first time reading from that source and i must say i am a bit confused of the rethoric used by the author. spicifically not calling the nazi salute by its name and adapting to call tesla vandalism "terrorism". Also i think some fact checks for the wrong musk tweets would be nice, but that might be out of scope for a smaller publisher. Do you have thoughts of that source? i am not convinced to read more articles from there tbh
to be fair, this is the image the center parties have and upkeep. I, as a farly left person, already question if this seperation to right extremism will still be upheld in 4 years. Our Center-right partie CDU falls more and more for populist rethoric, which reminds me of the republicans or the toris.
So what you have been told is not wrong per se. But there is a significant amount of people in the country and politicans in the parlaiment, that argue the seperation between right exremism and center parties did already collaps behind the scenes.
OP is a troll. see the account is very new since all former accounts of that user recently got instance banned at least on blahaj.zone. Not sure if they are just very confused, maniac, or actual alt-right, all i know is no point in engageing with them. this is my advice to block them.
it kinda is. but its a reference to the modern reboot of she-ra where: (huge spoilers for the show, dont click if you plan on watching)
Tap for spoiler
adora/she-ra literally dates catra who is an antromorph cat
and so it begins...
thanks a lot. I really apprechiate that summery. maybe ill get to learn some best practices. since i am already makeing tiny games on my own, perhabs i outgrew some of that already.
does anyone know if this is good material? I would apprechite the format, but i know sometimes humble bundle offers some less than ideal learning materials.
ja hallo polizei? bitte kommen sie schnell, hier im park sind ein paar linksradikale am karten spielen! sie sind in 2 minuten da? super danke!
ja. du hast den antrag verstanden.
did you read that? Because to me it really reads like it talks about davincis comissions. Which are not a publishing/patreoning deal. It even talks about his focus on his personal work outside those comissions. just because the word patreon is used in the article makes it support your point...
But for you i did another quick read of his wikipedia article (do you need a link to that or can you find that on your own?) and read that in the last 7years of his life he had the vatican as a patreon for his art. Before he had two other patreon for shorter times mostly for his engeneering, cartographing and organizing talent.
and to finish this petty argument of: even when all you claim is true. artist are still able to produce art without a publisher. which was my first point. heck even you can shoot him a donation so they are not as dependent on a publisher deal, if you feel that person deserves more funds. My original point was that a publisher breaking a deal, does not prevent the art from beeing made in principle. and this point stands imo, as i didnt see any conter argument against it yet.
thanks for samveing me the effort :)