I like TOS Operation: Annihilate! because it presents a situation where a starship captain would be justified in issuing General Order 24. I'm disappointed that they didn't actually mention GO24 in the episode, but my headcanon is that the crew were all reluctant to mention it by name.

I think GO24 is deeply misunderstood. It's only ever been presented as a thing that a bad, crazy captain would order; as grounds for mutiny. So why would Starfleet even have such an order on the books? I think it's actually designed for situations like the one in this episode: to prevent the spread of dangerous life forms.

This interpretation also enhances my enjoyment of another TOS episode, A Taste of Armageddon. In this episode, Kirk actually invokes General Order 24. Scotty understands that Kirk needs leverage to bluff with, and plays along. Bluffing the bad guys by citing a public health ordinance is classic Kirk. See also Corbomite and Fizzbin

I usually go to wunderground.com

I say lean into it. Praise Jesus so loudly and obnoxiously that the preacher themselves asks you to tone it down a notch.

Guys. Guys. I've got it. This is poetry.

Show us your death certificate

Sure. Whether or not its constitutional, etc. is really beside the point. Any official challenge to the governor's declaration would necessarily involve demonstrating that McConnell is alive and well (or not). In either outcome, the question of the governor's authority would be moot.

Calling me names rather than addressing any of the points I raised only serves to demonstrate the points I've raised.

We're doing exactly what I've been criticizing the rest of the fediverse for doing. There are no stakes here. Neither of us have been harmed or otherwise inconvenienced by the other. Yet we're ramping up the outrage. We've abandoned all discussion of the original topic and are nitpicking over the tone of adjacent comments. Stoking outrage has become the point.

Be honest, does that sound about right? Does that sound familiar? Isn't that what always happens in these sorts of discussions? It's not healthy, and I perceive the same rotten motivation in much of the community responses to this tesseract case.

I can't and don't approve of, excuse, or defend the actions of the tesseract dev. I do empathize with him though. I can understand the impulse to double down and lash out. That's just human psychology. So I don't fault the dev for feeling that way, even if I do fault their actions. But I deem the fault to be immaturity, not malice.

I do think that, had the community not gone straight to the outrage memes, that perhaps things would have shaken out differently. If tesseract is/was as popular with the community as the level of outrage suggests, then it would seem that losing the developer of that software is a net loss for the community.

Had the dev been more mature... well they probably wouldn't have gotten themselves into this mess in the first place. But had they been more mature in the aftermath, and had the community been more forgiving, then the situation might have resolved amicably to everyone's benefit. Instead, we traded a valued community member for outrage memes.

This I sincerely believe. This I have given due consideration. This I am willing to discuss and be persuaded against, if a person can be found who honestly disagrees with most of what I've just said and can explain why.

Can you point to a comment that you would describe as insincere, and can you explain why you think so?

Can you point to a comment where I am not?

Don't stress over labels. They don't fit anyone perfectly.

My dismissiveness is a sincere, considered position.

Your dismissiveness is a spiteful, knee-jerk reaction.

We are not the same.

Don’t you find that to be dismissive?

That's my point. People are crying crocodile tears over spilled milk.