You’re assuming that they scouted this and carefully planned it to ensure they wouldn’t cause damage. I doubt that.

Seems like they did:

The canvas of the painting is protected with a glass screen, a factor Just Stop Oil said they had taken into account.

There’s an android app called URLCheck that can strip unwanted bits off the end of urls and then open them as well.

The house might look good in a sort of greeny-teal shade

If they still have nothing in a few months I guess their main value will be as a protest vote.

I guess we’ll have to wait and see.

What’s the point of contesting if you have no policy positions? All they’ve said afaik is pretty much identical to lib talking points “labur/greens is failing the act”, “no one is listening to the people”

So far seems pretty cynical imo.

I haven’t quite finished it yet, my feeling is that it slightly overstays it’s welcome.

I’ve also noticed that most of the time I do a thing or two in the game then realise there’s not quite enough time in the loop to do another thing, but just enough time to make me want to not waste the loop, since I find starting a new loop a bit tedious.

From memory it respawns the low level enemies constantly, since they’re just ammo/health/armour pinatas. You needed to kill the big enemies to complete an arena.

Not really a fan of the design choice, but I had a decent amount of fun when I clicked with how the Devs wanted you to play.

slug

That’s “vindictive and devious baby elephant” to you mate.

I convinced my partner to play it recently and the way I knew she’d finished it was that I could hear sniffling from the desk behind me.

American politics infects Australian politics in many ways sadly.

This changes the effect of negative campaigning (people still show up in Aus vs the US), but the idea is to dissuade people from voting for someone, rather than encourage them to vote for you. This might have a positive effect on votes for the party doing the negative campaigning, but I think it’s a poor definition of convincing someone to vote for you.

I don’t think this is a useful definition of voting for

which implicitly gets them to vote for you.

Seems to only be true if you think of there being only 2 parties, which is why I don’t think the definition is good.

Compulsory voting means any campaign has to be focused on actually getting people to vote for you

I don’t think this is necessarily true, did you miss the massive amounts of negative campaigning that happens every election?

Yeah but how are the cops supposed to access our data without a warrant or any form of notice?

Not from bris but been seeing a psychologist for a while. It may be hard for people to recommed since the way I’ve found it is that I had to see a few before I found one that “clicked” for me.

Have you got a family doctor? They might have a recommendation and they can get you a mental health care plan which will pay for some of your psych appointment for like 10 visits (any doctor can give you the plan afaik).

There’s only so many trees, we can beat them!

Well as people worried about victims I’d just be worried it might seem a tad disingenuous quote from a vast minority of cases and not provide any quotes from victims that never see justice you know?

What happens to people who have been raped and weren’t believed or were falsely accused of faking it? Just wondering if they have similar experiences with mental health?

The rate of false accusations of rape is really hard to determine but is generally regarded as being pretty low (Vicpol puts it at ~5% based on studies). It’s also extremely hard to get a good number though, since false does not mean unfounded.

I don’t think it’s justified drawing an equivalence between rape and rape accusations given the evidence we have on the rates, it makes it seem like false accusations are happening way more than they actually are.

Also given who this probably is, this is likely not the only accusation of rape also, which decreases the likelihood the accusations are false I would suggest.

The no campaign is run by pretty seasoned wreckers.

Just now you haven’t answered the queries he had repeatedly made, you’ve shot them down.

The same line used by climate change deniers for ages, while they disingenuously repeated the same arguments that had been debunked or were nonsense.