RaivoKulli

It does say “leaseholder” in the title. But I’m guessing whoever they heard this story from didn’t elaborare either on why he got the insurance since it dampens the story. Not much of a wild coincidence or conspiracy when the answer is mundane like that

I think they just included the guy’s name because he is the one who got the insurance

I like how it’s sus to you to include the name of the person who the article is about lol

Hell yeah

That’s true though

Ported… into… Fortnite? I don’t understand what that means. Like portint Sonic into Mario it just, what

Nokia doesn’t do phones anymore. HMD Global (Finnish company) bought the Nokia brand for phones and used it but apparently they’ve switched away from it recently.

I generally don’t chitchat with strangers. It doesn’t cost anything in that situation not to talk, there’s no negative to it.

But that’s not how it would go in a situation where you just don’t make conversation. Or are you thinking they really want to have a conversation with you and are just thinking “oh gosh I’m so bummed that random person didn’t talk to me”? I don’t understand

I wouldn’t gamble on someone else’s money since it is not my money to gamble on. It should be up to them imo.

It’s like gambling on someone else’s money. You could do nothing and the situation stays the same, or you could run the risk of losing their money. You feel the odds are good so you go for it, I would feel shit about losing their money just because I wanted to gamble so I don’t do it. And they can gamble on their own too if they want to, it’s not like by not gambling on their behalf you’re preventing them from gambling.

I never said I was doing this “because I wanted to gamble.” I’m doing this because I believe that the chances are quite good at having a positive outcome for both me, and the person I’m interacting with. I additionally believe that the chances of a negative outcome are exceptionally low.

You’re describing gambling…

I’m not ignoring possibility of good things. I just don’t think it’s worth gambling that there’s a negative outcome. If you don’t do anything it won’t cause anything negative and they’re still free ro talk to you. I just wouldn’t want to risk causing someones day to be shittier because I wanted to gamble.

I don’t want to make anyone’s day worse. Gambling on someone else’s feelings just seems icky to me.

So you’re just gambling on their feelings, did I understand that correctly?

Oh you mean UTC?

I knew this was due to DEI!

The blog post seems very readable to me

I don’t get how the articles “back you up” in this point

You’re almost insisting on talking to the people on a situation you know might negatively affect them and where they are stuck in the situation and that just seems odd.

What do the articles have to do with that?

You havent really addressed it propeely imo. I just don’t understand the mindset.

Well you won’t negatively affect them by not interacting with them. They are still free to talk to you, after all. The implication is a good one because they don’t know what sort of creep or angry person you might be and how you would react to rejection. You’re almost insisting on talking to the people on a situation you know might negatively affect them and where they are stuck in the situation and that just seems odd.