ok but is this one of these pseudo posts just to link to your OF?

Fun(I mean serious) fact: Emissions are increased with glass due to weight/volumne and production cost. But the unknown health concerns and problematic to nature outweighs that imo. Plus even well recycling countries export their plastic which then ends up in nature, just not on our responsibility

Yes! Im just curious to hear about it ^^

“What do you mean you arent forced into 2 sentences max and have to structure your thoughts ??2?”

New update just dropped

“Happiness isn’t just about wealth or growth — it’s about trust, connection and knowing people have your back,” said Jon Clifton, the CEO of Gallup. “If we want stronger communities and economies, we must invest in what truly matters: each other.”

Damn that was very well said

deleted by creator

The extra detail couldve been placed on another more direct position of the sentence is what Im saying… “trying very hard” not “clearly stating the wrong”

But thanks for being so helpful

The extra detail couldve been placed on another more direct position of the sentence is what Im saying…

“trying very hard” not “clearly stating the wrong”

The Trump administration cut funding to Yale University’s Humanitarian Research Lab, which was compiling a database of alleged Russian war crimes, including the abduction of an estimated 35,000 children from occupied areas of Ukraine, last month.

I mean the article is very tragic and all. But I cant help it to think the author’s sentence structure here is trying very hard to suggest the numbers were from last month. Am I the only one?

I just posted what I’d ask you too here

We really need forestland to bind C-atoms from the Co2 in our air. That would be the most heroic approach. Also wholesome since it creates habitat.

forest management resulting in slow money

well done >:[

happy for you >:[

Depression resistance +1000

The good old 360 days of quickly opening the message menu to flame someone ingame ,but then taking 20 years to type out all the letters

???

😂

Oh wow, theres more to this discussion, nicely useful!

says:

evaluate on case-by-case basis

So its kind of in a grey zone, not reliable doesnt mean bad source in that case. Useful link, altough wikipedia is also a grey zone in the sense that its information based on open source (everybody can edit it, and most liked proposals get through as I understand)

Thanks for the confirmation

Well what ground news wants to do -critical evaluation and media literacy- is so vital.

But ground news deciding on what exact position on the spectrum a source is, seems to achieve the exact oposite: make people depentend in questioning and finding a variety of sources.

Nowadays everything needs to happen in an instant.

If theres a solution that only takes half a snap, that will be the only relevant choice for the mass. Thats why Im instantly asking, because just today I referred to this source to someone else as a might-be-bad example but instantly realized, I will have to ask this on the next situation (now)

Anyways thanks for the correction!

by a first glance just discovering this, looks like narcissism.

They will do everything - like deleting the obvious - before allowing being on par with the people they initially disagreed with