I think of it more that the collapse of Rome took over a millennium. Rome was so large that the state could collapse and reform several times.

Caves.

Are you ok?

Some of the arguments for mutual tracking relate to safety, not cheating.

0.0 kB/s

I’ve mentioned in other cases that a lot of cultural post content is generally created mostly by people’s first languages. Local news is likely going to be written in the local language. Discussions on media are likely going to be in the language the media was produced in unless it is a major national hit.

I’ve mentioned that five more countries have English-speaking populations larger than the UK, but you’re likely going to see a lot more post content on the UK over Indonesia because local Indonesian media likely isn’t producing the quantity of English coverage as the UK. And I don’t expect that to change, as such a change would mean killing local languages.

You’re focusing on the nationality of the readers. Most of the people arguing that the USA is the largest English-speaking country is focusing on those providing the written content.

But there is a difference between a population who speaks English and a population that speaks English as a first language.

There are five countries that have a larger English speaking population than the UK: India, Nigeria, Pakistan, Indonesia, and the Philippines. Yet, a lot of the cultural output of those nations isn’t in English because those countries have first languages which take priority.

So the commenters of a post may be fairly diverse, but the post is likely going to come from the perspective of someone who speaks English as a first language. In that case, English speakers are likely going to know more about what is happening in the UK over India because British news is likely written in English while Indian news is going to be written in a wider variety of languages.

It took me a couple of edits, but I did it.

If you compare English as a first language, the USA is still over a majority. There is a reason why most other English-speaking nations have some subsidy for local media.

Mexico City has a decent sized American citizen community living there, but it is mainly driven by full remote workers who live there but travel back to the USA for a few days every six months.

I suspect that work authorization may be a problem. I’ve also heard that the culture in Mexico is somewhat conservative due to the Catholic Church; getting a job in a school will likely be difficult.

And I’m sure that Mandarin Internet media sites are very Sinocentric.

The United States is a giant nation in the English language. It comprises of a majority of English as a first language speakers and a large percentage of English speakers overall. American media output is also going to be primarily in English, including local news.

In contrast, a nation like Germany is likely going to speak in German when possible. This likely includes media like news. So, when it comes to news articles, I don’t expect English news from Germany to be written in anywhere near the quantity of English news written about California.

I feel like it would be like asking why Portuguese media focuses on Brazil.

Except there are problems with training. Companies are going to need to train more competent staff. How do companies train competent staff without competent staff in the first place?

I think a lot of CEO types think they’re amazing because they walk into a room and everyone’s like “yeah boss got it that’s great feedback”, and they don’t realize they just said a bunch of garbage and people just agreed because he’s the boss.

I bet. I also wouldn’t be surprised if the CEO gives direction, hears “can do, boss!”, but it doesn’t actually get done because there isn’t a triggered deliverable to verify. You may have junior staff doing what they’re being told, but it isn’t what the CEO wants because it is going through several layers of telephone and, because everyone is remote, it is harder to identify where the problem is.

That worked fine in person and on zoom. The problem isn’t the medium. The problem is people.

Yeah, but the problem of management is people. And I’ve pointed out that management aren’t always the people who don’t communicate. And issues with communication are made worse when everything is pushed to text where nuance is lost and everything is archived which can be used against you.

There are probably some teams that can work well remotely, but a lot of teams can’t. I generally find the best people who work remotely are highly competent at their job. Most people aren’t highly competent at their jobs.

I’ve been in discussions regarding returning to the office for my group, whether other groups should return to the office, and whether to keep the days in the office or add more.

For returning to the office, a lot of it came down to collaboration. My team does not use online communication tools to the quantity that it can substitute for in person communication. I advocated for a return to office for most staff, in part to benefit junior staff who weren’t communicating and needed mentorship. That meant the entire team had to show up on the same days, but I let them pick the days and changed those days on their request. The intent of the in person days is for them to talk to each other and coordinate.

One group resisted coming into the office far longer than mine. They were pushed into coming into the office, along with a change in reporting, because that group was blowing budgets and missing deadlines. I said you can bring them into the office, but you have to change their group culture to be more collaborative and talk to each other. It has been an issue working with members of that group because they’ve gotten used to a lack of coordination and communication, which created poor work quality.

When asked to go full RTO or increase days, I’ve pushed back. My group is mostly meeting deadlines and I see diminishing returns for more days into the office. I’m also aware it is a perk for staff, and not one I want to pull away. However, the gap in online versus physical interaction is still there.

If you’re going to fight back against coming into the office more, then you’re going to need to argue on the basis of coordination and collective productivity. I’ve seen a lot of people claim individual productivity, but that included a lot of rework that could have been avoided with some five minute conversations. Not emails, conversations.

On the flip side, if coordination isn’t a big deal, don’t expect raises any time soon. At that point, you’re a more easily replacable cog whose work can get pushed to places with lower costs of living.

Wolf 359 also prepared the Federation in dealing with a potentially superior technological foe. A lot of the fleet improvements would come online by the time the Federation came in contact with the Dominion. A pre Wolf 359 Federation would have gotten easily conquered by the Dominion.

To add to it, Voyager bright back a lot of technology after its travel, a lot of which got adopted by the Federation once Voyager returned. So you had two major technological jumps to the Federation with Q involvement.

I feel like you’re looking at it from a personal point of view. What if, instead, the love slave focused on the act of love making being their calling to life.

They are obsessed in getting to know you, have a great attention to detail, and will give up a lot for their career, which is making love to you. The Vulcan Love Slave is performing sexy science on you.

bitch-breaking

You mean Taming of the Shrew? I’ve never heard Shakespeare in its original Vulcan.