IANAL but my elementary understanding is that, no, a settlement results in no ruling from the court, and therefore no precedent is set.

No, it’s not, because that’s not what was said.

Commenter literally says “on that one decision”, and you constructed a strawman as if the commenter was saying that one decision made up for his past mistakes.

Who is your imaginary person you made up that does that literally every day? Where’s the strawman you made up?

You seem really mad and like you give a lot of fucks actually.

Love stardew, sunk over 2k hours into it and counting, and CA is based for a lot of reasons (not just his solo coding), but he’s not The Guy™ this question is looking for.

“I’ll just say sit back”

you misread

That’s cool, how does someone get involved in that?

? So you aren’t?

Is this meant to be a top level comment? I don’t think the article OP is saying that? Definitely some commenters in here saying that tho

What direct action are you taking?

So what are you doing? Yeah, exactly, thanks.

If they didn’t list all of the orgs that complied (which they did anyway), they would not have been covering all of the facts of the story.

If you can’t wrap your head around that simple concept, you are someone that isn’t worth engaging with.

Yeah, I actually already knew that, I wasn’t the OP for this comment chain, I just get annoyed when people say stupid shit.

It’s called due diligence, journalistic integrity, and reporting the facts.

“They’re a news site.” isn’t an excuse for not covering all the facts of the story, in fact, that’s the exact reason they’re being held with scrutiny. It is their job to provide as much information as possible. That’s quite literally what news reporting is for.

I want to insult you because tbh your comment is really fucking dumb.

You should just be forward with which perceived genocide you don’t qualify as a genocide so that people can decide whether there’s an validity to what you’re saying. Which genocides are we purity testing over that aren’t really genocides?

1. I’m not engaging with this argument about constructive criticism. Welcome to the internet. Hope you can get used to it.

2. Getting upset and threatening to leave and take your toys with you. That is what you did. Nobody (in the royal/aggregate sense, not the literal sense) gaf.

3. I mean, no, they literally didn’t aim it at you, and they also literally did not admit to doing so.

I would, personally, rather you stop posting, since your behaviour just kinda seems to be “unable to handle the pressures of the internet” to the point of causing and escalating non-issues to inflammatory arguments.

Unfortunately it sounds to me like you are too sensitive to be a regular poster in any community, if an offhanded half-joking comment that wasn’t even aimed at you is offending you to this degree.

Yeah, for sure, man, everyone believes you have a bunch of deadly, debilitating issues that you’ve allowed to go mostly untreated for 25 years. Those sure are deadly conditions, you know, the conditions that you can ignore for decades.

Oh for sure

I’m not saying I like her and I’m not saying you’re entirely wrong, BUT, she has NOT been out of the spotlight recently. This is only the second (maybe third?) thing that she recently broke rank on. She also just recently called to stop funding Israel.

Edit: oh yeah, 3rd thing was the Epstein Files.