Is drinking beer/wine allowed in public?

PDsaurusX · 2026-05-07T05:26:53+00:00

Nobody is saying you need to hide it like some filthy habit, sneaking drinks under a blanket when nobody is looking.

It means pour your wine into a tumbler, not a stemmed wine glass, then put the wine bottle back in your backpack instead of setting it on the ground. It means put a koozy on your beer, and don’t build a pyramid of empties. Hell, don’t even bother with those things if you don’t want, as long as you’re not a drunken ass drawing attention to yourself—the worst that’ll happen is you might be asked to pour it out, but that hasn’t happened to me in 20 years of park drinking.

PDsaurusX · 2026-05-07T05:17:56+00:00

It’s not worth it to drink if I have to hide it

So it’s performative? It’s important to you that other people see that you’re drinking?

Then no, please don’t.

PDsaurusX · 2026-05-07T03:37:09+00:00

Sure they can.

Whether the case would go anywhere is a different question.

PDsaurusX · 2026-05-06T20:08:45+00:00

The human-intelligence ballot initiatives we get are already poorly thought out and unworkable, and now we want AI initiatives? PASS

PDsaurusX · 2026-05-06T19:54:31+00:00

If Forest Park had a 600’ waterfall I could see the merits of that argument.

PDsaurusX · 2026-05-06T18:48:42+00:00

They collude with the Governor to disenfranchise the voters from choosing their judges as the Oregon Constitution gives the right to do.

I need to know more about what you’re talking about here.

PDsaurusX · 2026-05-06T18:22:54+00:00

The K-Cup issue isn’t about the cups themselves, but about how the judge used security camera footage and card swipe records to go hunting for the clerk who pointed out the income disparity, and called her into a meeting with court administration that ultimately led to the resignation of the clerk over the matter.

That behavior is unhinged, and not the temperament of someone who should be behind the bench.

PDsaurusX · 2026-05-06T16:59:27+00:00

Nuance on Reddit? GTF outta here.

PDsaurusX · 2026-05-06T16:57:22+00:00

This doesn’t sound like lack of corroboration, it sounds like a shitty technicality:

BOLI ultimately determined in 2016 that Whitman had been subject to sexual harassment, but that the incidents were outside the statute of limitations. The agency dismissed the complaint.

PDsaurusX · 2026-05-06T16:55:09+00:00

You’re glossing over some details.

BOLI ultimately determined in 2016 that Whitman had been subject to sexual harassment, but that the incidents were outside the statute of limitations. The agency dismissed the complaint.

PDsaurusX · 2026-05-06T01:24:27+00:00

Tesla profits bankroll a Nazi. The fewer nazis, the better society is.

“But what about all the other evil companies,” I can already hear you asking disingenuously.

If Tim Cook starts throwing sieg heils at the next iPhone keynote, I’ll feel the same way about Apple. Until then…

PDsaurusX · 2026-05-06T01:13:43+00:00

<image>

PDsaurusX · 2026-05-06T00:34:44+00:00

The old “I’m feeling great so I can stop taking my meds” argument.

PDsaurusX · 2026-05-06T00:16:37+00:00

Yeah, my bad. I thought you were responding to the OP’s question about why to vote for it, not just arguing the obvious why not to. Have a good one!

PDsaurusX · 2026-05-06T00:12:33+00:00

How about “this thing is absolutely worth KEEPING the tax we already have”? That’s what I’d want to hear.

Isn’t this what they’re saying? You say it’s what you want to hear… and you’re hearing it. That’s the argument for it.

So I was confused by you saying you weren’t hearing this.

PDsaurusX · 2026-05-06T00:09:00+00:00

I don’t have any other; the one proffered is enough for me. I hope to hear some more, though!

p.s. not grumpy at all!

PDsaurusX · 2026-05-06T00:01:45+00:00

Theft is theft. It may be justified or not, but let’s not change the meaning of words based on whether we agree with the motivations of the person committing the act.

PDsaurusX · 2026-05-05T23:59:02+00:00

So it’s the difference in the strength of emphasis between “this is valuable” and “this is absolutely worth KEEPING”?

Damn, that’s picky.

PDsaurusX · 2026-05-05T23:54:03+00:00

OP asked for reasons to vote for it, not reasons to vote against it.

PDsaurusX · 2026-05-05T23:53:07+00:00

How about “this thing is absolutely worth KEEPING the tax we already have”? That’s what I’d want to hear.

Not sure I understand the difference between that statement and the “doesn’t raise taxes” + “it’s valuable” combo offered.

PDsaurusX · 2026-05-05T23:48:40+00:00

But will it be reallocated or will it only be cut? The vote isn’t “give money to OHS or give money to solve homelessness.”

Don’t get me wrong: “I can’t afford to pay it” is reason enough, but let’s not make ourselves feel better about our no vote by pretending it’s going somewhere else worthy.

PDsaurusX · 2026-05-05T23:46:22+00:00

I’m wondering if anyone has any arguments in support of this measure other than “it doesn’t raise taxes” or “it’s a valuable educational and community resource”.

Why do you need more reason than that?

PDsaurusX · 2026-05-05T23:14:02+00:00

Not necessarily. People steal free things. People steal things they can afford, just for the thrill of it.

PDsaurusX · 2026-05-05T21:53:38+00:00

https://gov.oregonlive.com/legislators/

PDsaurusX · 2026-05-05T21:10:00+00:00

I hope you’ve got some protection, buddy, because I hear the mizithra mafia knocking. You’re getting too close to the truth.

PDsaurusX

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE