For when you need a laugh!
The definition of a "meme" here is intentionally pretty loose. Images, screenshots, and the like are welcome!
But, keep it lighthearted and/or within our server's ideals.
Posts and comments that are hateful, trolling, inciting, and/or overly negative will be removed at the moderators' discretion.
Please follow all slrpnk.net rules and community guidelines
Have fun!
www.healthyyards.org is the link in the image. I'm not affiliated with it in any way, I just hate when people put links in images and you can't click on them. Almost as bad as texting someone a QR code. Motherfucker, what am I supposed to do with that, get another phone to scan it?
Heal thy yards
Screenshot, share to binary eye, done 🥳
Kind of amazing that people still need to be convinced to wear helmets while riding.
You'd have a hard time convincing me to ride without one.
Same, but it's actually a charity I started recently to fundraise to buy bikes (and helmets) for teenagers who sign up for a cycling club at local high schools! There's a bunch of kids who are interested in the club but can't afford their own bike. Cycling is pitifully rare here in the US so I'm hoping to improve that in a small way 🙏
In that case, masterful self plug.
Where are you located in the US? I think I have a few unused bikes.
Thanks! South Carolina - details on https://helmetheads.club/ if you're actually interested in supporting, anything is appreciated!
Thanks! Unfortunately I'm pretty far from SC, but I'll see if I can contribute anything via the website.
This is very context related. As an example, in the Netherlands almost no one wears a helmet while riding a bike and the cyclist union discourages the government from any legislation requiring people to do so.
Cycling is so safe, you really don't need one (unless you think you should also wear one walking down the street). The cyclist union's argument is that if you force people to wear a helmet, fewer people would cycle, more would drive a car and in the end more people would end up getting hit by a car.
That being said, I would 1000% wear a helmet in most other countries.
FWIW I know on iPhones if you tap and hold on a QR code in an image, it should give you the option to open the link.
I’d be surprised if Android doesn’t have a similar behaviour available?
But.. they're sharing an image? Where else would you like it to go, in the EXIF metadata?
Like in a radio advert, you just remember the URL and type it in!
rewild that shit!
I can revegetate her
Because I'm also on a lot of cocaine and I've cleaned the entirer inside of my house to surgical standards.
Because of bullshit HOA rules.
City ordinances…
Bungalows have never been sustainable, tax and infrastructure-wise. We need a similar one.
Mayberry and cars were neat for the 50s, but we've sacrificed green space and agri space for bungalow sprawl. We either have to reduce people or forget single-level fire-trap houses and driving 20 min to a parking lot for daily needs.
I don't know where you live but I have not seen a new bungalow built in 40 years.
I've seen plenty knocked down to build a McMansion on though.
It's not an issue of the style of house; it's an issue of the lot square footage allocated to a single house (i.e. dwelling units per acre).
Think of it like this: if you've got a single family house on a square 1-acre lot, that's a little over 200 feet on each side. Assuming it's not a corner lot and you've got a neighbor across the street, your tax dollars basically need to pay to maintain 100' of street, water and sewer pipes, etc. plus the cost per mile of city vehicles driving past it. (Plus some amount related to the depth of the yard and its effect on the length of other roads on other sides of the block, but let's ignore that for simplicity.)
In comparison, if it were 4 1/4-acre lots instead (with 50' of street frontage each), each family would only be responsible for 25' worth of infrastructure. Or if it were a 10-unit multifamily building on that lot, each family would only need to pay for 10'.
Unfortunately, because tax is based on property value and not street frontage and value doesn't scale linearly like that, what ends up happening is that the city loses money on the large-lot single-family, and those people (who are already generally some of the richest since they can afford large lots) end up getting subsidized by the (poorest) people who take up the least amount of space.
It's both unjust and a perverse incentive to consume more space than you need.
You have described the municipal struggle of Edmonton property tax to a T. And people here hate that old bungalows on huge lots are being torn down and split into 2 homes or multiplex builds. Bunch of moronic nimbys
I've described the problem in essentially the entirety of North America, at least.
People on here always talk about how lawns need a bunch of fertilizer to work, but that never made sense to me because we've never done that around here. But then I learned that's because everyone just has clover growing along side their grass.
Anyway I think shaming people for their lawn is a bad idea. I think killing your lawn will only catch on if it's presented as a way to make your lawn cooler. You're not a bad person for having a lawn, but you could change it into something so much more interesting by including native flora.
We only have yards because some asshat when creaytng the cookie cutter home system for suburbia thought it was a good thing to force non rich people to care for a thing only rich people had because they paid others to take care of it to show they had wealth to hire a ton of people, so that "they would be too busy to think about commuting crimes"...
Mine's all brown and overgrown, am I doing it right?
18th century? Who was doing this in the 1700s?
Today's lawn is pretty much a tiny copy of the Estate Grounds that the Aristocrats used to have.
And they were spraying all kinds of nasty shit on grass that isn't native to make it look pretty?
Nah they just used the poors to take care of it.
Which I guess is still sorta true today.
The "that isn't native" part is mostly a US problem. The reason they aren't native here is that Europeans brought over the same turfgrass species they'd been using at home.
"Kentucky bluegrass," for instance, is actually native to Europe, despite the name. Ditto for fescue, bermudagrass, etc.
And they were spraying all kinds of nasty shit...
Yes they used literal shit, both animal and human.
...on grass that isn’t native...
I can't answer that but it really wouldn't surprise me. The ruling class commonly imported plants and animals from all over the world.
...to make it look pretty?
No pictures exist, obviously, but I'm quite sure that groundskeepers were doing whatever was necessary to make their Lords estate look as good as possible.
We have one that barely has any grass left. We are surrounded by meadows and there is so much just random plants growing. Don't tell me our lawn is bad since the obly difference between it and the surrounding meadows is that we mow ours.
Pretty sure the mowing is the exact problem. Can't remember if it's solved by using an old school push-powered mower or something
Edit - after looking into it, seems like push mowers don't help because Americans eating meat will cause as much pollution pushing a mower as using gas? Not sure