frongpik

The pressure to make money out of it will turn your forum into what could be another subreddit. To repeat HN you'd need to remove pictures (they invoke emotions and attract unsophisticated audience) and all the marketing fluff, hire a team of people who deal with autos on day to day basis (mechanics, salesmen, dealship owners, pro racers, stars like the ex Top Gear team) and advertise everywhere that here's the no bs forum about autos. Wait for 10 years and you'll get a critical mass of audience. You'd still have to pay expensive mods. On top of that you'll have to figure a non-ads business model to support the forum.

Why? It's a great delivery. It may sound harsh only to our truth-allergic world of big corps.

In a situation where a criminal breaks into someone's house and brandishes a knife, the intent doesn't matter and the criminal shouldn't have agency to decide the outcome. I think this is what rubs me the wrong way about your comment: who gets to decide the outcome - the robber or the one being robbed.

Everyone can't just collectively move away from the MLS database. I'm sure redfin is trying to figure it out.

I like to say that the reason you need two agents to sell a house is because you need one agent to convince the seller to sign that contract and another agent to push the buyer.

In an ideal world the seller would hire someone to show the house to potential buyers (e.g. redfin pays a fixed hourly rate to its agents who show the house) and then both seller and buyer hire real estate attorney to close the deal. 3K usd max. This nice plan falls apart when sellers and buyers can't agree where houses will be listed for sale (don't offer craiglist).

We need you know.. Tinder for houses.

You sound like an efficient assets manager. People turn to a suicide because their life is miserable, often for objective reasons (e.g. cancer) and you may find it hard to believe, but it's their right to end it.

Before curbing the "gun epidemic" I'd look up how many lives are saved vs how many are unrightfully taken. A proxy for the first number is the number of burglaries - about 1.5 millions per year. A proxy for the second is about 10 thousands - all gun related deaths excluding suicides and internal gang disputes.

Well, if I was a woman, I wouldn't take your advice.

How many violent home invasions are reported per year?

It's their right, though. You can't take away someone's rights because you feel morally superior.

The fear of gun violence is imaginary. The media instills the fear because, quoting the Chomsky propaganda model, "when people fear, they accept authority". Most people in the US wouldn't know gun ownership is a thing, because most of them will never see a gun unless they go to a range.

My hypothesis as to why the new US administration is so fixated on gun control is that they really need to import big piles of migrants to do the low rung labor, but if that new underclass gets guns, things will go downhill. So their plan is to pack the supreme court with anti-gun judges (to bypass the bill of rights) and take the guns. They seem to be trying the Australian scenario where a possibly manufactured shooting was used as an excuse to ban guns.

I see Mark doesn't waste time.

Referrals. Someone needs to vouch for you.

The risk of being shot in the US is below obscure kidney problems. Guns is a microscopic problem in the US that looks big only under the media's microscope. The real elephant is cancer.

I'd say you're chasing mirages and building sandcastles and look down upon the lazy neighbors who just watch the sunset.

Gun violence exists only on media outlets. However 600k/year deaths from cancer is very real and the US healthcare won't miss a chance to bankrupt those people before they die.