Right? What kind of person teases us like that and then doesn’t share the method :|

ethical capitalism

:D

17 Mio. https://de.statista.com/infografik/23994/geschaetzte-zahl-der-nazi-opfer/

Davon waren 6 Mio. Juden, es wurden aber auch andere Menschengruppen gezielt ermordet. Ich sehe diese Zahl oft miszitiert, daher der Einwurf. https://cdn.statcdn.com/Infographic/images/normal/23994.jpeg

Wisst ihr noch wo er sich losgerissen hat? Bringt da seine Schüssel mit Wasser hin (kein Futter, denn das kann andere Tiere anlocken, die er dann meidet). Außerdem ein Kleidungsstück von euch dort hinlegen. Das gibt dem Hund Grund dort zu warten. Hoffentlich findet ihr euch wieder!

Lemes 👈

The story turns out to be an act of revenge by the co-author, who donated 10 million pound to Cameron’s party in hopes of being given a cabinet position. After Cameron refused to give him such, Ashcroft co-wrote an unauthorized “biography” of Cameron.

With this in mind, I wouldn’t give this story any second thought other than the realization that Ashcroft is an utter tool.

Daniel’s Jack?

Inventors of those patents are Robert L. Sweet and Alan B. Densky. Those names mean anything? I don’t know them and I don’t get the point you are trying to make…

I assume you mean, that you disagree with my idea. In this case I find it a somewhat valid use of a downvote within the system that I outlined. But if everyone downvotes what they disagree with, before actually engaging with the content, it turns Lemmy into just another echo chamber.

I disagree. There is rarely a relevance for like/dislike and all upvotes and downvotes are, should be viewed as and used as indicators of relevance.

Upvote what you find relevant/interesting, not what you like.

Downvote what you find irrelevant to the community or what uses language that you find inappropriate for that community, not what you don’t like.