reverendsteveii

do you have any evidence of impropriety other than "hhhhhmmmmmmmmmm 🤔🤔🤔🤔🤔🤔🤔🤔"?

https://80.lv/articles/amid-helldivers-2-controversy-game-s-community-manager-almost-got-fired/

He was "almost fired" a couple days ago

in this case, more like nudelwackeln

he'll let them hurt who they want to hurt and that's all they care about

irene?

okay but how do you establish any of those incentives with people who simply don't exist? eventually the agreements fall apart as all parties involved are either dead or cryostatic, and the agreements will have to compel someone who was never party to them to take some sort of action. Like, I guess you could put a reward in trust but even then you'd need some sort of legal entity to manage and distribute it that would, itself, need an incentive in trust in order to continue, and so on in an infinite regression.

I never understood why that phrase was ever used as if it were an excuse.

A thought-terminating cliche is a rhetorical device intended to end a discussion without actually resolving it. The idea is to say something that the other party more or less has to agree to without regard to whether it actually has any bearing on the discussion at hand, and then refuse to discuss further. This makes it seem like the discussion is over and, as the last person who scored a point, you've won. "It's just a few bad apples" is one. "Let's agree to disagree" is another. Trump almost singlehandedly invented one in the phrase "fake news", which is ostensibly intended to mean "I don't trust the source of that information" but is often used in an infinite regression where everything unfriendly to the arguer is fake news. It's basically a deus ex machina for arguments; a way to escape a corner you've been backed into without ever admitting that you were wrong about anything.

"I'm into if statements lately"

"Those sons of bitches are only doing everything we asked them to in order to confuse us and make us look bad."

this one is just trigger-happy incompetence, but the phrase "a few bad apples" ends with "spoil the whole barrel" and the police are a perfect example of that. The way they close ranks and try to protect one another from responsibility for really egregious shit means that not every cop is a criminal, but that every cop ignores crimes that other cops commit.

my wife’s friend is a big believer in “not all cops” and “only a few bad apples”

does your wife's friend know how the phrase "a few bad apples" ends?

Looking forward to when taxpayers who did absolutely nothing wrong have to pay a 7 figure settlement to you for your medical damages and a second 6 figure settlement to the officer for wrongful termination and then a further 5 figures a year to the officer in disability payments for the trauma he went through in having to shoot and kill an unarmed man who was on his knees with his hands in the air and sobbing (TW - that last link is the body cam for the murder of Daniel Shaver, don't click it unless you like utter depravity and really high stakes games of Simon Says).