That's not really true though. Rumble pays Russell Brand millions and offered Joe Rogan an obscene contract. The problem is that viewers stick with their regular, favourite sites and don't feel a need to move because doing so feels like an unnecessary sacrifice. They're comfortable with the familiar and aren't convinced a change should be made, and even often get defensive if you bring it up.
I think it's more like,
"I don't want to move to <alternative site> because I'm a weak and lazy creature of habit and uncomfortable with change, plus I don't really care if someone I agree with gets booted from Youtube so long as I can still watch stuff."
Her words:
The outrageous rage baiting campaign that has been playing out illustrates the exact kind of harassment and online bullying that so many kids experience.
Hypocrite cry-bully bigot should be flogged. I wasn't aware of this or I would've joined the protest crowd. This happened very close to me.
For the history buffs, is there an example of a genuinely "diverse" population building and enjoying a successful civilization? From what I've seen, when there's a critical mass of diversity things tend to get worse and less efficient rather than better. DIE departments in both government and corporations seem to be unproductive tumours that leech resources and time from departments with purpose.
What I want to know is if "diversity is our strength" is an assertion with no evidence.
I want to disagree with you based on my principles but it's just not realistic. E.g., antibiotics are more important than child molesters.
Also, "right to live?" Is that something people have? Then why does everyone die?
I think this guy's sacrosanct attitude on human life is just a way for him to establish himself as a "better person" than you and the other commenters. His whole spiel is him trying to demonstrate superiority through virtue. Absolute beta.
Interesting post until you started masturbating.
The top people who you totally rub shoulders with on Twitter are worried about optics and income. On (allegedly) anonymous forums, we feel more at liberty to express ourselves honestly and, to me, that makes others' comments seem less constrained by ulterior motives. Maybe that's not true for you, but you take your account name with you everywhere. While I agree you can reach high-status individuals on Twitter, I also find the average user's intelligence lacking. Depends what you want, I guess.
We know. That's not the point. The point is the sexes should be regarded as equal before the law OR that there should be acknowledgement of men being a better fit for certain roles, and with that acknowledgement, an appropriate amount of respect and privilege afforded to them. My preference is the latter. We currently have neither. Forced military service is male discrimination with zero perks.
I think as far as readers are aware, Arthur Dayne is the best fighter. But, his death is a bit lame. IIRC, he dies alongside two famous Kingsguard in a 3v7 against Ned Stark and Howland Reed and some of their fellow knights. Ned isn't particularly known for being an incredible fighter (unlike his older brother) and Howland Reed didn't have much of a reputation except that Ned regarded him highly.
Considering Dayne's reputation and the reputation of the Kingsguard (Ser Gerald Hightower was an exceptional fighter too), Dayne's death seemed underwhelming. That gives me the impression there may have been better fighters.
Oh look, a leftist. You can tell because they think what you are is more important than what you've done.