@GreatLakesProg The problem is that this kid, and his sibling, and all the commenters on the internet think your first communication needs to be this needlessly aggressive. Its the mindset that leads to trashy people brawling over nothing constantly.
@GreatLakesProg Sure. But you have to teach the child to stand up for himself appropriately. You can send the same email but phrased in a way that acknowledges that it could just be an accident and lets the teacher save face and you're way more likely to get what you want.
@xwanyex This is probably directionally true, but actually putting a number to it is the right-wing version of that "corruption index" from the other day.
@inthewildwey@Omar40202@AGHamilton29 No. The wounded are not acceptable targets. If Israel were setting up all of their C&C infrastructure and munitions under hospitals to take advantage of that rule and useful idiots like Hamas does, my answer would be different. They don't because they're civilized.
@MadCADLad@Omar40202@AGHamilton29 Tradeoffs and risk-reward calculations. Stuxnet was a possible negative outcome in a scenario where the choice to do it was still correct. If you can't see the difference between your first and selling boobie trapped pagers to known terrorists, I can't help you.
@inthewildwey@Omar40202@AGHamilton29 And that gives Hamas the right to shoot rockets made from supplies that should be helping civilians at kids on playgrounds? Unlike Hamas, Israel keeps their children and their military bases in separate places, it's hard to mix up.
@Aevaqv8j@Omar40202@AGHamilton29 They chose to sell pagers to known terrorists specifically for the purpose of talking to other terrorists. They just failed to predict that one terrorist would be dumb enough not to keep his terrorist activities away from his family.
@Omar40202@AGHamilton29 People will be like "you can never do anything that could ever possibly harm a child unless you're turning humanitarian aid into rockets to fire directly at Israeli schools in which case you're the good guy"
@marcus_ut182 1. Adult with agency behaves poorly in public, faces predictable public opinion consequences. I'm sure she got plenty of unacceptable messages, but that's on the senders only.
2. Accurate
3. I think they just genuinely misinterpreted the university's legalese.
@Omar40202@AGHamilton29 Try "sometimes collateral damage happens". It's not Mossad's fault this poor kid's terrorist father left his terror pager out for somebody else to find. It's hard for the civilized mind to imagine not at least having the decency to keep being a terrorist away from your family.
@SenWarren Bleeding edge technology that we don't fully understand. Time pressure. Where did "trust the experts" from a few years ago go? Why is this one up to the lawmakers and peoples' whims instead of the people with advanced degrees who created the tech?
@leahfiles@EdwinPJacques You didn't have to standardize it somehow. You could have said "I'm trying to plot deeply subjective quantities about which I have clear biases. That's not a good use of my or anyone's time." and done something different instead.
@mikalminors_ai@4xCaliban I'm not trying to diminish Hasan's bad behavior or put any blame on Basil. Just asking that the third parties who I 99% agree with use words in the ways they are commonly used instead of going for 1 extra point of oomph at the cost of 3 points of credibility.
@mikalminors_ai@4xCaliban I think it's justified to think Hasan is scum and his actions towards basil met his usual standard of reprehensibility. That's just contingent on Basil being a human being and an American, not because Basil specifically had any experience of 9/11.
@RBMEllis@figtion The only part I think is fair to be bothered by is other people claiming victimhood/trauma from it on Basil's behalf. Hasan sucks enough without decent people needing to stoop to that.