Killing in the Name is the right answer, I feel.

… . -.?

That’s your only contribution? Cool. Objections duly noted.

Proofreading your own work without a significant time gap is pretty useless. You’ll catch a few obvious errors, but approaching the same problem in the same mental space tends to lead to the same thought patterns, tends to lead to making or overlooking the same mistakes.

You’ll do a bit better reapproaching the subject a few days later. It’s almost, but not quite, like reading a new piece of writing. In my experience, comments are set and forget, unless you’re obsessive like me and enjoy rereading your old shit.

By far the most effective proofreading, though, is an Editor. There’s a reason it’s a paid position for anyone who makes a living writing. A completely different person will read the text more as-is, without accidentally interpreting it how they INTENDED it to be written. This will catch far more errors, but isn’t really practical for shit posting in social media. The closest you’ll get is someone calling out a typo or grammatical error.

As long as the intent of the message is clear, it passes the bar for acceptable social media content. We’re not writing PhD theses, we’re just having fun discussions. We’re not writing a paper meant to be readable to someone independently, we’re engaging in dialogue and can easily ask the other person to clarify.

TL;DR high-level proofreading and error correcting isn’t really as viable on social media as it is formal writing, nor is it really necessary as long as the message received is the message intended.

The only hope is that they keep rereleasing so much they end up back at Morrowind. Except they’ll probably ruin it.

Y’all bots?

Mate, they made a joke. Kinda like the ones the celebrated George Carlin made.

Great. Another old white man. Welcome to the owmer class, I suppose.

That’d be all the things.

Did you understand what they said? Great! They did perfectly fine then. Waste less energies.

Why do you think they have time to sleep?

It’s as likely your top 30 or so pages are AI generated, paid results, SEO optimized shit, etc that’s just as unsavory. No one says you can’t verify information, and probably should anyway, be it one search result verifying another, a bunch of commenters verifying each other, or verifying the two against each other.

Fuckin right lol? Why else do we exist, socially, if not to share cool shit with each other? Be it knowledge, a cool cat pic, a song you wrote, or eventually genetic material, arguably the “point” of sexual reproduction, maybe even life. I think now more than ever we should be hesitant to telling anyone to outsource any of that part of humanity to our AI overlords.

Tbf neither did the McDonald’s snitch. I mean, they probably DID because they will not see a cent of that money, but they still snitched based on the promise of money, not just for free.

“just Google it” has always been a shitty reply. People are asking for your opinion because they want opinions from people, not some nameless site/author/whatever. Even if you’re just regurgitating information, it’s coming from a PERSON not a random article. Never mind the reliability of the source. Heavens forbid that we social creatures social about a thing for a bit.

I get that, and I don’t disagree, but my point is that the venn diagram of “shoots up schools” and “shoots up political targets” don’t really overlap. Kids don’t kill people for political reasons, they kill because they’re in pain. Yes, they have a “better” target but that target isn’t causing them active daily suffering.

Assuming it’s school attendants themselves, then they probably don’t have a direct reason to shoot up anywhere but their school. Maybe their home. Their school is probably the thing that’s causing them direct issues in their life, it’s where their anger is aimed, and people don’t often consider better options when they’re that level of angry. I just don’t really see these two things having enough overlap for that to be a thing.

Obviously, it’s a very different scenario when it’s not someone who’s enrolled at the school. That’s a level of dysfunction that I can’t even begin to look at the world through the lens of. I don’t think that kind of dysfunction is the one to take suggestions of better places to shoot up, though.

Implying management is human work?

To be fair, aren’t almost all school shootings done by attendants of the school? At least all the ones that have stuck in my brain are ones committed by current or previous students of the school they shot. And I can’t think of how to verify that either way this morning. In those cases, though, it’s probably not entirely political, but personal.

I feel like someone should compile a list of suspects (read: denied claims) and read them off loudly at every memorial event for him.