Her taxes directly support the war. It’s not as easy as people are good and bad. Good people can be in bad situations. Sanctions are supposed to hurt all people. That’s how they work. It’s seen as a lesser evil, rather than a good. They are damaging for both sides.

Yes, if you know about that community. However, by browsing the all feeds of multiple instances, you come across communities you weren’t aware of and can subscribe to on any of the instances you have an account on. Assuming, of course, they all federate.

It’s not that it matters. It’s that if an acronym is new, it makes sense to clarify its meaning until it’s clear to all.

Quick, go buy a mattress and a rug. They too might be on sale.

Well, the voice has no real power over government. The senate does. The method of electing the senate is also left up tot he government. If we trust them with that power, why would we not trust them with the power to legoslate for the voice in the same way.

As it’s in the constitution, they could not remove it. They could change it, and I would expect changes over time to make it more effective.

If the detail is being voted on now, we would need to have another referendum every time we make a change.

For me, it comes down to whether the concept of a voice is a good idea. Assuming we think it is, it’s up to the parties to campaign on how that should be. We can vote accordingly, just like every other policy. The only option off the table is no voice, unless they want to run on having another referendum.

Sure, there are those that think it shouldn’t be in the constitution. They are the same ones that removed it before, which is why it needs to be in the constitution. There are those that think it won’t work. They offer no alternative, and if it doesn’t work, we can vote again to remove it.

In a way it needs to be like that. If we are voting on the detail, which can be changed, people will feel misled. Were voting on the concept only.

Those looking for detail will be disappointed. These pamphlets don’t provide clarity either way. I don’t think it’s the fault of the aec, but rather how something like this is inserted into the constitution.

That’s a harder ask if people have already tried it and found it lacking.

Perhaps a notification when it occurs, so you could unsubscribe if you wish.

The thing with most carcinogens is they are cumulative. If people are going to continue to consume lots of red meat, cutting other carcinogens does help.

Obviously, the media would be better from a public health point of view to focus on the red meat. However, the media focuses on news and changes. Red meat has been a known carcinogen for a while. Not to mention bad for the environment and ethically problematic. It’s led to a raise in veganism and vegetarianism and many people have cut red meat in particular or are flexitarian.

The problem with sweeteners in partiyos that many people consume them in an effort to be healthier, cutting their sugar intake. Over time, we’ve found out that they are more problematic than we knew. Risks for diabetes as well as cancer.

Especially given the armies of people who cross post any decent content to all networks. I hope that here, due to no monetary benefit and no karma, it is only for the love of sharing. All the good content will make it here, but rather than being a firehouse of crap, the community nature should make the relevant communities more focused.

I still use Facebook for local groups. I think even they realise that niche communities without outrage are where the growth will lie. That’s likely why they are scared of federated networks. It could easily kill them over time.