Does this ruby actually exist? There seem to be almost no references to it online. A Rolling Stones article, OP's link, and a couple of reddit posts. It does not appear on Wikipedia's list of world's largest rubies. As recently as last year, this would have placed #1 on world's largest rubies sold.
So many possible factors. Family support allowing more sleep, less car-centric cities, less tradition of single parent transporting the kid around while on errands, etc etc.
Check out this article: Fatal Distraction, it won a Pulitzer Prize. It's about how the mind works and why this incident keeps happening over and over again.
Nobody INTENDS to leave their kid in the car to die.
Fatal Distraction is a Pulitzer Prize winning article that examines how the mind works and why this sort of incident keeps happening over and over again.
They are. The people who do this? They are you and me and your neighbor.
Check out this article: Fatal Distraction, it won a Pulitzer Prize. It's about how the mind works and why this incident keeps happening over and over again.
No, it does not. I have not read anything about Gaiman's case, and have absolutely no opinion on it at this point. My comment was entirely a commentary on the absurdity of your logic.
I'm all for supporting women. Give them a chance to speak out, make sure they are fairly listened to and taken seriously. You've gone a step beyond that, you've already decided guilt and innocence and proclaimed it. More, you're doing so from a position of influence (yes, as a moderator of a large community, that's what you are). This is the sort of thing that libel charges get filed for (ok, not gonna happen at our current size, but you may want to start keeping that in mind.)
Why would you default to that?
Because that's the basis of our legal bloody system! Innocent until proven guilty! There's a thousand law professors out there who can explain it better and more eloquently than I could in a thousand years, but that's the gist of it.
You do not need a conviction to make up your mind.
That's correct. We do, however, need a conviction before stating it as fact instead of opinion.
Not only are you siding with the party with no evidence
I beg to differ. I have not sided with any party. What is it about people today that they seem unable to grasp the concept of neutrality?
Are you implying the rest of the world uses a different, more socially friendly banking system? For that matter, when's the last time China sent out a multi-billion dollar aid package?
1% is hardly worth calling sinister.
Yeah, it's only a few billion dollars. What's that between buddies?
semantic difference in my word choice is hardly significant enough to be worth quoting lol
It's only significant when it's in your favour, eh?
How is that additional sentencing? In essence, they proved themselves to be unfit parents (because, you know, the whole grooming for crime thing), and had their kids removed due to that. It's like if you lost your job because you were convicted of a crime. That's not additional sentencing, that's just a consequence of your actions
Trusting the government to do the right thing is a poor idea. Politicians will only do the "right" thing if it helps them out.
Without any information, this is just idle conspiracy theorising. It's not even about politicians, since from the sound of it this came from regular govt officials, not elected politicians.
They're not just writing the software, they're responsible for the infrastructure it's running on. And keeping that running and secure IS a full time job.
Right now, you sound exactly like one of those C level execs who looks at IT and asks "We haven't had an issue in years, what do we need to pay them for?"
I'm all for supporting women. Give them a chance to speak out, make sure they are fairly listened to and taken seriously. You've gone a step beyond that, you've already decided guilt and innocence and proclaimed it. More, you're doing so from a position of influence (yes, as a moderator of a large community, that's what you are). This is the sort of thing that libel charges get filed for (ok, not gonna happen at our current size, but you may want to start keeping that in mind.)
Why would you default to that?
Because that's the basis of our legal bloody system! There's a thousand law professors out there who can explain it better and more eloquently than I could in a thousand years, but that's the gist of it.
You do not need a conviction to make up your mind.
That's correct. We do, however, need a conviction before stating it as fact instead of opinion.
Not only are you siding with the party with no evidence
I beg to differ. I have not sided with any party. What is it about people today that they seem unable to grasp the concept of neutrality?
Oh no! We're comparing credit card interest rates with country-level loans! And they're higher! Gosh! Never mind that the IMF interest rate is half of that. 🙄
the logical conclusion is foul play
Nobody but you claimed foul play, only bad intentions.
Due process means the law was fairly applied and their rights were respected. I agree and understand that a govt program does not mean this is the case. In the absence of any countervailing evidence however, that would be the default assumption.
The interviews published were hand selected, the articles are very biased. I'll sumerize a different way, only 3 of the 100 kids taken from their parents did not speak poorly about their experience.
I agree with you there. The kids are not under a gag order though. Is there any other article or source that indicates a different situation from the one described here?
Does this ruby actually exist? There seem to be almost no references to it online. A Rolling Stones article, OP's link, and a couple of reddit posts. It does not appear on Wikipedia's list of world's largest rubies. As recently as last year, this would have placed #1 on world's largest rubies sold.
Something smells fishy here.