danhakimi

whatsapp for family, because that's where family is.

nobody uses facebook to connect with family, they use facebook to connect with people from high school they haven't seen in 15 years and don't care enough about to actually keep in touch.

wait, is "buddy" gendered?

I like to mix it up. but language is context dependent. "buddy" is a go-to of mine, and feels entirely gender neutral.

"my people" is good for plural.

"friend" is good as long as you have the right rhythm with it. Like, you know, in the second person, like "hello, friend."

"bro" obviously doesn't work, but I have casually referred to trans friends as "broham" and they didn't seem to mind. I don't do it often, but sometimes mixing in a good bro pun is more fun that way... go a little over the top, call somebody brobrahk brobrahma, nobody's going to be thinking that you're implying gender, it's an equally ridiculous term to call anybody by. Similarly, although context dependent, there are implicitly feminine words you can use, although some of them can be degrading in the wrong context. "Gurl," "bitch," and "slut" can work, as long as it's ridiculous enough in context not to be taken seriously. I'm a guy, I've had friends call me these. "Gurl" might not be the best for a nonbinary friend or a trans man friend, so be careful with it.

I don't know, I only have a few nonbinary friends, I guess, and I mostly refer to most of them by their names.

in addition to you being an asshole, you're also wrong in practice about how HR teams work. If they hear about shit like this, they really do try to do something about it. Sometimes they can't really accomplish anything, and they're just bureaucratic about it, but no, they do not think of the person making the report as a problem, they think about the person actually causing the actual problem. Hostile work environments are unproductive, are bad for employee retention, and have a heightened risk of law suit. Only shitty businesspeople think the problem doesn't exist as long as it's not on paper.

OP's better off if their employees steer clear of them—that much is obvious, isn't it?

op mentioned the DSA...

well I said "would." It's not a moral issue, it's just confusing that people find this compelling. It doesn't quite seem like a collaborative artistic experience. It seems more like just bad tech.

I don't understand why this would exist over noscript + using the websites you actually want to use. If you want to spend time on minimal websites, there's no reason you can't use html and http to do it.

it looks like this was a college student's weekend hacking project and some people took it way too seriously and now have this social idea about how intentionally inferior tech is going to revolutionize... devolutionize? the internet. This is not snapchat. This is cave painting.

see, you're a scientist, and in your spare time you pretend you understand culture as though it is composed of true and false statements instead of jokes told to frame advice for building better outfits.

the headline doesn't say "Why Siriano's Designs Look Bad," do we need a lesson in reading comprehension? The caps lock and the second-person phrasing should make the tone clear to anybody with a sense of humor, did you never develop one of those? Did you miss my concept reminding people that this is a humor channel? Did you ever think that maybe the video could explain why some all black outfits are bad and why other all black outfits are good?

did any of that occur to you at all?

and I'm saying it's astoundingly stupid for somebody to think he can say that based on a video he didn't watch. like, truly astounding. like, how a person could be so stupid really has me scratching my head, let alone so stupid as to double down on it.

if you don't want to watch the video, don't watch it. I installed sponsorblock and enjoyed it just fine, as I do many of his videos, but, silly me, I actually care what people have to say, and not just who sponsored their videos.

"I think this is crap, but I don't even know what this is, I'm not going to watch the video, or any video made by anybody who wants to earn a living making videos, but I'm sure as shit going to criticize the videos I don't watch!"

I'm surprised to see you have a comment history, since you posted this comment ten seconds after I posted this link, but I'll ask anyway, since I'm not sure anybody is going to check my report.

What company do you think you're telling people to avoid?

Remember that Frugal Aesthetic is a comedic channel for humorous jokes, and that taking this video seriously is morally wrong.

Will Ferrell has IMO the best fit.

What makes you say that? his pants are aggressively tapered, I hate, but if you love that... there are plenty of other slim pants here. His jacket is too tight, it's pulling at the button and flaring out in the back, which looks even worse because his pants are not a traditional full cut. The lapels are buckling at the chest because he went for a cheap fused jacket from a brand that used to be a designer brand, and is now just coasting on its name.

Did no one look back at 90s pictures and audibly not laugh at how bad they looked back then?

Yeah, in the 2000s, and that's how we got the skinny fit trend, and people have now looked back on that and laughed at it too. And now people look back at the best outfits of the 90s, and realize that some of them were actually great.