YEAR OF DOGS 2KFOREVER

Caspar David Friedrich - Evening with clouds (1824)

If a worker who isn't the owner says ANYTHING similar to "I'm not really supposed to do this but-" and then does something that helps you, under no circumstances inform the business, including through reviews. You tell them that the worker was polite, professional, the very model of customer service and why you like to go there. You do not breathe a word of the rulebreaking.

Employee-customer solidarity

Even if they don't- Your review can be the thing that wrecks someone up accidentally;

"Janie was so helpful when I wanted to buy a new washing machine on Friday, she stayed with me for half an hour and wasn't pushy at all, we had a good laugh about our cats' silly antics and she got Adam and Suzy to carry it to the car for me- 10/10 excellent service, I'd come back any day!"

-But Management has a policy that workers should spend no more than 10 focused minutes on any customer at a time, and that they should always try to upsell the insurance and the higher price model, so Janie was breaking policy.

-And they aren't supposed to have their phones on the sales floor, so now Janie is going to be quizzed on whether she was showing photos of her cat to a customer.

-Adam is a warehouse worker and shouldn't have been in the front-of-house at all, Suzy is a porter, and store policy is both to use a trolley to move heavy items, and that only the porters should do it, so now Janie is in trouble for pulling Adam off-task, Adam is in trouble for walking through the shop floor, and Suzy is in trouble for poor handling procedure. Maybe the store even has a paid delivery service that Janie was supposed to upsell as soon as you said "I can't put this in my car without help", so this was all against policy.

Your review should always be as bland as possible, "10/10, five star service, will shop here again, thank you to Janie at the Town Street branch" You NEVER know what was technically a rule-break, capitalism is not your friend, the review process is part of the panopticon.

FIVE STARS, TEN OUT OF TEN, VERY GOOD, NOTHING MORE.

1987

Buying a car

English added by me :)

i know you guys are all super into reclaiming slurs and stuff, but you can’t just go around calling random people faggots.

i’ve straight up seen lgbt people call other lgbt people faggots as an insult because they had an opinion they disagreed with. do you. like. hear yourself

you’re not cool and revolutionary, you’re just an asshole

lots of people are saying ‘yes, we can’t tell you apart from a homophobe when you do this’ and it’s important to note that you can’t tell because they’re being homophobic. being lgbt+ does not exempt you from bigotry

characters who dig themselves out of their graves (whether literal or metaphorical) are at the top of the list. nothing beats a character who should have died but didn't and comes back to haunt their own life and the world around them, benevolent or violent it doesn't matter, it's enthralling either way

really cool article about the FBI ignoring a neo nazi mass shooter who would eventually commit a mass shooting at a gay nightclub so they could focus on planting a pink haired cop in a protest movement and get her to introduce these protestors to some hilariously obvious undercover cops posing as arms dealers. the SOMEX parts of this are serious tho they are using social media to gather info on protestors and target them and fabricate charges and make their lives hell and it is causing the death of movements like this.

JK Rowling has used her billionaire legal team to silence a Jewish woman for telling the truth about her contempt for trans victims of the Holocaust.

Scotland’s network of “freedom of speech” organisations, as per usual, have nothing to say about the use of wealth to gag critics of the wealthy.

However fast they race to condemn the LGBT+ community for saying the names of those who harm us. Statements at the ready to insist that transphobes no one wants to work with anymore must be given every possible opportunity to gain from their bigotry.

But it's not the billionaires who are being silenced, as our media breathlessly echo their every hateful proclamation.

It's journalists and activists forced to publicly humiliate themselves under the weight and the threat of billionaire legal teams or be driven into destitution.

We deserve better. Freedom of speech needs to mean something

The Streisand Effect strikes

This will swiftly become one of the primary things JK Rowling is remembered for. Trying to erase crimes of the Holocaust against trans people and then silencing Jewish journalists for calling her out.

With your help we can make sure JK Rowling is known as a Holocaust denier first, author of mediocre children's books second

It is a matter of public record that Rowling did a Holocaust denial. Yes, pretending there is question about which groups were targeted by the NSDAP and why, very well known historical facts supported by many independent sources, is in fact Holocaust denial. Her tweets calling the historic Sexualwissenschaft Institute book burning a "fever dream" are still there.

Except in the UK, truth is not a matter of supportable fact. Because of laws allowing frivolous lawsuits, being rich and famous means you get to decide what the truth is. Even if it's contrary to evidence in the rest of the world. In the UK, for no discernible reason, those were not the books the Nazis burned.

calling it jetlag is kinda funny as fuck actually

[gaslights my circadian rhythm by crossing multiple timezones] the lag...

Charles Frederick Tunnicliffe - Seven Avocets

I've seen several sites mention this, it's real.

Do not make the MISTAKE of thinking you need to put your side forward. The Guardian is transphobic as fuck, and will twist your words. DO NOT ENGAGE.

By the way, this is in the aftermath of the Cass Report, and the goal will be to make Trans DIY something that needs to be regulated or stamped out. DO NOT ENGAGE.

Martino Maranzana

Intel Corporation 1994 Annual Report