For a first timer Id recommend just complimenting the other person’s watch

They have fewer of those scary foreign looking people

When you finish the final sentence of an essay or a report do you just submit it straight away? You don’t read it through?

It’d be easier to list countries that don’t

Why the fuck would investors get compensation? Isn’t the entire point of investing that your capital is at risk

If you only shower once a month I don’t understand why I you’d need to wash the towel any more regularly?

I’m not against criticism, certainly the number of downvotes suggests I phrased it poorly or should have kept my views to myself.

I tried to present my views in a neutral manner without accusation. I used the term reflect because as you state I have no idea of the user’s situation so it’s for them to reflect.

I used a separate paragraph for the reference to hygiene in order to make a distinction between what I did and did not know. What I had hoped to raise was the distinction between hygiene and just applying masking products. But I didn’t know how to communicate that without being more specific.

I apologise if I caused offense. None was intended. I’m some random person online, my views are my own, if I have caused offense I hope that can be easily dismissed as just another provocative voice online.

Semi colons wouldn’t be valid in file names so they’re ignored so there’s no reason to include hyphens either

It’s not just cultural in terms of nations it’s also dependent on the type of work. You’re going to be critical of a taxi driver stinking of BO when he sits in an air conditioned cab all day, but not somebody doing physical labour in the open air

Dude… Maybe re read what you wrote and reflect on it?

There’s a cliche of Internet folk with poor hygiene and it’s something that should be addressed but it can be awkward for people to bring it up.

We’ve been fighting for transparency for so long. Now they’re providing transparency we have the audacity to complain about their blatant corruption.

Thanks! I think that’s the context I was missing. OP cut a few paragraphs when quoting the article. Lesson learned I should read the source.

Perhaps I’m missing something here, what is the issue with insisting thefts are reported to the police?

Isn’t a bigger issue that the

police declined to investigate delivery failures

Does that mean the police are denying a crime may have been committed? Or does it mean they agree there may have been a crime but they aren’t willing or able to commit resources to investigate what happened?

Bills?! Bills?! How very dare you suggest that people require compensation for their work.

You’re in a Linux community here. Open Source development is about freedom. All work should be made freely available for users and corporations to enjoy as they wish without having to consider such frivolities of whether anyone should be compensated.

The fact your comment here is at -1 really underlines the immaturity of many users.

I can understand your previous comment getting downvoted because it was a little inflammatory, but your statement here is entirely factual with a neutral tone. So there’s really no reason to disagree with it, let alone pepper it with downvotes.

I do understand - but as a society we’re working to remove unnecessary gendered terms from our language. I believe in doing similar with religious terms.

Language is important. If we’re thanking a deity for the work of government it’s both minimalising the work of elected representatives and exclusionary to other cultures.

god has nothing to do with it

I did read the article. The context of the statement you’ve picked out is as follows

Dodgy driving – covering such reported infringements as speeding, jumping a red light, overtaking on double white lines or ignoring the humble pedestrian crossing – was more likely to be a factor when a Subaru, Porsche and BMW was involved than a Skoda or Hyundai.

The authors have hand picked these items but they don’t say that these behaviours are exclusively what’s defined as risky or aggressive behaviour.

I agree with your statement:

Anyone who overtakes on a double centreline is an utter twat and well deserves to be called dangerous.

I’m not sure if you thought I was implying otherwise?

Then there’s the subjective language of “risky” and “aggressive”. Is it risky and aggressive to overtake a slow vehicle? Quite possibly? But I regularly drive in an area frequented by older tourists. Often they’ll be driving at 30 on a wide, open, road where the national speed limit applies. So is it aggressive that I overtake them at double their speed?

This article just reads that the authors have solely set out to draw the conclusion they’d already decided upon.

 A study of more than 400,000 UK road accidents found that when “risky or aggressive manoeuvres” played a part in collisions, there was a significant statistical difference in driver culpability across different brands.

While I completely understand why the drivers are considered culpable for making risky or aggressive maneuvers. What I would be interested in is the circumstances that led them to making those maneuvers.

My own experience is that I only overtake (which I presume is considered risky?) when I’m behind a vehicle driving well below the speed that the road and weather conditions permit.

So while I am responsible for an incident that may occur due to my choice to overtake I do think consideration should be paid to what caused that manoeuvre.