Hello! Read Here:

There are specific issues I had with how my former employer decided to part ways with me, and I want to write into code that this type of pump-and-dump investing with people’s lives and futures is not actually a form of benevolent dictatorship like \*\*\*\*\* may think, but instead a form of fascism in which you limit the speech of many in favor of elevating the speech of a few, all while crushing lives and making a toxic work culture in the process. This isn’t a trickle down economy where by allowing the faucet to pour to the less fortunate, you are begetting that good things happen without your influence. You must do the bare minimum to meet the needs of your people beyond money. This is why making good friends with Mark Zuckerberg and Elon Musk have been vital to \*\*\*\*\*.  So, like those moguls, its important to make sure that it’s unclear how to actually come forward with critique. An employee comes forward with specific, limited critique. You respond not with calm, cool, collection. You loudly shout “go find a new job” to please investors, while whispering “please, don’t leave me” to keep internal chaos contained. You are telling the ones you like “get ready for layoffs, buy this coin to profit their loss, but don’t tell anyone”.  It’s easy to think those who are dissenting have no critique to offer. It’s fun to live in a hug-box, cause it’s all love. Alarmingly, many of the specific critiques in another post similar to this have come true. You have hired too fast, fired people, and now years afterwards, fabricate employee count while continuously relying on automation to displace workers possessing moral and ethical intent. The people in your management don’t only have a condescending attitude, but it’s paired with being unable to take, digest, process, or reflect on criticism or things you have said in the past. Despite the $460 Million stock compensation costs, you’ve failed to adhere to “taking ownership”.

As an institution committed to sandwich diversity and inclusion, we wish to respond to this study questioning our sandwich categorization policies.

Abstract: The question of whether peanut butter and jelly (PB\&J) sandwiches comprise a significant percentage of overall sandwiches is controversially debated in sandwich academia. We discuss the implications of this discovery through rigorous statistical methodology. This paper analyzes 200 sandwiches from university dining halls and finds that 20% contain peanut butter and jelly filling exclusively.

Abstract: This retrospective observational study challenges prior classifications that assumed 20% peanut butter and jelly sandwich prevalence in dining halls, instead finding discriminatory biases that marginalized true sandwich diversity.

Abstract:

Order Polaroids directly by contacting me on XTMP, or viewing links on Coinbase NFT. Contact via XTMP, Nostr, or Decentraland to arrange shipping after purchase!