I suppose a group chat by it's very definition is a clique, else it would be a public chat.
The key - as in face to face interactions - is to only bother yourself with groups you have a personal interest in, or a professional benefit from being in.
It's a fine balance. Too many groups and it comes across as insincere, too few and you end up out of the loop on a lot of friendly news or professional opportunities.
I think this - and the dozens of other reasons - is it.
I'm in a handful of reasonably active group chats, and if one of my absolute banger messages doesn't get a response, welll... maybe it just wasn't that good. Not awful in as much that people leave the group en maase, but just not nearly as funny or interesting to other folk as it was to me.
It may be that it was the group chat equivalent of clicking a Lemmy post, thinking "huh, cool", and moving on.
It may be that the post was so balanced and well presented from most angles, that there isn't really anything to add.
It could be that my post went against the grain of the flow of conversation or the tastes of the majority of the group, and people chose to ignore it rather than tell me to fuck off.
It could be that people's lives have run away with them, nobody gave any serious mind to the post when they read it, and it would just be a bit weird replying twelve or 24 hours after the post.
Any which way - if the group is still active, and you've not been called out publically or privately, then people likely don't give a toss and have moved on - no harm no foul.
I can only speak from across the pond, but that's likely the strategy. It has no downsides for the current administration - but the incoming administration either has to cancel it and look like the shitheads (not that they seem to care about that), or run with it to save face, and try and find the budget for it.
I'm not questioning that it happens - it's a common thing in high volume hotels or high value airline routes after all - but I'd be interested in what sort of margins they oversell at.
That said, most of the documents would likely be commercially sensitive I should imagine.
I suppose it's irritating that you pay (a likely large amount of money as it's probably a UK ticket) for a ticket with a seat reservation, the least they could do is actually assign you a seat.
If it's a free for all and - as you likely correctly say - they don't oversell the number of tickets against the number of seats, then the reservation card of the ticket is a little pointless really.
In all honesty, I've found a more willing group of people to discuss things with - even if a lot of the time, our platforms and views are very different. There's a larger acceptance on Lemmy of other people's views and their right to hold them which is super cool, every now and then though I get brought down to earth with a bump.
If I see someone's reply start with "So, you..." - I'm already rolling my eyes so fast that I'm time traveling back to nineteen-blackandwhite. In general, it's an overly reductive view on the statement that misrepresents the initial comment in order to try and spark a pointless argument.
It's exhausting.
(in b4 "so you hate reading comments then?" 😂)
e: it's not just Lemmy to be fair - the other popular aggregator, most tabloid news sites with comments, and a lot of gaming news sites with social interaction are largely the same.
I have a laptop for uni work that I bought in Jan 2011. It's got Lubuntu running on it and most of my work is done on Google Docs... so I'm not seeing the benefit of upgrading really.
Competitive packages should attract successful candidates, not cunts who consistently fail at both moderating pay, and literally shitting in the rivers and leaving for the taxpayer to clean up.
Fuck the shareholders of this company, it's an abject failure and needs to be brought into local authority ownership.
That one took me a minute.
It should win a gong.
It kept me ticking over, anyway.