How is this the way I first heard about the results‽

Firefox is now exclusive to ternary computers.

Famously they’ve been very successful where come from - Sheffield - but have absolutely nothing to put to their name following a long-reigning green party mayor of the city … other than some postulating and participstion in reality shows.

(Actually i would credit the green party’s success here with the delay to Sheffield getting an improved metro system, which is now only going ahead under a labour-led Combined authority for the entire county.)

He held a, what Wikipedia calls, ceremonial post for one year? The Greens also only had 8 councillors and Labour a majority, so this criticism feels very misplaced.

True, direct financial support is basically always better than these convoluted financing schemes. Too bad the media will eat you alive if you try to do it.

Maybe if the title was clearer that this was a nomination thread there'd be more engagement, because it does currently look like just an announcement post. !anime@ani.social and !canada@lemmy.ca did that and more people are joining in there.

Sure, the Green party has a historic current of conservationists small-c conservatives who are only Greens because they want to keep landscapes pretty. Doesn't help that the only council the Greens have a majority in (Mid Suffolk) is held by that faction, but that will almost certainly change in May. Every party has cranks, but they do stand out a lot more and have a lot more influence in the Greens due to how small the party has historically been. Just look at the 'natural births' thing the Greens only dropped in the run up to the 2024 General Election.

Hopefully the Greens with all the momentum behind them now can leave most of that stuff behind, Polanski himself has come out in support of pylons and the people in my local Green party are from this new wave and are pretty sensible, so I have hope.

arguing that the government should subsidise scarce fossil fuel resources

No, they argue that the government should provide support to cap people's energy bills. This unfortunately means paying for fossil fuels, but that's just the nature of our current energy grid. Reeves has announced intentions to provide support for energy bills as well, they're just less broad than the Greens proposal and will mean people over whatever threshold the Treasury decides don't get the support they likely need. Do you think it'd be fair to brand the Labour government as subsidising fossil fuels when these measures are actually announced?

A caveat: The Greens proposal only really makes sense when done along with the Greens proposed broad tax rises.

but not do anything to increase our own production

Unless you're arguing for fracking, North Sea drilling won't bring in enough gas to meet our needs or even affect the price very much. We'll still need to buy most of it from Norway and arguing over domestic production is frankly a distraction.

https://removepaywalls.com/https://www.ft.com/content/cf1f0a55-7831-4b37-baa8-82a97c1295e4

Article appears to have been deleted.

green development gets blocked

The Greens control 12 councils and the only example the article brings up of the Greens blocking development is the pylon thing is Suffolk. While wrong, I don't think it's enough to say it's a systemic issue with the party.

GNOME isn't actually based on GTK, the shell has its own widget framework called the Shell Toolkit: https://gnome.pages.gitlab.gnome.org/gnome-shell/st/index.html

I don't think I've ever read an opinion I agree with expressed this disagreeably before. The title is also weird given Valve doesn't officially support the Steam flatpak and AFAIK hasn't given any money to the flatpak devs.

There's not enough gas to meet our demands and what gas is left is more expensive to extract. The money would be better spent on transitioning away from fossil fuels faster.