bearister said:

---

Too bad a jury would find it didn't apply in the case of the Ms. Good murder.


*The officer has no worries. If he had pulled both women out of the SUV and capped them face down on the street in cuffs, Trump would pardon him.

---

Why would it not apply?

Trump can't pardon state charges but your hypothetical scenario is quite a stretch to begin with

movielover said:

---

Despite clear evidence, from multiple angles, thousands hit Minneapolis against ICE.

They're trying to blindside you America.

Nip it in the bud.

Round them up, heavily jail those orchestrating it.
pic.twitter.com/SDLmXtwtno

— Tommy Robinson 🇬🇧 (@TRobinsonNewEra) January 10, 2026

---

Do you really believe this? All of these people should be rounded up and jailed for protesting?

Good essay here IMO. I agree with a lot of it. I do find the ICE officers more (not entirely) at fault here. I'm also not convinced it rises to the level that would get them criminally convicted. It's pretty hard to convict a cop.

The full essay link
6/6https://t.co/ayg4kJtBb5

— Carl (@HistoryBoomer) January 11, 2026

BearlySane88 said:

---

bearister said:

---

Too bad a jury would find it didn't apply in the case of the Ms. Good murder.


*The officer has no worries. If he had pulled both women out of the SUV and capped them face down on the street in cuffs, Trump would pardon him.

---

Why would it not apply?

Trump can't pardon state charges but your hypothetical scenario is quite a stretch to begin with

---

The federal officer can use the federal officer removal statute (28 U.S.C. 1442) to have a state court case transferred to federal court.

This is a common practice and generally favored to protect federal interests and ensure a neutral forum.

Federal Court as the Venue: Once removed, the case proceeds in federal court, which applies state substantive law to the charges.

Trump's DOJ would then drop the charges. Your leader controls it all.

*I hope that the person who starred your post sees this as a teachable moment too.

sycasey said:

---

movielover said:

---

Despite clear evidence, from multiple angles, thousands hit Minneapolis against ICE.

They're trying to blindside you America.

Nip it in the bud.

Round them up, heavily jail those orchestrating it.
pic.twitter.com/SDLmXtwtno

— Tommy Robinson 🇬🇧 (@TRobinsonNewEra) January 10, 2026

---

Do you really believe this? All of these people should be rounded up and jailed for protesting?

---

Plus many. Pac 10 and movie lover's politics (not them the keyboard warriors that they are but their politics) scare the HECK out of me. It is more than trump. I figure we are about the same age (late 50s) and I am trying to figure out what part of their (or my) education was missed.

Formative books for me in my 20s were Darkness at Noon and the God who failed (along with everyone's favorite George Orwell). I grew up with a healthy skepticism of the state and the importance of freedom. Of course my Berkeley mom may have been critical - as she never stopped reminding me that she was pushing my stroller through Sproul were some nice young man was on top of a police car reminding people to stop the gears of the machine when it is chewing people up ;-)

My opinion is that many of us that went to CAL have the same shared experience, whether we are in our 50's, 60's, or 70's when it comes to Govt in general, let alone the environment.

It's clear to me that the politics of the "keyboard" warriors are those of people that never attended CAL.

It's patently obvious.

To me this quote from HistoryBoomer on Substack encapsulates my feelings.

" In the end, this is a tragedy of bad choices."

I want our public servants to make better choices. They take my taxes. Least I can expect. But I don't want to try to provide a detailed "how to improve your public policy" to this administration because, bluntly, that is NOT their goal. Their objective is to terrorize. It is to create viral moments. It is to trigger the reptilian brains (some on this site) who want to hurt people and enjoy the visceral joy as someone ****s around and finds out.

How do I know this with 100% certainty and clarity?

Because it has been a ****ing year and ICE STILL is not in matching uniforms!!!!

Go watch ANY police action by a mid to large city police force. You know what you DO NOT SEE. You do not see a hodge podge of crap that looks like they have been cos playing milita guys firing paint ball rounds in the woods. And yet 12 months after swearing in and making this the signature domestic agenda item ICE can not be outfitted in matching uninforms with clearly identified markings and seem to love triggering the libtards with their Dick's sporting goods head coverings. It is INTENTIALLY amatuer hour. And bluntly it pisses me off to no end that there are those on the right, including on this board, that can't put down their keyboards for an instant and say "I am not giving up by beliefs but yeah - the administration needs to pause and get this professionalized cause otherwise it is cruelty for cruelty's sake" They might also stop thinking that 100,000 people in the twin cities are all on SOROS' payroll and actually are motivated by legitimate concerns. It is so dismissive and ****ing condescending. I am so tired of reading that crap.

PS. And you know this. Go look at these videos. I have a life so I haven't spent dozens of hours in slow mo but I can not tell
1) Which cars are ICE and which are not.
2) All the ICE agents. I mean I get who MOST are but I also know in the upper midwest in Winter there are regular people who wear camo cause it is the warmest jacket they have and a real man must ALWAYS be ready to go out for deer hunting.
3) the main group you can pick out is a bunch of guys, on a suburban street hanging out with tactical weapons (loaded I am sure) talking about the Vikings. I mean what the **** are they doing that for? Even if you say picking up the sex offender you pick him up. You don't pick him up. You leave. Why are they their for an extended period of time unless to cause a scene and terrorize. I am so done with ICE.

DiabloWags said:

---

My opinion is that many of us that went to CAL have the same shared experience, whether we are in our 50's, 60's, or 70's when it comes to Govt in general, let alone the environment.

It's clear to me that the politics of the "keyboard" warriors are those of people that never attended CAL.

It's patently obvious.

---

It would be wonderful if the powers that be were to figure out a way to create a board for good non-sport discussion but somehow exclude or moderate the voices, which I suspect you are righth are here to fight with the Berkeley libtards, just to fight and do their good for the right wing cause. There are a lot of smart people here and I learn stuff when I don't have to wade through the propoganda.

People who read 1984 should pay attention to 2003. ICE was formed in 2003, it's budget has tripled since then . It is now the largest law enforcement agency, bigger than the FBI and DEA. All this has happened under the administration of the authoritarian "state.," Democrats and Republicans. Trump is just using tools he was given.

socaltownie said:

---

DiabloWags said:

---

My opinion is that many of us that went to CAL have the same shared experience, whether we are in our 50's, 60's, or 70's when it comes to Govt in general, let alone the environment.

It's clear to me that the politics of the "keyboard" warriors are those of people that never attended CAL.

It's patently obvious.

---

It would be wonderful if the powers that be were to figure out a way to create a board for good non-sport discussion but somehow exclude or moderate the voices, which I suspect you are righth are here to fight with the Berkeley libtards, just to fight and do their good for the right wing cause. There are a lot of smart people here and I learn stuff when I don't have to wade through the propoganda.

---

I recommend just skimming what you consider right wing propaganda and focus your discussions on meaningful interactions with your friends who post left wing propaganda. Much of the stuff jamming up the threads is arguing over each others' propaganda. It would also help if folks, like the person you responded to, didn't spend an inordinate amount of time flaming posters and hypocritically accusing posters of doing things he does himself.

socaltownie said:

---

DiabloWags said:

---

My opinion is that many of us that went to CAL have the same shared experience, whether we are in our 50's, 60's, or 70's when it comes to Govt in general, let alone the environment.

It's clear to me that the politics of the "keyboard" warriors are those of people that never attended CAL.

It's patently obvious.

---

It would be wonderful if the powers that be were to figure out a way to create a board for good non-sport discussion but somehow exclude or moderate the voices, which I suspect you are righth are here to fight with the Berkeley libtards, just to fight and do their good for the right wing cause. There are a lot of smart people here and I learn stuff when I don't have to wade through the propoganda.

---

I get your general point but I'll add:
I went to Cal in the 80s and came in already as a right of center moderate but it's a little concerning that you're pushing for moderation of speech. Totally get having to follow board rules but beyond that, there should be no moderation of speech. As Cal is/was a beacon for free speech, so too should this board. We are all given the ability to ignore posters we deem unfit to respond to. I also think it's incredibly important to hear what the other side is saying. I often disagree with posters here but I enjoy the opportunity for debate and to know what people who don't think like me are thinking/feeling about world events.

That being said, one of the biggest agitators is most certainly Wags. So if it were to be moderated heavier or people excluded, he would most certainly be one to go also.

I'm not perfect by any stretch but I truly enjoy the debates had here and have learned things from listening to both sides of the aisle. It's hard sometimes when we disagree but that doesn't make it any less important to listen.

bearister said:

---

BearlySane88 said:

---

bearister said:

---

Too bad a jury would find it didn't apply in the case of the Ms. Good murder.


*The officer has no worries. If he had pulled both women out of the SUV and capped them face down on the street in cuffs, Trump would pardon him.

---

Why would it not apply?

Trump can't pardon state charges but your hypothetical scenario is quite a stretch to begin with

---

The federal officer can use the federal officer removal statute (28 U.S.C. 1442) to have a state court case transferred to federal court.

This is a common practice and generally favored to protect federal interests and ensure a neutral forum.

Federal Court as the Venue: Once removed, the case proceeds in federal court, which applies state substantive law to the charges.

Trump's DOJ would then drop the charges. Your leader controls it all.

*I hope that the person who started your post sees this as a teachable moment too.

---

I appreciate the info, I didn't realize the feds could just do that. I thought it had to be recommended by the state before that could happen.


Choose kindness. We aren't enemies. Go Bears

bearister said:

---

BearlySane88 said:

---

bearister said:

---

Too bad a jury would find it didn't apply in the case of the Ms. Good murder.


*The officer has no worries. If he had pulled both women out of the SUV and capped them face down on the street in cuffs, Trump would pardon him.

---

Why would it not apply?

Trump can't pardon state charges but your hypothetical scenario is quite a stretch to begin with

---

The federal officer can use the federal officer removal statute (28 U.S.C. 1442) to have a state court case transferred to federal court.

This is a common practice and generally favored to protect federal interests and ensure a neutral forum.

Federal Court as the Venue: Once removed, the case proceeds in federal court, which applies state substantive law to the charges.

Trump's DOJ would then drop the charges. Your leader controls it all.

*I hope that the person who started your post sees this as a teachable moment too.

---

Sounds like a law that the next Congress should change

BearlySane88 said:

---

socaltownie said:

---

DiabloWags said:

---

My opinion is that many of us that went to CAL have the same shared experience, whether we are in our 50's, 60's, or 70's when it comes to Govt in general, let alone the environment.

It's clear to me that the politics of the "keyboard" warriors are those of people that never attended CAL.

It's patently obvious.

---

It would be wonderful if the powers that be were to figure out a way to create a board for good non-sport discussion but somehow exclude or moderate the voices, which I suspect you are righth are here to fight with the Berkeley libtards, just to fight and do their good for the right wing cause. There are a lot of smart people here and I learn stuff when I don't have to wade through the propoganda.

---

I get your general point but I'll add:
I went to Cal in the 80s and came in already as a right of center moderate but it's a little concerning that you're pushing for moderation of speech. Totally get having to follow board rules but beyond that, there should be no moderation of speech. As Cal is/was a beacon for free speech, so too should this board. We are all given the ability to ignore posters we deem unfit to respond to. I also think it's incredibly important to hear what the other side is saying. I often disagree with posters here but I enjoy the opportunity for debate and to know what people who don't think like me are thinking/feeling about world events.

That being said, one of the biggest agitators is most certainly Wags. So if it were to be moderated heavier or people excluded, he would most certainly be one to go also.

I'm not perfect by any stretch but I truly enjoy the debates had here and have learned things from listening to both sides of the aisle. It's hard sometimes when we disagree but that doesn't make it any less important to listen.

---

I think there is a fine line between censorship (bad) and then encouraging dialogue and debate. My personal belief is that cardinal sins are positing material that is self evidently false and misleading just to trigger people. That isn't positive but negative. But I also get why that is challenging.

I also am sympathetic as was near banned because I offered what I truly considered a well reseached, though out and experienced based critique of "team relevance" on the football board. ;-) I decided to quit when the owners and board members DM'ed me aksing me to dial it back - and especially stop being repetitive (though I thought much of team relevance "arguments" were highly repepetitive and very ill thought out. Though in that case the golden rule (he who has the gold makes the rules) both ruled the day and was ironically instructive for the direction of college sports.

socaltownie said:

---

sycasey said:

---

movielover said:

---

Despite clear evidence, from multiple angles, thousands hit Minneapolis against ICE.

They're trying to blindside you America.

Nip it in the bud.

Round them up, heavily jail those orchestrating it.
pic.twitter.com/SDLmXtwtno

— Tommy Robinson 🇬🇧 (@TRobinsonNewEra) January 10, 2026

---

Do you really believe this? All of these people should be rounded up and jailed for protesting?

---

Plus many. Pac 10 and movie lover's politics (not them the keyboard warriors that they are but their politics) scare the HECK out of me. It is more than trump. I figure we are about the same age (late 50s) and I am trying to figure out what part of their (or my) education was missed.

Formative books for me in my 20s were Darkness at Noon and the God who failed (along with everyone's favorite George Orwell). I grew up with a healthy skepticism of the state and the importance of freedom. Of course my Berkeley mom may have been critical - as she never stopped reminding me that she was pushing my stroller through Sproul were some nice young man was on top of a police car reminding people to stop the gears of the machine when it is chewing people up ;-)

---

This guy echoes a lot of what I think is going on. It's clear that some folks here subscribe to this ideology here. Not everyone who supports ICE or Trump, but some. If you believe you're already at war then you're willing to forgive all kinds of abuses.

ICE's brutality stems partly from unprofessionalism and low recruitment standards.

But a lot of it is simply that ICE agents are being recruited from people who sincerely believe that they're engaged in an existential race war:https://t.co/36UusB0dq3

— Noah Smith 🐇🇺🇸🇺🇦🇹🇼 (@Noahpinion) January 11, 2026

dajo9 said:

---

bearister said:

---

BearlySane88 said:

---

bearister said:

---

Too bad a jury would find it didn't apply in the case of the Ms. Good murder.


*The officer has no worries. If he had pulled both women out of the SUV and capped them face down on the street in cuffs, Trump would pardon him.

---

Why would it not apply?

Trump can't pardon state charges but your hypothetical scenario is quite a stretch to begin with

---

The federal officer can use the federal officer removal statute (28 U.S.C. 1442) to have a state court case transferred to federal court.

This is a common practice and generally favored to protect federal interests and ensure a neutral forum.

Federal Court as the Venue: Once removed, the case proceeds in federal court, which applies state substantive law to the charges.

Trump's DOJ would then drop the charges. Your leader controls it all.

*I hope that the person who started your post sees this as a teachable moment too.

---

Sounds like a law that the next Congress should change

---

I would support that. It should have to be pushed up by the state, not decided by the feds that it's being moved.

socaltownie said:

---

BearlySane88 said:

---

socaltownie said:

---

DiabloWags said:

---

My opinion is that many of us that went to CAL have the same shared experience, whether we are in our 50's, 60's, or 70's when it comes to Govt in general, let alone the environment.

It's clear to me that the politics of the "keyboard" warriors are those of people that never attended CAL.

It's patently obvious.

---

It would be wonderful if the powers that be were to figure out a way to create a board for good non-sport discussion but somehow exclude or moderate the voices, which I suspect you are righth are here to fight with the Berkeley libtards, just to fight and do their good for the right wing cause. There are a lot of smart people here and I learn stuff when I don't have to wade through the propoganda.

---

I get your general point but I'll add:
I went to Cal in the 80s and came in already as a right of center moderate but it's a little concerning that you're pushing for moderation of speech. Totally get having to follow board rules but beyond that, there should be no moderation of speech. As Cal is/was a beacon for free speech, so too should this board. We are all given the ability to ignore posters we deem unfit to respond to. I also think it's incredibly important to hear what the other side is saying. I often disagree with posters here but I enjoy the opportunity for debate and to know what people who don't think like me are thinking/feeling about world events.

That being said, one of the biggest agitators is most certainly Wags. So if it were to be moderated heavier or people excluded, he would most certainly be one to go also.

I'm not perfect by any stretch but I truly enjoy the debates had here and have learned things from listening to both sides of the aisle. It's hard sometimes when we disagree but that doesn't make it any less important to listen.

---

I think there is a fine line between censorship (bad) and then encouraging dialogue and debate. My personal belief is that cardinal sins are positing material that is self evidently false and misleading just to trigger people. That isn't positive but negative. But I also get why that is challenging.

I also am sympathetic as was near banned because I offered what I truly considered a well reseached, though out and experienced based critique of "team relevance" on the football board. ;-) I decided to quit when the owners and board members DM'ed me aksing me to dial it back - and especially stop being repetitive (though I thought much of team relevance "arguments" were highly repepetitive and very ill thought out. Though in that case the golden rule (he who has the gold makes the rules) both ruled the day and was ironically instructive for the direction of college sports.

---

I get your point and it would be challenging. I know this particular section of BI is less moderated than the sports sections but didn't realize or wasn't around for the situation you described yourself going through. I'm one to argue that all ideas should be allowed regardless of how they make you feel. We all have the ability to ignore, don't respond, correct information we deem we need to. In life and on this board. Again, I do see your point though. I appreciate this dialogue, it's much more effective than posters who just name call and try to shame others.

I often found myself keeping my mouth shut in college because my views were regularly in the minority but truly valued the friends I made at Cal who were open to hearing the dialogue anyways. Too often we shut down those we disagree with, not based on facts but based on feelings.

sycasey said:

---

socaltownie said:

---

sycasey said:

---

movielover said:

---

Despite clear evidence, from multiple angles, thousands hit Minneapolis against ICE.

They're trying to blindside you America.

Nip it in the bud.

Round them up, heavily jail those orchestrating it.
pic.twitter.com/SDLmXtwtno

— Tommy Robinson 🇬🇧 (@TRobinsonNewEra) January 10, 2026

---

Do you really believe this? All of these people should be rounded up and jailed for protesting?

---

Plus many. Pac 10 and movie lover's politics (not them the keyboard warriors that they are but their politics) scare the HECK out of me. It is more than trump. I figure we are about the same age (late 50s) and I am trying to figure out what part of their (or my) education was missed.

Formative books for me in my 20s were Darkness at Noon and the God who failed (along with everyone's favorite George Orwell). I grew up with a healthy skepticism of the state and the importance of freedom. Of course my Berkeley mom may have been critical - as she never stopped reminding me that she was pushing my stroller through Sproul were some nice young man was on top of a police car reminding people to stop the gears of the machine when it is chewing people up ;-)

---

This guy echoes a lot of what I think is going on. It's clear that some folks here subscribe to this ideology here. Not everyone who supports ICE or Trump, but some. If you believe you're already at war then you're willing to forgive all kinds of abuses.

ICE's brutality stems partly from unprofessionalism and low recruitment standards.

But a lot of it is simply that ICE agents are being recruited from people who sincerely believe that they're engaged in an existential race war:https://t.co/36UusB0dq3

— Noah Smith 🐇🇺🇸🇺🇦🇹🇼 (@Noahpinion) January 11, 2026

---

Yeah **** those people.

But it's fair to say the same towards the left who are preaching this is like the civil war. The rhetoric on both sides is often absurd.

BearlySane88 said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

bearister said:

---

BearlySane88 said:

---

bearister said:

---

Too bad a jury would find it didn't apply in the case of the Ms. Good murder.


*The officer has no worries. If he had pulled both women out of the SUV and capped them face down on the street in cuffs, Trump would pardon him.

---

Why would it not apply?

Trump can't pardon state charges but your hypothetical scenario is quite a stretch to begin with

---

The federal officer can use the federal officer removal statute (28 U.S.C. 1442) to have a state court case transferred to federal court.

This is a common practice and generally favored to protect federal interests and ensure a neutral forum.

Federal Court as the Venue: Once removed, the case proceeds in federal court, which applies state substantive law to the charges.

Trump's DOJ would then drop the charges. Your leader controls it all.

*I hope that the person who started your post sees this as a teachable moment too.

---

Sounds like a law that the next Congress should change

---

I would support that. It should have to be pushed up by the state, not decided by the feds that it's being moved.

---

Trump would veto it and you would support Trump in doing so

dajo9 said:

---

BearlySane88 said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

bearister said:

---

BearlySane88 said:

---

bearister said:

---

Too bad a jury would find it didn't apply in the case of the Ms. Good murder.


*The officer has no worries. If he had pulled both women out of the SUV and capped them face down on the street in cuffs, Trump would pardon him.

---

Why would it not apply?

Trump can't pardon state charges but your hypothetical scenario is quite a stretch to begin with

---

The federal officer can use the federal officer removal statute (28 U.S.C. 1442) to have a state court case transferred to federal court.

This is a common practice and generally favored to protect federal interests and ensure a neutral forum.

Federal Court as the Venue: Once removed, the case proceeds in federal court, which applies state substantive law to the charges.

Trump's DOJ would then drop the charges. Your leader controls it all.

*I hope that the person who started your post sees this as a teachable moment too.

---

Sounds like a law that the next Congress should change

---

I would support that. It should have to be pushed up by the state, not decided by the feds that it's being moved.

---

Trump would veto it and you would support Trump in doing so

---

I just clearly stated I would support it happening. I'm also the one star on your post about it. Maybe pick someone who doesn't support it to argue with. Good lord.

Do better.

"More Americans (44%) support protests against ICE than support ICE itself (39%), Axios' Josephine Walker writes from a YouGov survey taken the day Good was killed.

Just 27% said the agency's tactics were "about right" compared to 51% who called them "too forceful." Another 10% said they were "not forceful enough."
Axios

socaltownie said:

---

DiabloWags said:

---

My opinion is that many of us that went to CAL have the same shared experience, whether we are in our 50's, 60's, or 70's when it comes to Govt in general, let alone the environment.

It's clear to me that the politics of the "keyboard" warriors are those of people that never attended CAL.

It's patently obvious.

---

It would be wonderful if the powers that be were to figure out a way to create a board for good non-sport discussion but somehow exclude or moderate the voices, which I suspect you are righth are here to fight with the Berkeley libtards, just to fight and do their good for the right wing cause. There are a lot of smart people here and I learn stuff when I don't have to wade through the propoganda.

---

The owner of this platform could easily VERIFY whether or not posters had graduated from our beloved University given the verification platforms that currently exist for magazine sellers to verify a discount to student subscribers.

Sadly, I've initiated a number of threads here that deal with BASIC ECONOMICS, and yet they become a "playground" for idiotic claims and absurd political "what-about-isms" by those who (a) suffer from poor reading comprehension and (b) those that are poorly educated and operate from a terribly flawed knowledge base in which they're literally only able to "speak" thru cut and paste "tweets". Most of the time, they have no comprehension of what they tweeted.

For example, just this morning I log on to find a lover of Movies comparing Q4 GDP from 2024 (Biden) with Q3 of 2025 GDP (Trump).

For obvious reasons. no one in the business world makes such an inane comparison. No one.

But because there is little "effort" here by management to support high quality posting given a bar that is quite low, this kind of "rubbish" is allowed for high volume posters who pollute the forum 24/7.

This is why quality posters like Unit2sucks have left. And it's sad, because that guy was clearly one of the smarter guys in the room. His posts were incredibly insightful.

This is why I've now (soft) capped myself at just 10 posts a day in OT. If management refuses to raise the bar, then I have to limit my time here. Wading through all of the nonsensical rubbish here by keyboard warriors posting 50x a day just isn't worth it.

This is how a forum dies.

DiabloWags said:

---

socaltownie said:

---

DiabloWags said:

---

My opinion is that many of us that went to CAL have the same shared experience, whether we are in our 50's, 60's, or 70's when it comes to Govt in general, let alone the environment.

It's clear to me that the politics of the "keyboard" warriors are those of people that never attended CAL.

It's patently obvious.

---

It would be wonderful if the powers that be were to figure out a way to create a board for good non-sport discussion but somehow exclude or moderate the voices, which I suspect you are righth are here to fight with the Berkeley libtards, just to fight and do their good for the right wing cause. There are a lot of smart people here and I learn stuff when I don't have to wade through the propoganda.

---

The owner of this platform could easily VERIFY whether or not posters had graduated from our beloved University given the verification platforms that currently exist for magazine sellers to verify a discount to student subscribers.

Sadly, I've initiated a number of threads here that deal with BASIC ECONOMICS, and yet they become a "playground" for idiotic claims and absurd political "what-about-isms" by those who (a) suffer from poor reading comprehension and (b) those that are poorly educated and operate from a terribly flawed knowledge base in which they're literally only able to "speak" thru cut and paste "tweets". Most of the time, they have no comprehension of what they tweeted.

For example, just this morning I log on to find a lover of Movies comparing Q4 GDP from 2024 (Biden) with Q3 of 2025 GDP (Trump).

For obvious reasons. no one in the business world makes such an inane comparison. No one.

But because there is little "effort" here by management to support high quality posting given a bar that is quite low, this kind of "rubbish" is allowed for high volume posters who pollute the forum 24/7.

This is why quality posters like Unit2sucks have left. And it's sad, because that guy was clearly one of the smarter guys in the room. His posts were incredibly insightful.

This is why I've now (soft) capped myself at just 10 posts a day in OT. Wading through all of the nonsensical rubbish here by keyboard warriors posting 50x a day just isn't worth it.

---

You sir, are half the problem. You speak entirely from a place of entitlement and never from a place of teaching. If people are wrong about things, TEACH them don't demean them.

It's very simple.