Part of the reason is internet commentators are so mean to each other, and many of us users don’t want to be judged by someone? (Although extreme echo chamber is also a bad thing)

I reflected on the the whole thing after hearing opinions from both sides of users. I now realise I don’t care as much anymore which may be a good thing.

True, "Karma" doesn't mean much unless you can refine "Karma" statistics, e.g. upvote/ downvote ratio, "karma" trend against time graphs, last 30 days net "Karma", filter "Karma" statistics specific to community/instance.

Still, you can't stop someone from selling a 5 million "Karma Points" account to trolls, so I disagree with showing "Karma" like Reddit.

Same as microwave oven, cell phones and laptops. Human beings freak out about stuff that they don’t understand, it was then thunder that human freak out about, it is now technology that human freak out about.

Of course we both are speculating without any proof, I am also merely speaking of my gut feeling.

I have been thinking that the rhetoric of saying Putin is weak because Prigozhin was able to momentarily rebel is kind of wishful thinking. I think weak is a pretty strong word.

If Putin is as weak as some of us think he is, Prigozhin would have continued to march towards Moscow already.

At the same time, if Putin is as strong as some of us think he is, his army would have reached Kyiv with a new regime installed already.

Hence the truth should be lying somewhere in between, for now.

I know it's not something many people want to hear because it isn't a polarized statement, for example, it's not as exciting as saying Putin is super strong and can nuke everything, we better bow down to him or Ukraine is super strong and can occupy Moscow tomorrow, let's give them F-35.

The reality is war is a boring and extremely slow meat grinder. Sometimes you cannot stop it once it's started (because deaths can be remembered for a long time) and sometimes you cannot avoid it (forever appeasement is not far from escalating the situation and empowering the bully which is worse off). I can only wish that Ukraine winning the war can prevent the potential China-Taiwan war from happening.

When new weapons arrive on site, I expect things to change. I wish Ukraine get Crimea back.

If I were Prigozhin, I would not return to Russia after the war. I wouldn't even eat or drink anything in which might have even the slightest chance of having radioactive material.

I'm ok with the Lemmy plain designs.

Thank you for this valuable information.

Isn't "have" either an auxiliary verb or verb and "of" a preposition?

Are these acceptable? If yes, why? If not, why not?

• I of heard that story before.
• Diane of already gone.
• John ofn't phoned, of he?
• I ofn't visited London before.
• Of you seen Roz?
• Of she been invited?
• They still ofn't of any news when I spoke to them yesterday.

I don't know man, Oxford Dictionary (click Grammar Point to expand) says that https://www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/definition/english/have_2

A common mistake is to write ‘could of’ instead of could have or could've

I could of told you that.

I could've told you that.

The reason for the mistake is that the pronunciation of ’ve is the same as that of of when it is not stressed. This is a common error but it is definitely considered wrong in standard English.

Thanks for the info about French and Spanish governing bodies. TIL

I know right, I know people make careless grammatical mistakes all the time, including me, which is completely fine but people outright thought that "should of" is correct and use it all the time starts to get annoying