merridew

Someone who owns a piece of land should be freely allowed to construct any residential structure they want, so long as the building is safe. 

A bold opinion that seems to have been quite conclusively rejected in cities across the world.

Apartments are residentially zoned. Hotels are commercially zoned (for good reason).

Turning residential homes into unregulated mini-hotels at scale depletes housing stock, and is a nuisance to residents.

This law effectively blocks residential homes from continuing to be used as hotel businesses operating out of residentially zoned areas, allowing residential units to once again be used as housing, and removing the nuisance to residents.

Please explain why you see this as a NIMBY net negative for housing.

... unwelcoming of misogyny? Surprising.

When it's used like that it is.

You wouldn't describe a man as "a male", and you wouldn't refer to your mother as "a female".

How is a law ending the stealth conversion of residentially zoned areas into commercial a net negative for housing?

Zoning laws exist for a reason.

PMQs is an opportunity for MPs to put questions to the Government, in public. If the government chooses to publicly dodge a legitimate question, that in itself is worth it.

Before Blair, PMQs were twice a week for 15 minutes. Once a week for 30 is a recent change. And before Wilson & Heath it was pretty civilised. That too is a recent change, and it's got markedly worse under the recent run of Tories.

Tear gas is not legal in the UK. Being found in possession of it can lead to a prison sentence of between 6 months and 10 years, and a fine.

Government makes last minute change to National Curriculum with addition of classes in ‘Holding up bits of Classroom’

https://newsthump.com/2023/09/05/government-makes-last-minute-change-to-national-curriculum-with-addition-of-classes-in-holding-up-bits-of-classroom

In court cases, ideally you save the crystallization of your argument for summing up, because if you reveal it too early on you give the opposing side the opportunity to rebut it.

I like to hope that's Starmer's strategy. If he says anything too exciting too far for an election, it gives the Tories an angle, and time to spin nonsense against him. But you can't punch fog.

Yes exactly. It isn't in the public domain, and so is still protected by copyright, and arguably fails the test for Fair Use. But OP's earlier comment suggested they were not aware that federal works sit in the public domain.

Wish they finished the game because it was pretty fun.

Were we playing the same game?? When I played it in 2013 it was a tedious, RSI-inducing cow-clicker with lootboxes and "premium" gems, and according to Steam I played for less than an hour before abandoning it.