#workplace social media policies

[employeetrackpro]

Unpacking The Myths And Realities Of Employee Monitoring In Workplace Policies

In today’s digital age, employee monitoring has become an integral part of workplace management. While some see it as an invasion of privacy, others view it as a necessary tool for ensuring productivity and security. To navigate this complex issue, it's essential to understand the myths and realities of employee monitoring within workplace policies.

A workplace policy is a formal document that outlines an organization's rules, guidelines, and expectations regarding various aspects of employee behavior and operational procedures. These policies serve as a framework to ensure consistency, fairness, and compliance with legal and regulatory requirements. 

Myth 1: Employee Monitoring Equals Invasion of Privacy

A common misconception is that employee monitoring inherently violates privacy. This belief stems from fears of constant surveillance and intrusive data collection. However, the reality is that ethical monitoring practices are designed to balance the needs of the organization with respect for employee privacy. Transparency is key. Employers must inform employees about what is being monitored, the reasons for monitoring, and how the data will be used. Clear communication helps build trust and ensures employees understand the purpose behind monitoring efforts.

Reality: Monitoring Enhances Productivity And Security

When implemented correctly, employee monitoring can significantly enhance both productivity and security. By tracking work patterns, employers can identify inefficiencies and optimize workflows. Monitoring tools can highlight areas where employees may need additional training or support, leading to improved performance. Additionally, monitoring is crucial for safeguarding sensitive information and ensuring compliance with industry regulations. In sectors where data security is critical, monitoring can prevent data breaches and protect intellectual property, ultimately benefiting both the organization and its employees.

Myth 2: Employee Monitoring Creates A Hostile Work Environment

Critics often argue that employee monitoring fosters a culture of mistrust and anxiety. They believe that employees under constant surveillance will feel stressed and demoralized. While excessive or covert monitoring can indeed lead to negative outcomes, a well-balanced approach can avoid these pitfalls. Involving employees in the development of monitoring policies and being transparent about monitoring practices can mitigate feelings of mistrust. When employees understand that monitoring is in place to support and protect them, rather than to micromanage, they are more likely to accept and even appreciate it.

Reality: Monitoring Provides Objective Performance Metrics

One of the significant advantages of employee monitoring is the ability to gather objective performance data. Traditional employee performance reviews can be influenced by subjective biases, but monitoring tools provide concrete data on productivity, attendance, and task completion. This objective information can be used to make fair and informed decisions regarding promotions, bonuses, and other rewards. Furthermore, objective data can help identify high-performing employees and those who may benefit from additional training or support, fostering a more meritocratic workplace environment.

Myth 3: All Employee Monitoring Tools Are The Same

There is a widespread belief that all employee monitoring tools are equally invasive and perform the same functions. In reality, there is a diverse range of monitoring tools available, each with different features and levels of intrusiveness. Some tools focus on tracking time spent on specific tasks, while others monitor cybersecurity threats or ensure compliance with workplace employee policies. Employers can choose tools that align with their specific needs and ethical standards. It’s important for companies to research and select the right tools that provide the necessary oversight without compromising employee privacy.

Reality: Customizable Monitoring Solutions Exist

Modern employee monitoring solutions are highly customizable, allowing organizations to tailor their monitoring practices to their unique requirements. Employers can adjust the scope and scale of monitoring based on job roles, departmental needs, and specific organizational goals. For instance, roles involving sensitive data might require more comprehensive monitoring than those with less critical responsibilities. Customizable solutions ensure that monitoring is relevant and appropriate, avoiding a one-size-fits-all approach.

Striking The Right Balance

The challenge for organizations is to strike a balance between effective monitoring and respecting employee privacy. Clear and transparent workplace employee policies, developed with employee input, are crucial for achieving this balance. Monitoring should be viewed as a tool to enhance productivity and security, not as a means to control or micromanage employees.

You can also watch: EmpMonitor: Manage Remote Work Easily

Mesmerizing Words

By debunking myths and understanding the realities of employee monitoring, companies can create workplace policies that protect their interests while fostering a positive and productive work environment. Ethical monitoring can be a win-win situation, benefiting both employers and employees. In conclusion, employee monitoring is a nuanced but necessary aspect of modern workplace management. By navigating the myths and embracing the realities, companies can ensure that their monitoring practices are fair, effective, and respectful of employee privacy.

[obstinaterixatrix]

this falls into ‘if everyone would just’ venting so don’t take it too seriously but it severely irks me when people are addressing a specific problem from a specific population and do so in a completely ineffective way, you’re not talking to the people this relates to you’re talking to yourself. that’s fine but effective rhetoric is understanding an audience and tailoring your argument to what is most effective against them, not what would be most effective against you. pathos, logos, ethos, whatever the fuck. all communication is manipulation and you are not putting nearly enough effort into manipulation.

[theculturedmarxist]

In photos of 2023’s World Economic Forum- or Davos as it is commonly called, after the Swiss resort town where it annually occurs- you might not notice the HEPA filters. They’re in the background, unobtrusive and unremarked upon, quietly cleansing the air of viruses and bacteria. You wouldn’t know- not unless you asked- that every attendee was PCR tested before entering the forum, or that in the case of a positive test, access was automatically, electronically, revoked. And if you happened to get a glimpse of the strange blue lights overhead, you could reasonably assume that their glow was simply a modern aesthetic choice, not the calming buzz of cutting edge Far UVC technology- demonstrated to kill microbes in the air.

It’s hard to square this information with the public narrative about COVID, isn’t it? President Biden has called the pandemic “over”. The New York Times recently claimed that “the risk of Covid is similar to that of the flu” in an article about “hold outs” that are annoyingly refusing to accept continual reinfection as their “new normal”. Yet, this week the richest people in the world are taking common sense, easy- but strict- precautions to ensure they don’t catch Covid-19 at Davos.

These common sense, easy precautions include high-quality ventiliation, use of Far UVC-lighting technology, and PCR testing. You’ll also see some masks at Davos, but generally, the testing + air filtration protocol seems to be effective at preventing the kind of super-spreader events most of us are now accustomed to attending.

It seems unlikely to me that a New York Times reporter will follow the super-rich around like David Attenborough on safari, the way one of their employees did when they profiled middle-class maskers last month. I doubt they will write “family members and friends can get a little exasperated by the hyper-concern” about the assembled Prime Ministers, Presidents and CEOs in Switzerland. After all, these are important people. The kind of people who merit high-quality ventilation. The kind of people who deserve accurate tests.

Why is the media so hellbent on portraying simple, scientifically proven measures like high-quality ventilation as ridiculous and unnecessary as hundreds of people continue to die daily here in the US?

Why is the public accepting a “new normal” where we are expected to get infected over and over and over again, at work events with zero precautions, on airplanes with no masks, and at social dinners trying to approximate our 2019 normal?

We deserve better. We deserve to be #DavosSafe as the hashtag going around on twitter puts it. Your children deserve to be treated with the care that world leaders are treating each other. Your family deserves to be protected from the disease which is still- unlike the flu- the third leading cause of death in the US. We don’t deserve to be shoved back into poorly ventilated workplaces while our politicians and press assure us that only crazy people would demand to breathe clean air.

Clean water and clean food are rights we fought for; we have regulatory bodies that ensure we aren’t exposed to pathogens via our water supply nor our food. In 1854, John Snow famously conducted his Broad Street Pump study in London and demonstrated that cholera was water-bourne; however, it took decades for our public policy to catch up with our scientific knowledge.

A public health case study published by the NBCI describes the years that followed:

The first use of chlorine as a disinfectant for water facilities was in 1897 in England. The first use of this method for municipal water facilities in the United States was in Jersey City, New Jersey, and Chicago, Illinois, in 1915. Other cities followed and the use of chlorination as standard treatment for water disinfection rapidly grew. During the 20th century, death rates from waterborne diseases decreased significantly, and although other additional factors contributed to the general improvements in health (such as sanitation, improved quality of life, and nutrition), the improvement of water quality was, without doubt, a major reason.

Forty-three years passed from the initial demonstration that pathogens were being spread via water, and public action and regulation to halt disease.

Can you imagine, in the 1890s, being somebody who argued against cleaning the water?

Can you imagine, in those years of plentiful cholera, calling the people who demanded shit-free water “hold outs”?

One thing COVID realists are accused of is being “doomsayers” and “fearmongers,” so let me share a dose of optimism about the future with you. When we choose- whenever we choose- to get COVID under control, there’s an exciting new world awaiting us. One, not only without constant COVID reinfection, but where our kids can grow up free of colds, flus, RSV, and many other common bugs. And no, contrary to what you may have heard, staying healthy (shockingly enough) is not bad for children!

Once we choose to institute ventilation standards and introduce new technologies like Far UVC lighting- and embrace masking as an easy, kind, and useful tool to control outbreaks- we can bring every nasty airborne pathogen under control the way we did cholera. We didn’t have the science before; now we do. (I mean that quite literally; I can’t recommend enough the linked Wired article cataloguing the long journey to establishing that Covid is, indeed, airborne).

We face a stark choice; down one road, the one with zero infrastructure upgrades, no air quality regulations, and Covid safety only for those who can afford it, you and your family will get Covid this year. You will get Covid next year. You will continue to get Covid over and over and over again, as the health problems - like cardiac damage, viral persistance, and immune system dysfunction- continue to build up. (The billionaires, of course, will not).

Down the other road, we quite simply treat ourselves the way Davos would. We engage with what the science is telling us and we build a safer, better world for our kids. We embrace the lessons this pandemic is teaching us, and let go of things we now know are harming people. We stop clinging desperately to the idea that 2019 will come back if we just get the virus one more time, and we come together to achieve what we’ve been told is impossible: elimination.

The economic elite thrive on our divisiveness and blame casting. They don’t mind that we’re calling each other names, engaging in racial stereotyping, or leaving disabled people to die, so long as we keep their machine running. But we can choose to stop throwing blame at each other, and direct it where it belongs: at the powerful people who’ve left us to suffer, at the politicians who are whipping people into a frenzy over masks instead of over our millions of dead, at the talking heads on TV that work so hard to convince us: you want to get sick. It’s better than being a *weirdo* or a *hold out*.

We needn’t wait 43 years to redirect our energies. France and Belgium have already introduced new air quality standards, and DIY projects to build Corsi-Rosenthal boxes for schools and healthcare settings have popped up around the country. We have the science, we have the technology. All we need now is the political will and the solidarity to truly end the pandemic- the kind of solidarity the super rich always show with one another.

The billionaires at Davos don’t accept continual Covid reinfection. They demand better. It’s time we demand better too.

[rms-mathematic]

Y’all fuckers don’t even realize how fucking rich this man is. He is so rich. He is literally the Richest Person. Elon Musk cries himself to sleep at night because he knows he'll never be as rich as this motherfucker.

Imagine our billionaires didn't have to deal with labor laws or regulations to limit their income. OSHA does not exist in Hell and most of his employees are functionally immortal. What is workplace safety? It sounds expensive. He probably owns company towns, like Henry Ford tried to do back in the day, but it's actually effective because he. owns everyone in them as well. He sells consumer technology, television shows, streaming services, weird popsicles shaped like his and his besties’ heads, social media, and probably a bunch more shit we don't even know about. I guarantee his return policies are beyond shit and he offers literally no warranty on any of his products, and gets away with it because he has literally no competition. Don’t want his shit? Too bad, because he can literally hypnotize you into buying it. Oh, he also collects your data and probably pushes out ads so targeted they know what you had for lunch today. Don’t worry, he won’t do anything bad with your data, Trust Him! Look at those big eyes, he’s never done anything wrong in his life ever. I think we should all give him our money.

Meanwhile, Alastor's broke ass doesn't even own his own soul 💀

(obviously Mammon is richer, but he's the literal personification of greed and he's had a 10,000-year head start, so Vox is still doing pretty damn well, all things considered)

[yukipri]

Some thoughts on Cara

So some of you may have heard about Cara, the new platform that a lot of artists are trying out. It's been around for a while, but there's been a recent huge surge of new users, myself among them. Thought I'd type up a lil thing on my initial thoughts.

First, what is Cara?

From their About Cara page:

Cara is a social media and portfolio platform for artists. With the widespread use of generative AI, we decided to build a place that filters out generative AI images so that people who want to find authentic creatives and artwork can do so easily. Many platforms currently accept AI art when it’s not ethical, while others have promised “no AI forever” policies without consideration for the scenario where adoption of such technologies may happen at the workplace in the coming years. The future of creative industries requires nuanced understanding and support to help artists and companies connect and work together. We want to bridge the gap and build a platform that we would enjoy using as creatives ourselves. Our stance on AI: ・We do not agree with generative AI tools in their current unethical form, and we won’t host AI-generated portfolios unless the rampant ethical and data privacy issues around datasets are resolved via regulation. ・In the event that legislation is passed to clearly protect artists, we believe that AI-generated content should always be clearly labeled, because the public should always be able to search for human-made art and media easily.

Should note that Cara is independently funded, and is made by a core group of artists and engineers and is even collaborating with the Glaze project. It's very much a platform by artists, for artists!

Should also mention that in being a platform for artists, it's more a gallery first, with social media functionalities on the side. The info below will hopefully explain how that works.

Next, my actual initial thoughts using it, and things that set it apart from other platforms I've used:

1) When you post, you can choose to check the portfolio option, or to NOT check it. This is fantastic because it means I can have just my art organized in my gallery, but I can still post random stuff like photos of my cats and it won't clutter things. You can also just ramble/text post and it won't affect the gallery view!

2) You can adjust your crop preview for your images. Such a simple thing, yet so darn nice.

3) When you check that "Add to portfolio," you get a bunch of additional optional fields: Title, Field/Medium, Project Type, Category Tags, and Software Used. It's nice that you can put all this info into organized fields that don't take up text space.

4) Speaking of text, 5000 character limit is niiiiice. If you want to talk, you can.

5) Two separate feeds, a "For You" algorithmic one, and "Following." The "Following" actually appears to be full chronological timeline of just folks you follow (like Tumblr). Amazing.

6) Now usually, "For You" being set to home/default kinda pisses me off because generally I like curating my own experience, but not here, for this handy reason: if you tap the gear symbol, you can ADJUST your algorithm feed!

So you can choose what you see still!!! AMAZING. And, again, you still have your Following timeline too.

7) To repeat the stuff at the top of this post, its creation and intent as a place by artists, for artists. Hopefully you can also see from the points above that it's been designed with artists in mind.

8) No GenAI images!!!! There's a pop up that says it's not allowed, and apparently there's some sort of detector thing too. Not sure how reliable the latter is, but so far, it's just been a breath of fresh air, being able to scroll and see human art art and art!

To be clear, Cara's not perfect and is currently pretty laggy, and you can get errors while posting (so far, I've had more success on desktop than the mobile app), but that's understandable, given the small team. They'll need time to scale. For me though, it's a fair tradeoff for a platform that actually cares about artists.

Currently it also doesn't allow NSFW, not sure if that'll change given app store rules.

As mentioned above, they're independently funded, which means the team is currently paying for Cara itself. They have a kofi set up for folks who want to chip in, but it's optional. Here's the link to the tweet from one of the founders:

And a reminder that no matter that the platform itself isn't selling our data to GenAI, it can still be scraped by third parties. Protect your work with Glaze and Nightshade!

Anyway, I'm still figuring stuff out and have only been on Cara a few days, but I feel hopeful, and I think they're off to a good start.

I hope this post has been informative!

Lastly, here's my own Cara if you want to come say hi! Not sure at all if I'll be active on there, but if you're an artist like me who is keeping an eye out for hopefully nice communities, check it out!

[justinspoliticalcorner]

Elsie Carson-Holt at LGBTQ:

Jack Daniel’s has joined a growing number of brands that have cut their commitments to diversity, after conservative influencer Robby Starbuck threatened to make the company his next target. Last week, it was Harley Davidson, and before them it was Tractor Supply Co. and John Deere. Starbuck’s method of rallying his online followers to deluge companies social media with complaints about their diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives and donations to social justice organizations has proven effective.

Jack Daniel’s, the whiskey company, is the latest. On August 21, Starbuck posted on X (formerly known as Twitter) “Big news: The next company we were set to expose was Jack Daniels,” but that the company had ended several initiatives and partnerships.

Starbuck said, “They must have been tipped off by us going through employee LinkedIn pages” and that the company had “just preemptively announced” changes to DEI programs. Starbuck had obtained an email from Brown Forman (Jack Daniel’s parent company) saying that “the world has evolved” since launching a DEI campaign in 2019. The company said that since January, it had been evolving the current program to a “strategic framework,” which includes ending its partnership with the Human Rights Campaign and its Corporate Equality Index (CEI), which tracks how large employers treat their LGBTQ+ employees through various policies.

Jack Daniel’s is the latest company to shamefully cave into right-wing faux outrage artist Robby Starbuck’s bad-faith campaign against DEI and LGBTQ+ initiatives in workplaces by ending their participation in Human Rights Campaign’s CEI program and diversity initiatives.

[ukrfeminism]

Westminster city council and Social Work England last week became the latest to join a list of organisations – including Arts Council England, a barristers’ chambers and a thinktank – found to have discriminated against a female worker because of their gender-critical beliefs.

The social worker Rachel Meade’s winagainst the council and her profession’s regulator means she joins a select but growing group of gender-critical feminists who have successfully brought discrimination claims on the basis of their beliefs.

Gender-critical feminists believe sex is biological and cannot be changed, and disagree with trans rights activists who say gender identity should be given priority in terms of law-making and policy. Clashes in workplaces – in some cases with those who regard the focus on biological sex as transphobic – have led to a string of employment tribunals.

On Monday, a tribunal began hearing a constructive dismissal claim from Roz Adams against Edinburgh Rape Crisis Centre. Next month, Kenny McBride’s case against the Scottish government is due to be heard in Glasgow, while judgments are pending in a claim from Prof Jo Phoenix against the Open University and that of the Green party’s former deputy leader Shahrar Ali against the party.

In all four cases – and more in the pipeline – the claimants argue they were discriminated against because they hold gender-critical beliefs.

They hope to follow in the footsteps of the barrister Allison Bailey, and of the researcher Maya Forstater who obtained a landmark judgment in 2021 that her gender-critical beliefs were a protected philosophical belief under the Equality Act. The campaign group Sex Matters, founded by Forstater, has identified at least 19 current cases.

After the Meade case last week, which like several others involved disciplinary action being initiated against an employee as a result of social media postings, Westminster council said it would “consider what changes we need to make”. For the local authority it comes too late to prevent a payout, but other employers may need to learn from it.

Lucy Lewis, a partner at the law firm Lewis Silkin, said that on such a politically charged issue, employers could feel they must act quickly after a complaint.

“Because this has become a politically toxic issue, there’s a sort of temptation [on the part of employers] to take a kneejerk reaction rather than the considered view of actually, what is the impact, is there another way we can address this [other than disciplinary proceedings or suspension]?

“People are being influenced by the very public and political dialogue on this and actually there’s value in just taking a step back and understanding all the factors.”

Georgina Calvert-Lee, an employment and equality barrister at Bellevue Law, agreed that the wider debate – in which gender-critical feminists and advocates of transgender rights have been at loggerheads – may have influenced employers, but said they must adjust their behaviour in light of the case law.

“What Forstater and Bailey have done is they’ve set this very strong precedent of tolerance,” Calvert-Lee said.

“Above all, in a pluralistic society, which is what we want, you have to accept that people are going to have different views and some people are going to find their colleagues’ views completely obnoxious – but nevertheless protected because freedom of speech is something that … has been really promoted and underlined.

“It’s always been there but it’s been sort of forgotten in some of these culture wars.”

After settling a case with a gender-critical volunteer, Katie Alcock, Girlguiding UK said it remained “a home for trans people” but added: “We agree that sex and gender are different, and will reflect this in the language we use.”

After another case that was settled out of court, brought by the student James Esses, who was thrown off his course for expressing gender-critical views, the UK Council for Psychotherapy conceded it was a valid professional belief that children suffering from gender dysphoria should receive counselling rather than medical intervention and people should not be discriminated against for such beliefs. Esses’ case against the Metanoia Institute continues.

Calvert-Lee said the cases to date showed the importance of employers training staff “about what is acceptable and what’s not and what amounts to harassment and what probably doesn’t – the sort of respect they should give to each other”, as well as giving training to those staff investigating complaints.

“Whenever there’s some sort of complaint which involves a belief that’s basically pitted against another belief, they [the investigator] have to be completely neutral,” she said. “It’s not on for the investigator to come to it very overtly with their own value judgment.”

The tribunals have made clear that it is not a free-for-all but a balancing exercise. For instance, David Mackereth – an outlier in that he lost his case based on gender-critical beliefs – was found to have crossed the line by misgendering service users at the Department for Work and Pensions, making its decision to dismiss him reasonable.

Calvert-Lee believes the recent increase in cases will ultimately be a blip rather than a growing trend, as workplaces become more aware of the need to handle complaints and concerns more carefully.

The events that led to Meade’s claim came “just weeks before the Forstater employment appeal tribunal decision was given”, she said, and the results of the Forstater and Bailey cases would mean “employers will have training, and so they’re likely to fall off, you’re likely to have fewer cases”.

Lewis said there would always be “bad eggs” but compared the situation to legal cases on manifestations of religious belief at work, such as wearing a cross.

“You have a flurry of cases and people that aren’t lawyers … wonder why those cases go away,” she said. “In a common law system like ours, you have cases that set out some of the principles employment tribunals need to consider and then really good organisations like the CIPD [Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development] take all that reasoning, they give advice and training to employers and then employers are clear about what they need to do, how they should manage this kind of conflict in the workplace.”

She added that the media attention afforded to gender-critical cases perhaps suggested that they were more common than they really were. In fact, she suggested there were likely to be a greater number of claims brought by transgender people alleging harm, though many go unreported.

“The overwhelming majority of employers are not setting out to discriminate; they’re not just thinking ‘well all people with gender-critical views are bad, so we’re just going to get rid of them’,” said Lewis.

“They just have got strong alternative views in the workplace and they haven’t known how to navigate through that conflict.”

[sunshinereddie]

i love workplace (romance) aus so so much and so i’m imagining an au where richie and eddie are coworkers in the same office, and eddie happens to be richie’s work crush but richie never actually makes a move bc he knows that it’s against company policy for coworkers to date, plus he doesn’t even know if eddie’s into guys, and he wouldn’t want to make things awkward. so he just admires from afar, and tries to keep his flirting to a minimum. 

except one night richie and a few other of his coworkers go out for dinner, and richie maybe has a few too many drinks. he doesn’t remember much after his sixth beer, except for one of his coworkers hauling his ass into a taxi and somehow getting richie to his apartment safe and sound. he gets not nearly enough sleep that night, and is rudely woken up only a few hours later by his alarm, and richie wakes up with the dreaded reminder that he has to go to work. he considers calling in sick, but then he remembers the important meeting that his boss scheduled for today, the meeting he knows he’ll get in major trouble for if he doesn’t attend, so he pulls himself out of bed and gets ready for work. 

he manages his way to the office, and figures that showing up ten minutes late is better than not showing up at all, and makes a beeline straight to the break room for some coffee. he’s so tired and he can barely keep his eyes open, so he doesn’t see the other person in the break room and accidentally bumps into them while trying to find the coffee machine, and as richie starts to apologize he finally opens his eyes wide enough to see the person... and is suddenly woken right up when he finds that it’s eddie. 

richie’s mumbled “sorry”s turn into a real apology as he starts to help eddie clean up the coffee that he made eddie spill, but eddie doesn’t seem to be upset. richie starts to explain his hangover, and that he may not may not still be slightly drunk, and eddie just laughs softly and replies like, “yeah, i figured as much.” 

richie looks at him, confused, and with the realization that richie doesn’t know what he’s talking about, eddie just takes a sip of the new cup of coffee richie poured for him, tells richie to check his phone, and walks out of the break room.

after hearing what may be the worst thing to hear after a drunken night out, richie immediately whips out his phone. he checks his all his social media, but there was nothing posted from the night before. he checks his camera roll, and again, nothing out of the ordinary there. richie’s starting to think that maybe eddie was just messing with him... until he opens up his texts, and sees at the very top, a conversation he drunkenly had the night before with eddie. 

1:07am

Richie: heyy edsei

Richie: eddie*

Richie: r u siingle 

Richie: do u likke men

Richie: you knoew you;re like the secondd cutest in the office... after me of coursse ;)

Richie: we should go out s ometime

Eddie: Are you drunk? 

Richie: nooooiioooo

Richie: may be

Eddie: You know you have work in the morning, right?

Richie: yessss

Richie: will u be rhere?

Eddie: Yes, I will be at work.

Richie: yaaaaaaaaaayy

Richie: see u tomorrow edsie

Eddie: See you tomorrow, Richie.

Eddie: Get home safe.

richie stares down at his phone in shock, completely, absolutely, 100% mortified that he actually said all that to eddie. he refuses to believe that he had a drunken conversation where, over fucking text, he confessed that he’s into eddie. to eddie himself, no less!!!! he prays that eddie only thinks it was a joke, that since he knows that richie was drunk that he will think it doesn’t mean anything at all, that they can both just forget that this happened and move on…

except, he’s not the only one panicking. while he’s worrying about the drunken conversation, richie doesn’t realize that he happens to also be eddie’s office crush, and now eddie is sitting at his desk, unable to concentrate all day long, because he can’t stop thinking about the texts that richie had sent him the night before. obviously richie was drunk, but did that make his words more truthful, or less? what was that saying, drunk words are sober thoughts? did that apply here? eddie didn’t really want to ask richie about it in case it was all just a drunken misunderstanding and richie really doesn’t feel that way, but…

a part of eddie can’t help but hope that it is true as he rereads the conversation, and hope that maybe richie will actually ask him out now… when he’s not drunk, of course.

[mariacallous]

It’s no secret that homophobia has become official state policy in Russia. Last November, the country’s Supreme Court banned the nonexistent “international LGBT movement” as an “extremist organization.” Police conduct raids on LGBTQ+ clubs and same-sex couples face jail time for kissing or holding hands in public. Of course, countless queer people have no choice but to live in this new reality, and some of them even hold official positions. The independent media outlet Holod spoke with a gay man who has worked in government for over six years to understand why he continues to collaborate with a state that believes he shouldn’t exist. Meduza shares a translation of his story.

Not long ago, I was blackmailed.

I’d posted a profile on a private gay dating board on Telegram — without a picture of my face, of course. Some guy messaged me. I sent him a disappearing photo of my face in a secret chat. He sent one back. I sent him a picture of my penis. He sent one back.

You can’t take a screenshot in a secret chat, but you can always photograph the screen with another phone. That’s what they did. Then they found my page on VKontakte, where my work is listed in my profile, and messaged me directly: “Send 5,000 rubles [$58], or we’ll send pictures of the chat to your workplace.”

I deleted the chat and blocked the sender. Nothing came of it. It wasn’t the first time something like this had happened, so I was relatively calm. But the first time I was blackmailed — when they threatened to tell my mother that I “take it up the ass” — it really shook me up. I couldn't bring myself to go outside for a long time.

I’ve been working in public service for over six years, and before that, my job was also connected to government organizations. In my youth, when I decided to dedicate my life to the state, I already knew I was gay. All this time, I’ve been hiding my relationships with men from my employers. If I go on vacation, I tell my colleagues I'm going with a girlfriend to avoid unnecessary questions.

‘You can’t escape politics’

I went into public service for idealistic reasons: I hoped that in this job, I could do something good. I wanted to fulfill my potential and have an influence on the decisions that were being made. Of course, none of that happened. But at least I, someone without any connections and from a completely ordinary family, achieved what many is the ultimate dream: I built a successful career as a public servant and earn a decent salary. I worked, and still work, in mid-level positions in departments that deal with urban management.

I thought that in the executive branch, I could escape from politics. If, for example, you’re involved in city road repairs, your work doesn’t depend much on whether Putin or Yeltsin is president.

But it turned out, of course, that you can’t escape politics. We’re not forced to engage in pro-war propaganda on social media or put the letter Z on our profile pictures. Our higher-ups are reasonable. But it’s everywhere around us. Recently, I went out to lunch at a cafe, and there was an official who I know is gay, sitting with a young guy. The guy was wearing Balenciaga sneakers, and the official had a jacket with a huge Z pin on the lapel.

‘They never had freedom to begin with’

I have many gay acquaintances who work in government agencies. Sometimes you go to a gay club and see a colleague there. Then you meet them in a work setting, and they act like nothing happened. I’ve noticed that among government officials, it’s often the gay ones who bust their asses to support the war. I see it, and it disgusts me.

There are even federal politicians among my gay acquaintances. Over the past few years, I’ve often asked them how they put up with state-level homophobia and why they stay in their positions. I asked one of my friends, and he replied: “What do you mean? Nothing’s changed.” And I think: “Well of course, you and your boyfriend still go on vacation just like you used to. The fact that gay clubs are closed [doesn’t matter] because you never went there in the first place. You don’t feel all these restrictions because first of all, you’re private people and second, you’re privileged.”

Many gay Russian officials and politicians are married with kids, but they fuck young guys. But they don’t consider themselves gay — just men who occasionally have sex with other men. And since they don’t see themselves as gay, they feel that homophobic laws don’t apply to them. So maybe this extreme zeal and obsession among government employees with promoting homophobic values is actually the behavior of people who haven’t fully come to terms with their own orientation.

Officials are people who already live with a huge number of restrictions. They live by these restrictions. For example, I, like everyone else, regularly submit not only income declarations but also reports on all my social media. And I haven’t posted anything for a long time; I can only share the view from the window or a beautiful sunset because God forbid something happens.

And it seems to me that this is why gays in government don’t see all these homophobic bans as a problem. Nothing has been taken from them because they never had any freedom to begin with. An official is a public figure, and homosexuality has always been stigmatized in our homophobic country. You couldn’t be an openly gay person in government in the 2000s or 2010s. Politicians were never really on dating sites or regulars in gay clubs. They’ve already gotten used to it.

‘This hopelessness is what got to me’

I myself have gotten used to it to some extent. The bans haven’t really affected me much. Well, other than them blocking the website of a sex shop for gays that I used.

I generally consider myself a statist. I didn’t use to worry much about what was happening in the country, even though I saw the growing clusterfuck. But even for me, things have become very uncomfortable over the past two years, and in recent months, I've been thinking about either changing jobs or emigrating. Although not much has changed in terms of everyday comfort, psychologically, it's become harder.

I don’t like it when they intrude into personal matters. I’m not really into gay clubs or loud gatherings, but I want to have the option to go. When I’m stripped of that choice, it bothers me. It’s one thing for me, living in a city with over a million people: there are always places to socialize, drink, or fuck. But I come from a small town. I can’t imagine what kids in rural areas, who are just starting to question their own sexuality, are supposed to do now when all websites with any information about homosexuality are blocked.

But it wasn’t after the homophobic laws were passed that I started thinking about leaving this job, it was after the presidential election. Even though I’ve been immersed in this crap for over 10 years, this was the first election with no oversight whatsoever. Do whatever you want.

It was my first time working on an election commission. I didn’t vote for Putin myself; I took my ballot with me. But I was convinced that the number of people around me who supported Putin was so large that getting his [desired] result in the elections would be easy. But it turned out not to be the case. In my precinct, less than 50 percent voted for him. The rest was fabricated by the commission chair: he rewrote the protocol.

I thought the public was completely gripped by a victory frenzy. It turned out only half were. But the system is willing to do anything to make it appear like there were more. This hopelessness — when a significant portion of the people wants change, but the system crushes this desire — is what got to me.

I wasn’t involved in the falsification; I just didn’t interfere. This is probably where my moral line is. Despite the internal conflict, I think I could have worked my entire life for a homophobic state — provided I didn’t have to participate in anything homophobic myself.

‘I’m stuck in a swamp I can’t get out of’

One of my gay friends started working out six days a week after the war began so he wouldn’t have time to think about anything. It feels like people around me have started drinking and using drugs more. Whenever there’s an external threat, you choose something important and try to ignore everything else. I’m trying to focus my life on personal happiness. When I was in a serious relationship, I was completely absorbed in it and didn't care at all about what was happening around me.

Some of the men I’ve had relationships with were much more involved in government policy than I was. Some even helped enact homophobic laws. But that didn’t bother me because you don’t fall in love with people just for the values they hold. I’ve even dated a man who was married and cheating on his wife — maybe that’s wrong too, but that’s life. There’s an internal conflict, but we live in the here and now.

My friends tell me, “You need to quit your government job, cut ties completely.” But it’s very hard; I’ve spent 10 years of my life building this career. Recently, I tried looking for a job outside the public sector but I couldn’t find anything suitable. I feel like I’m stuck in a swamp that I can’t get out of. I don’t want to become so hypocritical in another 10 years [that I’m] going to cafes with guys and then sitting around talking about Z fascism with a serious face. Either stop fucking [men] or take off the cross.

Yes, I feel uneasy and yes, I have a moral conflict. But it’s not like there’s a warm welcome for me abroad. A Putin official isn’t wanted in Europe. I put myself in this trap and now I’m trying to get out without getting crushed.

[yuadokjon]

a hierarchy not based on strength

summary: he's a gym owner.

-----

New job, new life. When you finally heard back from your dream job, you couldn't hop on a plane fast enough away from the hellhole you unfortunately called your hometown. Sure, it would start as a mostly administrative position at the bottom of the totem pole. Sure, the pay wasn’t great. And, sure, the only way you would be able to afford living anywhere remotely near your workplace would be in a shoebox of an apartment in the sketchiest side of the city. But, hey -- new job, new life. And, most recently, new gym.

Within the first few weeks of moving in, you were sifting through yet another smashed-in pile of new resident mailers until digging out a glossy, colorful flyer for a gym. Malevolent Shrine, huh? You eyed the neon-colored temple, the sharp edges of the skulls and teeth littering its base piercing into the two words it centered. Loud. Bombastic. And unbelievably douche-y, you noted with a raised brow at the captions splashed haphazardly across the page in tribalistic all-caps:

‘ONLY A HIERARCHY BASED PURELY ON STRENGTH MATTERS.’

‘DISCOVER THE HUNGER TO TAKE HOLD OF YOUR DESIRES.’

‘STAND PROUD. YOU ARE STRONG.’

Was this for a gym, a rave, or a cult? What kind of business owner signed off on this? It just screamed frat bros and gym rats, and you were pretty sure you weren’t the target market. But it did its job of grabbing your attention and, a quick search of its close location later, considering its relatively reasonably priced offers. Brand new members could even sign up for a 30-day trial with zero dollars down as an offensively yellow spike in the corner shouted. It couldn’t hurt. Maybe you needed something of a familiar routine to help better ground yourself. Help adjust to this lonely foreign land that you hoped to eventually replace ‘home.’ 

Of course, you, ever-diligent skeptic, had to uncover all the public secrets you could before stepping one foot inside. Not that there was much to find. Nothing much was on their official site other than current promotions and classes in that same gaudy font from the ad. No social media accounts. No gallery of staff or trainer photos. Not even an ‘About’ page. It was opened sometime in 2018, going by the sparse Internet reviews and photos you did find. You would have been impressed a business could survive in this day and age with such a specter of an online presence if you weren’t so frustrated. But it was indeed a real gym, one with decent reviews and a decently large layout providing enough spacing among machines to retain some level of privacy while easily cycling through them. No Wi-Fi, televisions, or cafés peddling the latest health fads but 24/7 with great showers and sauna. A very no-frills gym. You could appreciate that.

The next day some kid in a white-pink ombre bob took down your information, not offering a smile or tour throughout the entirety of the speedy sign-up process. You could barely get a word in that wasn’t a simple affirmation or denial as they reviewed your application and drilled through the gym policies and rules in a monotonous drone, pointing vaguely in the respective directions of the few amenities before ushering you out of their office with a handful of brochures and a temporary gym badge. You think you might’ve signed something and mumbled a thanks right before they neatly shut the door in your face. You weren’t sure if you had even caught a name. But you did recall them confirming something about a free cancellation policy within the first thirty days, so you took full advantage of it whenever you could.

Today was day 22 of your trial period, and so far it was...fine. Generally everything was fine, except for...your eyes scanned cautiously around the gym's perimeter. You felt the squat bar you were resting against lurch and whipped around, coming eye to eye with a pair of scarlet ones. You squeaked and jumped back in surprise, immediately earning the icy stare of a certain manager that chilled the back of your neck. You hissed and huffed as you adjusted your clothes for no apparent reason.

“Ugh, Sukuna!” 

“Afternoon, gorgeous,” he greeted cheerily in return. You merely crossed your arms over your chest and scowled back at the grin that only widened at your defensive display.

“First time seeing you here during these hours,” he casually continued as he pushed himself off the bar he’d been dangling over and peered down at you from his full height, “Missed you this morning.”

“I was hoping to, actually,” you sighed and shooed him away from your rack, hands on hips until he obediently bowed out outside and around the metallic cage, “For the last time, leave me alone.”

Yeah, generally everything was fine save for this pink-haired menace that terrorized your every gym visit since popping up out of nowhere one day.

Sukuna had smoothly inserted himself into your routine and refused to let you recall ever knowing a peaceful start to your day since joining Shrine. He was there. Always. Every early morning -- or even the occasional late night -- it didn't seem to matter when you timed your pilgrimage. Sukuna was always there, waiting for you outside the locker rooms with that suspicious smirk and two fresh towels slung over his shoulder. What are we working on today? How about we try pushing past your PR? Need a spotter? What am I saying, of course you do. Wave after wave of rhetorical questions and light barbs always buffeted you first as he followed around after you like an eager kitten. What protests you eked out during his infrequent ebbs were patiently listened to but quickly drowned again, swept up by the tsunami of suggestions from someone who was obviously more experienced at this than you. Though you would always insist on sticking to the schedule you had already carefully laid out prior to each session, you always found yourself drifting away and towards his instead by the end. It was a ritual at this point.

You couldn’t deny that your physique was the best shape it’d been in a while, his challenges helping you push past limitations that had long been entrenched for years. And he was also useful in warding off other goers, whose numbers you were surprised to find even during the odd hours you purposely chose. A singular distraction with honest -- if crude -- motivations, you could handle. Multiple ones wanting who knows what from you? Especially from around this part of town? One close brush was close enough for you. No, Sukuna was decidedly the lesser evil that you knew. Probably.

You understood their caution and had shared it when he first stepped up to you. He was taller and bigger than any of the regulars you now recognized. Wide muscled thighs and arms that seemed to strain the basketball shorts and cutoff tanks he always wore that would have blanketed any other man. Perfect limbs that balanced vertically at the convergence of his comparatively slimmer waist. Bulging veins that recorded a history intimate with everything within the gym’s interior and scars that suggested a familiarity with dangers past the confinement of their brick walls. Like a wrathful Buddhist deity rendered exquisitely in flesh and blood. Not that you were ogling. He was just hard to not notice.

But more than his imposing build or the tats he unabashedly wore across its expanse, it was the air around him. Heavy. Intense. Suffocating. He was a planet, its inescapable gravity forcing further down the lowered heads and eyes from everyone encircling his orbit. His presence both demanded and eschewed attention, the correct answer of the two one might realize only afterwards (and possibly much too late). Nobody dared to approach you now, even in the past thirty or so minutes you were free of him for once within this gym.

Other than the flirting, however, Sukuna seemed harmless enough as you got to know him over the course of your visits. He hadn’t yet given you any reason to fear him, though he left you plenty to question everything else. You weren’t sure how or why such an intimidating man took an interest in you at all. 

“Aw, don’t be like that,” he chuckled and sidled in behind you while you checked over the loaded discs that flanked the opposite ends of the steel pole and the clips holding them firmly in place. His big hands hugged the centimeters of space above your hips as he leaned down, smirking, “You know how to get me to stop.”

“For the last time,” you repeated to his reflection in the mirrored wall in front of the two of you before slapping his hands away, “I don’t go out with jobless losers.” 

“Hmph,” he pouted but eased back again as you swung underneath the bar and shouldered the metal onto your squeezed blades, “What makes you think that again? Spread your feet farther, doll.”

You rolled your eyes but complied. His hands now hung loosely under yours that tensed and tightened their grip. You peeled your gaze away from them and onto your reflected form as you took a deep breath and started your descent.

“One,” Sukuna voiced aloud your thought as you came back up, the deep reverberations scattering away what focus you had managed to muster. You furrowed your brows.

“Loser because obvious. Jobless because,” you grunted as you steadily lowered yourself again, “How else could you always be here? And in the middle of the day.”

“So are you,” he scoffed.

“I’m only here now because I took the day off.” 

“I could have, too.”

“Doubtful. Wish I could take a day off from you for once.”

“Two -- aw, hurtful. Are you trying to avoid me, [Y/N]?”

You didn’t answer. You tried to ignore the heat emanating from the body that followed behind you as you continued with your reps and he with his count. You fixed your eyes on your heaving diaphragm to blur out the thicker frame that overshadowed yours several times over. Your heart was pounding. Your head was starting to spin. Maybe you had already overdone it. Or you should’ve drank some more water beforehand. Breathe, you thought you heard your partner warn, don’t forget to breathe. You shut your eyes as you struggled to drive up the bar a final time and quickly re-racked it with his help before doubling over to catch your breath. He bent down in concern before shooting back up as a pointed finger stabbed the air in front of his face.

"One. Date," you panted, shakily but emphatically jabbing the singular digit skyward again, “Got it? One. One date then you'll leave me alone to lift in peace.”

He blinked. An unusual softness crept into his features that disappeared as quickly as it had appeared when you looked up and awaited his response. 

“One,” he agreed, the usual snark now returning in full glory, “So…how about now?”

“No.”

“But you just said you had the day o--”

“No.”

[borderlineomniverse]

If You Don't Know About Project 2025, You Need To.

For the uninformed, Project 2025 is a plan drafted by a conservative alt-right think tank that would turn America into an autocratic dystopia in the event that Trump wins the 2024 election. The plan would begin execution IMMEDIATELY upon Trump's innaguration, and includes actions such as the following:

Trump would recieve near-unlimited powers as president and would essentially become a fascist dictator.

Using this power, he would invoke the Insurrection Act of 1807 to mobilize military forces and hunt down anyone he deems to be his enemies (the plan specifically states "deep state politicians", but who he regards as his enemies could expand to generally anyone who opposes him).

Project 2025 pretty much spells the end for LGBTQIA+ rights, with the removal of protections against discrimination and healthcare as the beginning of the plan, but would eventually include the criminalization of anyone who "appears" gender-nonconforming or doesn't fit a heterosexual stereotype. Transgender individuals would be forced to detransition, or at the very least, present themselves as their gender assigned at birth, and any non-heterosexual couples would have their marriages annulled (at the very best), or may even be imprisoned. There's so much more that would occur along the lines of destroying LGBTQIA+ rights, but these are some major points I wanted to highlight.

On the topic of diversity rights, the document has evidence that Trump could begin deporting non-white individuals (mostly Latinx people, but anyone is fair game) and as a whole, rights for any non-white individuals would go by the wayside.

Furthermore, women's rights would also be abolished, with discrimination against women in the workplace returning and reproductive rights being thrown out. Abortion would become criminalized under this new policy, and women would lose automony over their bodies and decisions.

Most of the current administrative branch would be demolished, with current departments like the Department of Education, Department of Justice, and FBI being shut down, and others having their power either significantly limited or replaced with Trump's own conservative infiltrators.

Speaking of which, while this project doesn't technically go into effect until Trump's potential election, the steps are already being made. Alt-right individuals and supporters can sign up on Project 2025's Website to officially join certain jobs and become apart of the project's officially sanctioned militia that could execute Trump's bidding.

If all of this seems very scary, it should be. If Trump gets elected, we would see the end of American democracy and freedom, and the country would transform into a fascist dystopia. If you think this only affects Americans, think again! Other alt-right parties in other countries can and will take example from Trump's power and push for the abolishment of freedom in other countries as well.

So. What can you do?

I hope this doesn't need to be said, but if it does, then VOTE. If you were planning to not vote, then by taking that inaction you are effectively making an action that could spell the destruction of our nation. If you are voting age, you MUST cast your vote against Trump to ensure that Project 2025 will not go into effect.

You can also spread the word to friends, whether that be in person or online. Reblog this post, or make your own posts. Make sure that this information is circulated in your online circles and encourage others to share more information wherever you can. Talk about it on all of your social media profiles and get all of your mutuals talking about it as well. Unfortunately, there's a huge subset of the internet that just isn't aware about Project 2025, but if we get the word out and encourage as many people as we can to take action against this manifesto, then we may be able to save our nation. Again, even if you're not American, this policy could impact you in the future, and you can share information for your own online audience and inform your American followers about the issue. It's very important that we get as many people talking about this as possible.

I hope this post motivates you to take action and begin sharing information about Project 2025, and if you would like more resources I've linked articles and resources for you below.

Analysis from PBS Newshour: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MsoGfOesEEA

For those of you hesitant to vote for Biden: https://www.tiktok.com/t/ZPRwpYeNx/

[readingsquotes]

"Condescension, dismissal, and misrepresentation from elite journalists kind of proves the students’ point: they should be wary of the mainstream media’s intentions, as mainstream media has consistently misrepresented the movement’s goals. These journalists are holding student activists to a standard that they don’t hold other organizations to — including their own workplaces.

Journalists from the New York Times, the Atlantic, and the Wall Street Journal are powerful professionals at the top of their fields who regularly deal with media spokespeople. The organizations they work for enforce message discipline by investigating reporters’ leaks, directing inquiries to media liaisons, and maintaining strict social media policies that control how (and if) their employees weigh in on unfolding events. Many of the organizations’ reporters’ interviewees, such as universities, make it clear that individuals do not speak for the organization as a whole. Media policies are standard operating procedure for contemporary organizations and movements. A White House correspondent like Baker is surely used to talking with spokespeople.

Refusing to grant students the courtesy of talking to their chosen representatives — a courtesy that is part of the job when questioning the powerful — is of a piece with the disrespect often reflected in the reporting and commentary that demeans and misrepresents student protesters’ motivations and goals."

....

It is not difficult to figure out what pro-Palestinian student protesters want. Organizers at multiple encampments have written, publicized, and advertised their demands. Their disciplined refusal to break message discipline shows a remarkable seriousness. Their refusal also sends a message to mainstream journalism they feel has failed to rise to the historical moment: prestige journalism, examine thyself.

[ausetkmt]

Yahoo News: Civil Rights Groups Horrified at Elon Musk's Racist Outburst Against Black People

Earlier this week, multi-hyphenate billionaire Elon Musk endorsed a tweet suggesting Black students at Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs) have lower IQs and shouldn't become pilots.

"It will take an airplane crashing and killing hundreds of people for them to change this crazy policy of  DIE," he tweeted, intentionally mixing up the letters of the acronym for "diversity, equity, and inclusion."

Civil rights groups were understandably horrified at the billionaire's racist comments.

"The only thing anyone needs to hear from Musk about diversity in the workplace is an apology," Marc Morial, president and CEO of the National Urban League, told NBC News, calling his statements "abhorrent and pathetic."

In his tweets, Musk appeared to imply that HBCU students shouldn't be allowed to become pilots. However, neither his statement nor the tweet he was responding to stand up to virtually any degree of scrutiny, from made-up average IQ numbers to wrongfully correlating high SAT scores with high IQ.

Musk also claimed that a United Airlines program that allows students at three HBCUs to interview to become a pilot meant that the airline had "prioritized DEI hiring" over "safety," a demonstratively false statement that only further highlights his twisted worldview.

Even fellow billionaire Mark Cuban saw through the racist fearmongering.

"BTW, looks like multiple layers of merit-based evaluations before they can fly for United," Cuban tweeted, adding a link to the program.

In a schoolyard bully-esque response, a clearly incensed Musk called him "a liar" — without offering any evidence, of course.

In the CEO's mind, DEI initiatives seem to lead to mistakes like the door plug of a Boeing 737 MAX 9 jet falling out and forcing an emergency landing — a preposterous claim with no relationship to reality.

To be clear, Musk's latest hurtful remarks shouldn't come as much of a surprise, given previous comments and conspiracy theories he's already endorsed.

Musk's ventures also happen to have a well-documented problem with overt racism in the workplace, with swastikas and nooses found at Tesla, according to a lawsuit filed by the US Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) last year.

"Musk’s company not only refused to investigate complaints or take any steps to end the abuse, it viciously retaliated against employees who complained or opposed the abuse," Morial told NBC.

It's a sad state of affairs, with Musk's racist tirades quickly becoming a common fixture on his social media platform X. Just over a month ago, Musk called an unhinged and antisemitic conspiracy theory "the actual truth," leading to an outpouring of criticism and condemnation.

His latest remarks are only adding to the pile.

"Reminder to Elon Musk: providing a home for the proliferation of hate speech and white supremacist conspiracy theories kills people," NAACP President and CEO Derrick Johnson wrote in response to one of Musk's tweets. "Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion cultivates a more inclusive society."

"They are not the same," he added. "We are not the same."

Yet Musk is digging in his heels. In response to NBC's reporting, Musk lashed out once more.

"Those are openly racist organizations," he tweeted in a pitiful rebuke that will likely only stoke the flames.

More on Musk's overt racism: Elon Musk Cosigns Racist Claim That Black Students Have Low IQs

[harriswalz4usabybr]

Monday, October 21, 2024 - Kamala Harris

The Vice President, Governor Kelly, and Secretary Haaland headed to the cornhusker state to do some campaigning. The 'official' schedule is below.

Omaha, NE (Event #1) Event Location: University of Nebraska Omaha Event Type: Get Out the Vote Event Time: 8:00 - 11:00 CT *The campaign launched a Get Out the Vote initiative on-campus at the University of Nebraska Omaha. Governor Laura Kelly met with some faculty members, while Deb Haaland and the Vice President met with various student groups. Some social media ambassadors were recruited to help us raise awareness for the down ballot races and ballot measures in the state of Nebraska. Our stance on the ballot initiatives are below.

Omaha, NE (Event #2) Event Location: Biaggi's Ristorante Italiano Event Type: Lunch with Local Democrats Event Time: 12:30 - 15:00 CT *We invited some local democrats from across the state to join the campaign for lunch. This was just a session for us to discuss the issues going on in Nebraska and how democratic policies are being discouraged due to republicans in the state.

Lincoln, NE Event Location: Pinnacle Bank Arena Event Type: Campaign Rally Event Time: 18:00 - 21:00 CT *Full-text of this speech will be released shortly.

Nebraska Initiative 434 Vote: No Reason: This amendment would place significant restrictions on abortion, limiting reproductive freedom in Nebraska. We urge a "no" vote to protect women’s health, privacy, and their right to make personal medical decisions free from government interference.

Nebraska Initiative 436 Vote: Yes Reason: Supporting earned sick leave is a basic step toward a healthier workforce and safer workplaces. Approving this initiative will help ensure that Nebraska employees are able to care for themselves or loved ones without risking their jobs or financial security.

Nebraska Initiative 437 Vote: Yes Reason: Legalizing medical marijuana is about providing relief to Nebraskans suffering from chronic conditions. This measure allows qualified patients access to safe, regulated medicinal marijuana under medical guidance, offering new hope to patients in need.

Nebraska Initiative 438 Vote: Yes Reason: Expanding medical marijuana through regulated legalization supports patients while ensuring safety standards. By establishing the Nebraska Medical Cannabis Commission, this initiative would ensure that patients get safe, quality products while supporting responsible business practices.

Nebraska Initiative 439 Vote: Yes Reason: This amendment would safeguard reproductive rights by establishing a state constitutional right to abortion until fetal viability. A "yes" vote upholds a woman's right to make personal healthcare choices, aligning with our stance to protect and expand women’s rights. We urge you to make this "yes" vote!

Nebraska Referendum 435 Vote: No Reason: A "yes" vote would pull taxpayer money from the public school system of Nebraska. Please keep money in public schools by voting "no" on this referendum.

~BR~

[tauforged]

tough talk for someone whoze doxed their own workplace and personal information while admitting to purposefully slacking and having severe mental episodes on company time... just saying. not to mention breaking your jobs social media policy so boldly, just a word of advice, basic internet safety you know

^ me when i have my priorities in order and care about internet discourse a normal amount, which is why i’m threatening to try and get a random internet stranger fired from his fucking job for stating an opinion i don’t agree with online

[soapver4]

A Stranger in the Lee Soo-Yeon Strangeverse

Merch idea: You're a vacationer in mystery mistress Lee Soo-yeon's macrohabitat, where each story so far begins with a lead character running into a corpse: in a store he shops at, at the home he visits for an appointment, along his commute, in a vehicle arriving at his workplace, and right above her on her vehicle. To enjoy your stay with maximal peace in this video game, you must keep the place as safe as possible:

Brave the embarrassment and stigma to report suspicious activities and domestic violence and other wrongdoings before they escalate or occur to more victims

Stop establishment patrons from taking any unconscious person away

Clean up after yourself so that no sign of carelessness or sloppiness suggests an abundance of easy victims to potential criminals

Join a mentoring program for at-risk youths

Join a neighborhood watch

Help out at a soup kitchen

Sign petitions for safer infrastructure and other robust security measures and for legal reforms to hold wrongdoers fully accountable

Pay all your rightful taxes to sustain a well-functioning justice system, including adequate hot spots policing (but with policy safeguards to forestall racial profiling)

Depending on the number of crimes accrued by the end of your stay, you get to collect rewards or penalties. There are two tiers of rewards: (A) a computer-generated, shareable gif of you slurping noodles with ace prosecutor Hwang Si-mok and warm-hearted police lieutenant Han Yeo-jin or having desserts with the dashing emergency medicine specialist and secret change-maker Ye Jin-woo and (B) shareable AI doodle of you in Han Yeo-jin's art style. The penalties? Computer-generated imagery of Lee Soo-yeon's villains cynically pointing weapons at your photo avatar. Sorry, you'll have to do more work to show off this other visual on social media. Naturally, the number of villains increases with the number of crimes.

A leaderboard publicizes all players' rankings. Every few months, active players have virtual access to a debate between socially-driven crime writers like Lee Soo-yeon and Kim Eun-hee and experts on criminal affairs. Physical attendance is possible with ticket purchase. The top 5% of players receive complimentary tickets. Let's keep in mind, though, that virtual virtue does not always translate to real-world virtue. Nonetheless, at a time when apocalyptic news ceaselessly rains down on us, the reminder that we have so much agency to sculpt our surroundings would be empowering, clarifying and inspiring.