We really need to just start sending texts.
So you would say that when referencing a singular specific person of undeterminate gender in the third person we should use is? Because I am quite sure that, if that has ever been correct at all, it certainly isn’t now. As per merriam webster: A student was found with a knife and a BB gun in their backpack Monday, district spokeswoman Renee Murphy confirmed. The student, whose name has not been released, will be disciplined according to district policies, Murphy said. They also face charges from outside law enforcement, she said.— Olivia Krauth
E: also, “Each member [of the women’s touch football team] found something they could improve on in the future.”
Dalby (Queensland) Herald (Nexis) 21 October 16, 2014 (as quoted in the oxford english dictionary)
Contradicts you as well unless you’d like to argue that “each man are fighting for himself” is correct.
You might want to work on your grammar, my friend.
'Tis meet that some more audience than a mother, since nature makes them partial, should o’erhear the speech."— Shakespeare, Hamlet (1599);
Caesar: “No, Cleopatra. No man goes to battle to be killed.” Cleopatra: “But they do get killed” —Shaw, Caesar and Cleopatra (1901);
In an 1881 letter, Emily Dickinson wrote “Almost anyone under the circumstances would have doubted if [the letter] were theirs, or indeed if they were themself.”
George Eliot (1859) – Adam Bede: “It is too late to spare anyone when they are dead.”
You is not very smart, is you?
Anarchism wants to do away with salaries altogether in most cases. Anarchism is about increasing freedom, meaning the ability for an individual to take the actions they want to take. A part of this is ensuring no person is dying of starvation/living on the street/etc.
That’s not really a valid argument, as wikipedia is descriptive, not prescriptive. But besides that, yes it does?
Anarchism in it’s correct interpretation rejects all hierarchies, be it from the state, white supremacy, the patriarchy or capitalism. Since money is equivalent to power income inequality does inherently imply a hierarchy.
I mean… can you really call it anarchism if you have a n implicit hierarchy? I would say that defeats the point.
We’re on the left. The only anarchism is social anarchism.
Hey, we are an anarchist instance, not "anarcho"capitalist. (Look at db0’s blog, he might be an ai shill but he’s not an ancap)
That’s dictionary.com pointing out that it is now in common enoudh use to be a word. English isn’t French, we don’t have a language police that comes to chop off your head if you use a newer spelling, and I don’t think we should either. Sike is correct now.