That’s definitely how I hope it’s taken by the general public!

It looked like a sign that management had posted in solidarity with the elevator companies rather than with the workers themselves, so I figured it was meant to be taken cynically.

It’s hard to be the only person fighting sometimes. Especially if she was surrounded by people who were all for this, what good is throwing a sprinkle of water at a bonfire?

It’s not like she quietly disappeared. She publicly denounced it and went on record actively against it. Making changes require negotiations, and her colleagues have shown they no interest in negotiating.

It is extremely unlikely that this was her Plan A. It’s also extremely unlikely that it was just this one isolated thing. And now, she’s free to join groups that actively interested in fighting against this and throwing her experience and network in as resources to help them instead.

Maybe that would wake people up enough to do something.

I’m sick of making shitty incremental process all the time when people need actual change put in place, all because “it’s better than nothing”.

Puts the anger onto the people striking. Classic.

Unfortunately, the people who should be concerned by that are the employers, and it’s not historically common for them to give a shit amout their disabled employees enough to prioritize their access overall, let alone in particular as a result of this strike.

LMAO @ them whining “but we worked really hard on it”

History attaches names to things, so resigning at least makes sure you aren’t the one remembered bringing this policy out.

I’ve been watching her stuff, and she’s excellent!! Very clear, fully subtitled, and a fantastic teacher.

Oops - I’m sorry, I forgot to look at Lemmy for ages!

I ultimately gave up on apps and did the thing called “comprehensible input”. That’s where you watch a bunch of stuff you’re inherently interested in, and you eventually pick up on the sentence structure, pronunciation and vocabulary they use.

They stress emphatically that it must be something you’re interested in enough to pay attention to. If it’s something you’re watching as a chore, or something you’re tuning in and out of, stop and watch something else.

I’ve realized that there’s a massive difference between the ‘relationship’ I build with words and grammar from something I want to watch versus something that’s “neat but essentially just fun homework.” I remember how a certain word was used, I recognize the exact context in that moment (rather than every single possible context that word might have), I learn entire ways of communicating an idea that sticks to me in French rather than directly translating something I’d say in English, and I care enough to be able to watch it a few times to force myself to understand the whole thing. So I find that I’m watching lots of content related to horror and violence, which does leave me with many words I wouldn’t say in a test, but gives me so much clarity on how to express ideas. Think of most horror movies and how they’ll have those bland, small talk conversations to establish the happy victims, or how they problem-solve to escape - all of that is excellent vocabulary, and the extra effort I put into learning words I should definitely not use ends up helping me learn all the other ones I can use. :)

I think apps - even Duolingo - would work if you have zero vocabulary, maybe. But as someone trying to go from a B to a C, the apps just aren’t doing it for me.

As for localization, I’m just watching some stuff specifically about Québec vocabulary, and trying to take the pressure off myself over having to be perfect right now. I’m clearly an anglophone so it’s not like I’ll be fooling anybody, so my goal is to just understand what everyone else is saying. :) Baby steps!

Sorry I took so long to reply! I’m still not used to Lemmy. :P

That was an excellent answer. I imagine it’s further compounded by how kids are sorted into grades, with someone being born very late to the grade’s cut-off having a disadvantage to someone born many months earlier/at the start of the cut-off.

From what you wrote, I’m almost persuaded to think that it’s something kids should be taught in school, but far later. I’m back on the boat of having calligraphy classes offered in high school as electives. The trouble is, once I suggest that, I feel like it’s setting myself up to be argued into having it at a much younger age and as a mandatory part of education, which puts us right back into the problems you listed out. :(

They’re clowns, so they can’t be taken seriously enough to invest in as propaganda. At any moment, everything they say can be dismissed as a joke. At best, it might be taken as a reflection of general sentiments, but it’s all deniable satire.

So they’re totally free to talk about anything they want. Their money doesn’t come from that in the same way as news outlets. And that means they can choose to focus on topics (regardless on what take they have) that news outlets aren’t allowed to touch for fear of losing cash. That means we end up hearing about stuff at all that we wouldn’t otherwise.

A diversity of topics is pretty important when it comes to breaking up an echo chamber!

Oh, neat! I think I’ve heard of that one but didn’t look into it at all. I’m gonna try it now :D

I agree to a large extent! I would add onto that by saying government funding also acts as advertising dollars would, but that because the government has put some value onto transparency and has to be elected, Canadians can have a better chance to identify where the unspoken bias is based on who’s got the wallet.

I would also say that because of all their funding and because of their need to establish themselves as a reliable source of news, CBC has to put a ton of effort into reporting on news that many would call ‘useful’ so that there’s more of a benefit of doubt extended to them when they don’t report on telecoms.

All that to say “let’s not throw the baby out with the bathwater,” but the genuinely useful articles and journalistic standards that exist for CBC do also operate in an environment that serves whoever’s funding it. They’re an excellent starting point for awareness, so I’m happy to see their stuff shared, but I’d never recommend having their word be law on what’s “worth” reporting or sometimes even the angle they’re taking while they report on it.

Me too! :D

You’re gonna be needlessly confusing people but okay, I guess the name is really important to you

😅 I mean…

Ribfest and Poutinefest come to mind, but they’re constantly shit on for being overpriced and not worth it. That’s before we even get into the part about the organizer being pro-convoy.

I guess there’s Bluesfest? Because Jazzfest is there but isn’t nearly as popular.

Tulipfest… It’s called that, sure, but it’s iffy.

Glowfest - I think that’s still happening. It’s not huge but it’s a known name.

Other than that, I don’t think Ottawa does anything that’s unique to just us.

… did… Did Ottawa give itself this nickname? 🥲

I guess this is where that advice to read in French as much as possible comes in, huh? That way you at least build up a Quebec French vocabulary that survives the France French education this owl is delivering :P

Did the Alberta MP want her to perform there? That actually makes sense. It would legitimize the area as a go-to destination for artists, and with how famous and sparkling alabaster white-and-blonde Taylor is, I’m sure there’s a lot of local politicians who’d want to spin that into a lot of meaning for their base.

:D It’s a conversation! It’s a human connection! It might not be life-changing, but that gives it some meaning for that tiny moment in time!

Exactly!

A mix of different perspectives isn’t the issue.

A mix of different facts, with one sourced and cited and the other just being angry opinions, is the issue. Those shouldn’t be equated with each other - not just because that angry opinions are cheap to pump. They can easily drown out researched articles.

That’s not to say opinions aren’t important! Many, many real-life experiences get ignored, overlooked, or purposely cast aside, and anecdotal accounts and subjective experiences are all we have. But I take issue with something presenting itself as a factual source of information when it only has very shaky citations, or when it has no citations and brushes it off like, “Well, everyone should know this, and if you don’t, you’re in on it.”

NatPo is propaganda parading itself as news, and that’s dangerous to put on the same level as news outlets that actually research their stories.