They didn't used to be. Maybe you'd have some less popular candidates try and get a jab in for publicity during the primaries, but the presidential debated used to be for attacking the other guy's policies while making yourself seem likeable and confident. And back before TV, they actually had to sound smart too.
Quoting Wikipedia in reference to the variance in ceramics for the degree of crystallinity and number of electrons in their iconic and covalent bonds:
With such a large range of possible options for the composition/structure of a ceramic (nearly all of the elements, nearly all types of bonding, and all levels of crystallinity), the breadth of the subject is vast, and identifiable attributes (hardness, toughness, electrical conductivity) are difficult to specify for the group as a whole
Joke's on you, I never figured out how to leave vim!
Excuse you, on the internet they're known as shit posts.
That's not really an explanation...
Lots of non traditional instruments get called for in concerts. I played a song that called for drumming on upturned metal trash cans in high school.
It does sound borderline war crime, but then again the US buried thousands of Iraqi soldiers alive in the first gulf war, but our lawyers also did the mental gymnastics to justify it not being one beforehand so presumably they have some justification so its just barely legal. https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1991-09-12-mn-2959-story.html
That being said, its not like Russia is being super careful about its rules of engagement.
I'm personally of the opinion that if a community is poorly moderated, you should just make a new community that is better aligned to the level of moderation users actually want and not to rely on a centralized admin team. They should really just be preventing serious abuse, like grooming, and provide support and advice to mods.
Ultimately its not sustainable and gives Admins too much centralized power to determine to that level what is and isn't appropriate mod behavior. I get that what you experienced is generally dickish behavior, but that can easily spin out of control when it relies on admin judgement calls like that.
People like to virtue signal about things they don't know anything about.
I'm glad you're sticking to your guns on this. At the end of the day, it should NOT be up to the admin team who are not subject matter experts to determine what is and is not considered "truth" especially in cases where there is still active research on the topic.
I also can totally see how this topic can elicit a knee jerk reaction, because people have been known to put animals on vegan diets irresponsibly, but we don't block people from posting "chonkers" or obese cats which is literally the same thing where people will often intentionally overfeed their cats for this aesthetic which is also clearly abuse in the exact same vein.
I also think its a good thing you reinstated the admin after some reflection and a well thought out response and statement. It doesn't seem like they are on some crazy power trip either.
Consider just going on a date with someone you wouldn't normally have if you're in a dry spell. Helps you figure out your preferences in a relationship beyond physical appearance.
Why is the default that it isn't? I'm saying we shouldn't have an admin enforced default not force one or the other People give terrible advice regarding pet care, child rearing and everything else. Why is this any different? Should we ban all content with exotic pets like parrots or sugar gliders because they overwhelmingly do poorly in captivity?
Isn't that kind of the point of having open communities, so that you can decide what does and doesn't belong in your community without some centralized censor coming in and deciding what is acceptable in your community unless it's illegal or actively harmful?
If you have definitive sources that vegan cat food with the appropriate taurine supplements aren't ok for normal healthy cats then you can make an argument that that's animal abuse, but otherwise you're just applying your own preconceptions to their community.
They're more of a "get off my lawn, and I'm serious" kind of aggressive than an "I'm hungry" kind of aggressive.
Spoilers for anyone who hasn't gotten up to chapter 967 in the manga
With regards to the iconic Roger Laughing panel when he gets to Laugh Tale, I think the reason Roger laughed when he got to Laugh Tale is because Joy Boy intended his treasure for someone who would live on and lead the world to a new future by overthrowing the World Government.
This would have been extremely ironic, since Roger was terminally ill and had just spent the final days of his life seeking a treasure that was meant for someone else, who would live long enough to be able to change the world.
I think that positions Luffy in a really interesting spot because he has been shedding his life span throughout the manga, like in Impel Down. It doesn't feel like a very Luffy thing to not take the one piece just because he doesn't have very long to live. I wonder if he would take whatever is on laugh tale and through sheer will power force the world to change before dying.