i love the thumbnail

it’s in the article. more than 5000 messages to gmail users per day without dkim

I don’t like being spied on

whatever you say about discord, all i can hear is “you don’t own the data, you don’t control the servers, and the terms of service are subject to the whims of a for-profit corporation”

no feature set, and no “community” built on such a platform can convince me it’s worth my time to use it for anything more than bare utility. for instance, sometimes my pokemon tournaments require i join a discord. i install the app for the course of the tournament.

I haven’t ever seen that

Certainly no justification for Russia enacting war and doing a multitude of war crimes.

i don’t think anyone is defending putin here.

https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2014/09/ukraine-must-stop-ongoing-abuses-and-war-crimes-pro-ukrainian-volunteer-forces/

i asked duckduckgo

amnesty international azov battalion

this was just the first result

edit: here’s the search

https://duckduckgo.com/?q=amnesty+international+azov+battalion

they say plainly what they don’t know. what they don’t know, you don’t know. and if you don’t know, you are trusting on faith, not evidence.

some people want to be swindled.

for what claim do you want a source that isn’t provided?

i quite like disroot’s suite of services.

https://encryp.ch/blog/disturbing-facts-about-protonmail/

i’m begging you, don’t buy snake oil.

can we poison this data?

if we see people using these phrases do we get to call them bots and shills, or is that reserved for pro war users?

you just need to time it and work it on the talk page. I’m sure that you can get this article fixed.

if the source says preemptive, that’s going to be a hard sell. Go find another source and bring it up on the talk page.

isn’t it accurate to say it’s preemptive? you could say unprovoked, but I don’t think that’s strictly true. I think preemptive is the best way to frame it: it shows that they struck first and leaves it open as to whether anybody would have struck them at all.

you can edit Wikipedia too. The bureaucracy can be a little bit frustrating and daunting, but you can certainly keep the record accurate.

even a source which is generally reliable can have its reliability questioned in any context. and a source that is generally unreliable for some reason or another can be considered reliable in some context.

the swamp maroons