janj

I can't believe GitHub broke copy/paste for files in a pull request. Now when I highlight a few rows in a file they are unselected and a feedback comment box appears. That used to happen when you click and dragged file line numbers. Breaking find/replace in this way is unacceptable and surprising coming from GitHub.

> good luck getting a chicken to voluntarily eat much of it (and they'd probably get sick pretty often if they tried)

I've had a cold compost as a part of my backyard chicken coop for many years. All kitchen scraps, as well as all yard waste, ends up there. Moldy fruit, veggies, breads, literally everything including things like turkey carcass after Thanksgiving. I've never had a chicken get sick off it and the food scraps are quickly either consumed or dug into the pile, no rotting mess. Every spring I dig it all out for the garden. It works out great.

I've been thinking the same. The fact that this issue is still not overwhelmingly recognized as legitimate seems to imply that a lot more suffering might be required before anything meaningful happens. Problem is the longer we wait the more pointless any action becomes.

Aren't social media posts a large driver of actions? Weren't they used very intentionally to misinform people on this issue? I believe social media (along with traditional media) is a large part of why we ended up where we did, with a large number of people still claiming this issue is a hoax when it very clearly is not.

I've been thinking about how relief from the impacts of climate change will not be available for all. I was wondering if access to climate relief should be limited for people who denied climate change or supported climate change deniers. With past voting records, social media posts, etc, we should be able to figure that out for a large number of people. I think this would be very unpopular but if relief is limited how else do you decide? The only reason I became politically active 20 years ago was because of my concern about climate change and recognizing we needed leaders in place that would take appropriate action. That didn't happen in large part because of the types of people I debated against. Maybe those people shouldn't have the same access to relief as things get worse.

That also happened in CA but if you already had solar panels you continue with the same rate for a while. Doesn't seem right to switch it for those already installed.

Or maybe find people at end-of-life with no heirs that would buy it for a $1 in exchange for a donation to their charity of choice.

Could this work? It could potentially help a very large number of people get out of these scams. Seems so obvious now that you point it out I imagine someone must've thought of this before.

I was contacted by those people and others, both threatening and claiming to want to help. I had a suspicion they were all affiliated with the parent scam company Westgate and so never considered dealing with any of them. Maybe they weren't related to Westgate but good to keep in mind anyone in this space is not to be trusted.

This is great. Maybe one day we'll see action on timeshares. I got one a long time ago that was impossible to get rid of. Fully paid for, Westgate told me it had a lot of value so I told them to just take it back, but they would't of course. I ended up just stopping all payments, went through a few years of harassing calls, and then done, nothing more. Still haunts me though, I'm afraid it could come back up with outstanding balance owed.

They are experienced, we were equals, maybe I'm just under him, maybe that was what we was trying to assert.

Again this was an observed pattern, not just one time.

I'm genuinely surprised that a question about a particular failed request could be interpreted as a request to start logging stack traces for all requests. One reason for the surprise is I also believe it would be unreasonable to log the stack trace for every request.

I always try to give people the benefit of the doubt, if my interpretation of something seems unreasonable I like to make sure there's not a more generous interpretation, and give the benefit of the doubt when possible.

Again it's about a pattern over time, not just one instance. I realize I'm consistently not being given the benefit of doubt so I work on my communication. It continues and I start to wonder if it's intentional. To answer your question in the other thread, it seems similar for some but not others.

I think some people form an initial impression of others and that impacts the communication going forward, probably not always intentional. I think also some people try to diminish others through public communication. I don't know if that is what I was experiencing but it could be the case, something to be aware of.

Wanted to add for context, this question wasn't directed to him specifically, was posted in a general channel. I don't want to sound paranoid but based on his pattern of responses it seemed like this type of immediate response in a public channel was intended to influence other's perspectives. I'm not into the office politics games but I am aware that people play them.

It's never a cross examination or contentious from my end.

One recent edited example:

My question: "I'm trying to investigate why a request is failing, I found it in aws, the logs for [service] contain a stack trace up to where the [microservice] request is made, logs are very sparse. Is there a way to get [microservice] stack trace?" [I included links to logs and relevant info]

His response is "Do you want a stack trace on every log? I assume dumping a stack trace is somewhat expensive (though I don't actually know if this is the case) so I would be hesitant to attach one to every log entry"

Did I ask to attach a stack trace to every log? I guided him through the original ask and did receive some help. If this happened one time it wouldn't register, but his initial response here was very typical, something I got used to.