knapplc

I understand and have some difficulty with this, too. It's difficult to always remember to use preferred pronouns, and I've messed that up a few times. I give my best effort, but it's not natural to me. All we can do is make a genuine effort to see those folks as they want to be seen. And hope they understand when we mess up.

I wanted to come back to this conversation and apologize. I am far more in agreement with you and the stance in the editorial than I conveyed. This was my poor communication problem, and my responses seemed unnecessarily adversarial. That's on me, and I'm going to work on that.

Too bad TFG never got around to Infrastructure Week. We need these repairs/replacements yesterday. Biden admin. announces $27B investment to repair 15,000 bridges: 'It's all about fixing the problem' The Biden administration on Friday launched a new effort to repair nearly 15,000 bridges across the United States using funds from the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law. The Bridge Replacement, Rehabilitation, Preservation, Protection, and Construction Program will provide $26.5 billion to state governments, as well as Washington, D.C., and Puerto Rico, over the next five years, with a separate $825 million for tribal governments in the same time frame. State and regional governments will receive a total of $5.3 billion for bridge reconstruction and resilience in 2022; tribal governments will receive $165 million. According to data from the Federal Highway Administration, there are 618,456 bridges across the United States. Of them, 45,023 — or about 7.2% — are considered structurally deficient, and nearly 231,000 of them — more than a third — are in need of repair, according to a report from the American Society of Civil Engineers. The ASCE bridge report, released as part of a 2021 Infrastructure Report Card, suggests that annual government spending to repair bridges should increase to $22.7 billion from $14.4 billion — figures taken from FHA’s 2019 Status of the Nation's Highways, Bridges, and Transit report. Friday marks 60 days since Biden signed the $1 trillion bill into law, which provides $550 billion over the next five years to fortify nearly every traditional aspect of U.S. infrastructure — including roads, bridges and freeways — plus a few newer efforts, such as increasing access to high-speed internet and preparing for the effects of climate change. And not that anyone needs convincing that we need to fix bridges in this country, but this happened today: Bridge collapse sends cars, bus crashing into ravine in Pittsburgh PITTSBURGH — A bridge collapsed Friday morning in Pittsburgh near Frick Park, causing several vehicles and a bus to crash down into a ravine, Channel 11 News has learned. “We are monitoring the situation in Pittsburgh and prepared to provide support as needed. Pittsburgh residents: Please stay safe and continue to avoid the area.” The Port Authority of Allegheny County said a driver and two passengers were on the bus that was on the bridge when it collapsed. All three people are OK.

Maybe we should call him "Awesome" Allen.

So, watched S4E1 of Cobra Kai last night. It was pretty much the same plot rehashed over the past three series. Not sure if we'll keep watching this season. It was fun to relive the 80s a bit when this started, but this is become a bit to carbon-copy.

I included that in mine as well. They can easily go wider, but I'm not sure how they can make the seats deeper without reconstructing the stadium.

I wish we could post results on HuskerBoard. This is the only place I can't. Bummer. Here's a screenshot of today. Reasonably easy.

Wider seats are fine, and it'll (maybe) help preserve the sellout streak to reduce capacity, but it won't do anything to alleviate the knee-in-back issue for us taller fans. Anyone over 6 foot doesn't fit in those seats no matter how wide they are.

And then the Big Ten can give us OSU as a "random" crossover seven out of ten years.

What's that article supposed to compel me to believe? Did you read the study that article cites?

Confirmation bias.

She presents this as evidence of her opinion, which is another unfounded opinion: Although the science on the benefits of child masking is uncertain, and the downsides are becoming clear, the districts presumed that allowing parents to come to their own conclusions would cause great harm. A reasonable reading of this is that the article to which she links is trusted source, but it's another opinion, which concludes with we don't know. She's saying what we're doing is harming children. She has no proof, she has opinion, and there's no conclusive evidence that masks harm children. But we know masks do mitigate spread of contagion. It's more anti-mask rhetoric.

Sure, children seem less affected by Covid, but they're not immune, and children have died from it. Plus they can spread it. This person's opinion is that we're damaging children, and she presents it as fact, but the reality is she is putting a lot of weight on conjecture. Even the article she links doesn't come to any conclusions about harm to children.

I'm having a hard time understanding this person's conclusions. This is all their opinion, right?

People usually start with a word that contains many of the common vowels & consonants, like learn or earls or trace. Sometimes you do that and you get a bunch of hits, sometimes you get nothing. For some reason HuskerBoard won't let me post my results. Keeps telling me it contains an unsupported emoji. Boo.