Golgafrinchan [none/use name]
Elephant chess is the Chinese word for it, but few people know that term in English. Chess players would, but not the public. Chinese people themselves call it international chess to distinguish it from Chinese chess and Go.
FWIW Chinese chess is a superior game to regular chess. It scratches the same itch, but is a much faster game. You can play in 20-30 minutes instead of the hours that chess takes. The king can’t leave the middle of the board and castling, the main reason chess takes forever, is not allowed.
But…but… CNN told us it’s illegal for us to look at the Wikileaks ourselves. Only journalists can do that. Then, they’ll report to us what we need to know.
Yeah, this was totally not written by the author.
Most advice columnists write their own letters. Shocker, I know.
Already do, in Canada!
https://apnews.com/article/covid-science-health-toronto-7c631558a457188d2bd2b5cfd360a867
Alan Nichols had a history of depression and other medical issues, but none were life-threatening. When the 61-year-old Canadian was hospitalized in June 2019 over fears he might be suicidal, he asked his brother to “bust him out” as soon as possible.
Within a month, Nichols submitted a request to be euthanized and he was killed, despite concerns raised by his family and a nurse practitioner.
His application for euthanasia listed only one health condition as the reason for his request to die: hearing loss.
Nichols’ family reported the case to police and health authorities, arguing that he lacked the capacity to understand the process and was not suffering unbearably — among the requirements for euthanasia. They say he was not taking needed medication, wasn’t using the cochlear implant that helped him hear, and that hospital staffers improperly helped him request euthanasia.
Apparently the new T4 Aktion programme has resulted in a wonderful increase in the volume of fresh organs for the transplant business.
“Cite your sources” requires a level of trust that most people haven’t earned with me. If I do go to the work of citing widely known facts, I had better not get a knee-jerk rejection when I come back with points.
I’ve cited sources when I got similar requests. I’ve sometimes crafted detailed responses detailing them point by point. And I’ve been burned again and again. Unless I already trust you, or you have made a good argument refuting the claims as a better and more complete version, I don’t feel obligated to do as you say.
People who demand evidence for things they already know to be true are usually arguing in bad faith. Would you demand somebody send you a peer reviewed study proving that not everyone likes chocolate chip cookies?