Part of me wants to be upset, but especially since these are clothing manufacturers, I have to wonder if the people handling the returns have the same problems that I did when I used to process them.

It was my first job out of highschool (through a temp agency), it was my first day, and I did some returns. You know, writing down what the products were, why they were returned, the order numbers yadda yadda.

Everything was cool until I got this package with a LOT of sharp pins in it saying "you obviously need needles to sew the clothes properly". There was only ONE thread loose, and this lady felt that making a complete stranger find sharp needles hidden in fabric was ok. Part of me hopes that that person finds the same kindness in life that they seem ok to give to strangers. Part of me wishes that it wasn't such a common thing.

Some returns had legitimate rotting garbage in them, and a lot of them were only worn once and then were returned because they "only needed it for party, need money back now". You can only see so much ridiculousness before you have enough, you know?

As a former employee, the fact that that company essentially paid for those needles and for the rotting garbage to be sent for other people to deal with was enough to make me quit. It's not worth my health, full stop. It never will be. That incident also made me lose a lot of faith in most of the general public. Part of me wishes that that particular person experiences the same level of "goodwill" that they give to others. I don't like wishing ill on peopld, but I also don't want to wish on good things for bad people. Most of us manage to submit returns without including a hazard, and it takes next to no effort at all. I don't even have to think about whether or not to do that, personally. It's a no-brainer.

As long as the in-person returns are still valid (within reason) and it's stated very clearly that online returns will cost money before purchasing, I don't really see the issue. Just put that information where they will read it (or hear it if it's voiced) and it should be OK.

It will help save the people who still have to deal with these insane returns for minimum wage. Fuck the overhead profit, and fuck the people who take their rage out on random minimum wage employees. (Don't do that literally ofc.)

Take it up with the people who might be able to actually do something to fix your problem, if you're that angry about the product. I will absolutely think much less of you if you personally take out your business complaints on the minimum wage employees.

I don't get some of these comments. You can want to avoid random nudity without bring a prude or jealous.

I'd argue that a LOT of people are not interested in seeing 99.9% of the population naked, and there should be nothing wrong with that. I don't care what they look like. Sometimes people just don't want to look at rectums.

The mindset of "you have to be happy about unexpectedly seeing a stranger naked or you're a prude" also doesn't sit right with me.

I would have just stopped using twitch, personally.

I smoked exactly one cannabis two years ago. My doctor told me that I probably won't make it to be 200 years old.

So, there you have it. If you consume even one of satan's cabbages, you too will die eventually.

You could put one in a hot dog and shock it if you want to try it without making your nose toasty

Some of the takes that I've seen on this are bizarre.

You can hate that Hamas has murdered innocent civilians, and you can ALSO hate that Israel has murdered innocent civilians.

Some of us are just genuinely disgusted by the sheer amount of innocent people dying. It's terrible, and nothing anyone says will ever make me believe that those innocent people deserved to die like that. Some of them only have the "crime" of being born there.

I'm not from the US, but it irks me to see so many people calling anyone from there a hypocrite for being upset over it, solely because of the United States' previous involvement. Many of the people commenting are probably not the same people who wanted to join the war back then. Many of the people commenting may have not been old enough to vote for the government at the time. Millions of people are not one single homogeneous life form. Every person has their own mix of thoughts, feelings, experiences, emotions, hopes, and dreams. These things help fuel how they see the world around them. No two peoples stories are exactly alike.

It's this one

I think that a lot of people here are confusing "introversion" with having social anxiety.

Being an introvert doesn't mean that you're scared of socialization. It means you generally prefer quiet time over socializing.

From Merriam Webster:

A person whose personality is characterized by introversion : a typically reserved or quiet person who tends to be introspective and enjoys spending time alone.

You can be both, but they are definitely not the same thing.

My grandmother was an amazing woman who devotes her life helping others. She was a nurse who also volunteered at old folks homes in her free time, and she donated to many good causes. She loved the teaching of Jesus. Her dad was a WWII vet, and she cared deeply about treating others with love and charity.

She passed away over a decade ago, and while I still don't like the idea that she's gone, I'm happy that she never had to see this all of this happening. She would have been absolutely crushed.

I think this might become more common over time.

Up to this point, a lot of the news company's online presence was probably pretty cut and dry. Some of my local news stations have terrible websites that take forever to load, yet those websites were probably cutting edge at some point. One of them has a layout that hasn't changed in at least 10 years.

If their IT department hasn't expanded their skills beyond making and maintaining those original websites, I could totally see a long delay happening before/if they join the fediverse.

I think this is a nuanced situation. On one hand, the government let this slide for a long time, and too many people became reliant on Facebook for their news. I believe it's very important for people to have the ability to be informed on the world around them. We should be spreading awareness about these things for people who apparently forgot.

On the other hand, it's Facebook. Facebook is also not exactly known for being unbaised or truthful. Provably false things have no business being passed off as news, regardless of what side of the coin you're on. Information is power. We deserve the truth.

We can still use news websites, news apps, FOSS sites like lemmy, the newspaper, watch the news on TV stations, etc. Why are so many people acting like this is the end of all free information? It it really that difficult for people to find another source? I can almost guarantee that you can list 4 or 5 news outlets from the top of your head. If you visit their pages, they will still get their ad revenue. They never got that revenue before because of Facebook.

It's also another situation where people expect other people's labour for free. It's becoming grating. Why are we defending a billion dollar company expecting this from small local companies? Journalists have to eat, too. If it was an easy, time-relaxed job, everyone would be a journalist. It's almost irritating that so many people expect them to permanently lose out on their hard earned money for the sake of saving people the effort of a few different clicks.

Where is any of this anger or frustration towards Meta, the billion dollar company that refuses to pay for these articles? Meta could have negotiated, but decided to just shut it down instead. Why are we cheering on a profiteering company from the US over our own local news sources?

Some people will argue "they'll get less clicks now", but I'd argue that many of those clicks just sent people through an amp-website that mainly benefitted Meta. I'm kind of suprised to see these posts on a FOSS- heavy community, to be honest. I though not having one corporate overlord was kind of the whole point.

Who's literally burning books that were removed from schools?

You're not wrong, though.

It can be easy to put up a front around other people, and hide parts of yourself. Tempting, even. If people don't know that information about you, they can't judge you on it.

Let's say two strong dudes were side by side, one of them acts "tough", and the other doesn't care about people knowing about his fascination with antique figurines. I would always think that the second guy is tougher.

I don't know what happened, but "tough" seems to only mean "following the buff crowd" to some people. "Tough" isn't just muscle strength. Nearly anyone can pretend that they're like someone else. It takes a certain kind of self confidence to let yourself be passionate about the things that you love and enjoy around others. It shows mental strength, which I think is a huge part of being "tough".

In the earlier hypothetical, the latter guy would probably be the one to stand up for what he feels is right, regardless of what he's told to think. He probably also wouldn't be as easily swayed by judgemental people, and would probably be less anxious and insecure as a result.