Readit NewsOh, it's the graphical terminal program (alternative to 'gnome-terminal'). Well, um, ok.
However, I will concede, after more digging as to why (as it rankled), that there was a "have to choose a unique name" issue there (even leaving aside trademark issues). I'm resigned (so I suppose signed up) to deal with residual issues that crop up going forward.
I love to mock '*ly.com' names for almost certainly doomed enterprises, but I get that at least it wasn't already taken.
I do have concerns about 'send them to China', since I think that that would be another display zoo with no qualms about continuing exploitation.
I don't like option three, and the reports I've seen (Guardian but also CBC etc) suggest that rewilding is off the table. I'd be ok with "the people of Canada will take care of the whales, but your business is your problem". I'd be ok with proving this point even if someone claims that the existing business could do it cheaper. A separate sanctuary would make clear that 'we care about the animals, but not your business plan as it relates to the public purse', to establish a policy.
If it is really the case that option 1 (china) is considered ongoing torture, and option three is unaffordable/unimplementable, then I guess that option 2 (euthanizing) is a front runner.
For the person that inherited it, they exist as a memento of childhood. Their parents big parties were only a small part. Keep a couple little pieces.
These also might have been, in some sense, insurance policies. Some of your ancestors might even have been second-class citizens in your country. The silverware might have been their best way of storing any value at all. I don’t know if I believe in spirits. But if you end up selling it off for what seems to you to be a trivial sum: that’s because your family was successful enough to not end up needing it. I think the spirits are proud.
That's a lovely thought!
I'm still unlikely to demand someone's immediate attention by triggering klaxons and fanfare on their device - not if quieter, more considerate comms will do the job.
I have dealings with Gen(xyzqbvwhatever) that don't respond to the 'more considerate forms' in a timely fashion. So after a grace period, I jangle the bell.
I get the other side of this. I get a ping for a message while driving, I can't do anything about it (distracted driving etc). So I either pull over (or turn off the highway altogether), or resolve to deal with it at my destination.
Nine times out of ten, if I pull off, it's an urgent notification that 1) my screen time is up by 17 minutes, 2) Second Cousin in Arkansas reposted a message about another missing cat, or 3) your soliac serucity number has been supsedned, CLICK HERE NOW TO AVOID ARREST AND JAIL.
However, when I get to the destination, I forgot that I got a ping.
Sometimes I think that the best option is to toss the cellphone, so that nobody has illusions about how (not) to contact me.
(over and above "why have you allowed me to waste so much time on this" --- wry grin)
But ban checked baggage fees, that's what's driving the carry-on mania.
Or, mandate fee-free one but not both...?
I was looking for discussion not of "ok, don't call in sick three days a week during notice", but how to deal with the second level effects that often work out to "take sick days when you get them, and if you actually get sick for two weeks, deal with that if and when". I'm trying to form an opinion on this, leaning toward:
- sick days are special, and don't impact your vacation day allowance (you can have 5 weeks of sick time and still accumulate vacation (PTO [unified vacation/sick/whatever] does not allow this) time up to (say) four weeks to take at once.
- however, sick days don't just evaporate if you leave / get laid off / go over the limit, so there's no incentive to be sick of nine-to-five on Friday.