generally have to see to their own needs before being able to do the administrative work on men’s behalf.

Same logic applies to men as well. And I don’t like your perspective of said groups always being enemies of each other. If this perspective was uniformly adopted, queers will never have their rights because they are a minority. While the majority groups only fighting for theirs. IMHO we need to look at all these as human rights and human values. Not gay rights, trans rights, women’s rights or men’s rights. Otherwise we don’t get anywhere.

Are you on Jerboa by any chance?

For clarification I am against Jordan Peterson and the ilk but equal opportunity y’all.

Don’t forget French.

Nah the sleeves between the lines. The lines are just plastic rings meant to isolate sleeves.

So alpha males are males who are unrefined and flawed? 🤔

We’re negotiating with Israel?

Make it 99.99% that’ll be closer to reality.

Counterpoint: r/idiotsincars (or !idiotsincars@lemmy.world)

Also there’s a whole dictionary term created for car drivers called “road rage”.

So going by statistics, car drivers are entitled assholes.

You could probably run Windows 7 without any issues at all.

Fedora KDE. Rock solid stable and my daily driver.

We can get an idea by looking at stats of number of children and civilians killed.

One country should be definitely worse than the other. Those stats are not the same number between Israel and Russia.

So one is worse than the other.

Nah, Putin is bad but this is worse than Putin.

There won’t be a conflict of interest because everyone is paying. So it’s not in the best interest of the other member countries if a corrupt country is getting a favourable report. Because their member fees are being wasted. So there’s checks and balances inherently built into the system.

So in a hypothetical similar scenario this report requested by LMG is funded by GN, Hardware Unboxed, The Verge and all the other YouTubers including the LMG. So there’s incentive to find faults in LMG within the group funding the report.

Nobody wants to watch a video to participate in a text-based debate

Why not? What’s wrong with using the most presentable, easy to digest content? If I needed to present a graph to support my claim would you rather have me describe that information in text rather than link to a picture or a video that shows that graph?

Also, there’s no need to watch the videos in length either to get what I’m presenting either. They describe and support proof to my 2 claims,

1. Investigator should be independent
2. There should be no conflict of interest in where money is coming from to pay the investigator

I presented 3 videos in a few comments but didn’t want to spam it to every reply. But here they are for your convenience.

1. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=qwbq9OsHvp4
2. https://youtu.be/CTxt96DwaFk?si=0KHoVdFElOoH0-Za
3. https://youtu.be/C_0XEIFGK5o?si=Yc_hONVBDGcEV_t6

If you were thinking that we were having a debate, why don’t you stick to debate rules and present a rebuttal to my claims?

Yeah, nor does the country crowd source the money for the investigation,

But they do. IMF pools its money from its member countries, hence crowd sourcing. The country being investigated doesn’t pay them.

so I’m starting to see a pattern in your answers.

What pattern is that?

A good weekend for you too.

I’d like to receive criticism to what I presented instead of you resorting to ad-hominem, please.

inviting a third party to do an independent investigation of a company’s alleged wrongdoings. I never heard of such a thing occurring.

Look into how IMF (International Monetary Fund) does audits and reviews. They don’t do reports proactively. They do it only when invited by a country.

Yes I know you asked for a company but I gave you country. I’ll update if a company name comes to my mind that did exactly what I suggested.

Obviously not. That’s what I’ve been trying to say. There should be no conflict of interest. It would be exactly the same as what LMG did.

Always follow the money.

Why do you say I tried to change the conversation topic? All my replies are sticking to

1. Independent investigation
2. Crowd-sourced funds (or in its essence, no conflict of interest)

Admittedly my wording could be improved in my original comment in hindsight. What I meant was that there should be no conflict of interest in where the money was coming from. So Linus paying for it is a major conflict of interest. I have provided several links that look into this subject in this post. I recommend that you read them.

Subscribers donating to Gamer Nexus so that they can do investigative journalism without licking manifacturer boots? That’s crowd-sourcing. Didn’t you watch their recent couple of videos?

Don’t forget that that’s how this whole fiasco started. Do you think Linus would have done this without GN doing that video? And the viewers giving Linus hell because of it?