I'm sorry sir, we stopped serving breakfast at 11 30

In Australia government funding is distributed to political parties based on the number of first preference votes they get as well so even if your first choice doesn't get in, you still helped them by putting them first.

Not only that but I thought comedy was explicitly ok as well! It's so confusing, you have to ban so many accounts before you get free speech apparently.

That's not that good, I can do that on a good day if I'm really hungry.

Oh fuck, do you think the rider is considered part of the motorbike? How about the square where just a bit of the wheel goes into. Ok I think tha- no SARAH NO PLEA-

You're a bit of a cunt aren't you

What qualifies someone to be a judge is simply redefined to be what is popular. A judge should therefore no longer follow the law, but make the ruling most in line with what is popular. Under a voting system that is the sole qualifier.

Yes I agree, and just because there is a methodology doesn't make the result not arbitrary. Can you explain what number four means? How do I assess it, what's a 0, what's a 5 and what's a 10? How does number 2 relate to bias, isn't that a factuality rating thing , why is it in the bias rubric? It's a joke, each rating is totally arbitrary as there is no definition of what each one means beyond some vague description of the category. It's essentially pick a number, feels based.

I have worked with qualitive rubrics before and this one is barely worthy of the name honestly. Two people could take this rubric away and come to completely opposite conclusions based on their own biases.

If you're still worried, just avoid practicing solo.

Biden: killing Americans in the west bank is totally unacceptable....but we will accept it.

The placement of the yellow dot is determined through a composite score derived from four distinct categories: Biased Wording/Headlines, Factual/ Sourcing, Story Choices, and Political Affiliation. Each category is rated on a scale of 0 to 10, with 0. indicating a lack of bias and 10 representing extreme bias. The average of these four scores is then plotted on the scale to indicate the source's overall Left-Right bias.

I wouldn't call picking four numbers 'a whole lot more ' personally. If you actually read some of the bias analysis it becomes more obvious how arbitrary it is.

Thanks for clarifying, that makes sense now. I think from that perspective, MBFC in my mind is still useless because the why behind their rating is totally opaque, at least to me. I have read several of their analysis and their methodology and I just still have no idea why they give a certain rating. It feels more like a post hoc rationalisation than a process or set of criteria that was followed. Maybe it's just me though, and it's clearer for other folks.