I already think that stock F450s and Ram 3500s shouldn’t be road legal, let alone the ones around here with “normal” lift kits.
I’ve never seen a truck with a proud stance like that, that’s disgusting.

I’m close to 2m tall, and the hoods of the trucks I walk by on my way to work are up to my shoulders, I think things like size aren’t really helping. Naturally, maybe 1 of every 10 trucks this size appear to actually be for work.

I think a lot of the modern safety improvements are great, but just making every vehicle gigantic is doing a lot of harm.

They are safer for the occupants. With their increased size, increased sound dampening, and reduced visibility, they are more dangerous to those outside of the vehicle.

Worried about libel, it is very likely that someone like Musk would sue.

If they said “It was the fault of Tesla that these people are dead” without proof and without it being a quote from someone else, they can be sued pretty easily.

Authorities are still investigating the crash and fire. But the details that we have so far implicate to some degree the electronic doors used by Tesla and other automakers, which require power to open.

You can likely just block the magazine for yourself, or you can contact https://kbin.melroy.org/u/melroy about it.

The butterfly, or an overweight jungle cat?

People can have more than one account, so there might be overlap between these two instances.

Also, having an account on one of these two doesn’t make you a vegan, just like having an account on any other instance doesn’t mean you’re not a vegan.

If you bought a house at the very top of your budget and the payments went up, it doesn’t really matter how much money you make.

You’re right in saying that these devices are basically ancient, and also right about why you should never use all-in-ones for anything that you would want to last more than a couple of years.

http://support.dlink.com.au/download/download.aspx?product=DNS-320 The age of the devices:

Firmware: 1.00
Hardware: A1
Date: 2010/9/7
First DNS-320 firmware release

You should be showing your source.

Sometimes I purposefully seek out LGBTQ games.

It’s nice to see a story that I can actually relate to once in a while, instead of another “straight white guy who is enough of an every man to be relatable to the masses, but still strong enough to save the world and get the girl.” Seeing the same “Hero’s Story” over and over and over in media gets boring, and if you want to see more of something, that thing needs to be profitable so more people make it.

C*ash Slap is on the poster, which is probably supposed to be a reference to Crash Bash.

If you don’t remember Crash Bash, that makes sense, it wasn’t great.

If it’s a word that already ends in an s in its singular form, like Travis, I would pronounce it like “Travis is”.
It’s a word that only got an s at the end because it’s pluralized, like “Smiths”, I would generally just pronounce it like “Smiths”.

Communities on Lemmy follow the rules of the community, and the instance that hosts that community. So, this would need to follow the rules of [email protected] and dbzer0, the instance that left memes is hosted on.

Both of these can be found in the sidebar on the main page of the community, aka [email protected].

There are also some instances that will ban you for your comments/posts in other communities, but that’s not common for most places that you would want to post anyway, or unless you post something very awful.

Sorry, I thought the person who was assumed dead was the father, not the character receiving the shares. If the person receiving the shares was the one assumed dead, it makes way more sense as to why it was less believable. It’s still possible but, unless things were set-up in a way that already assumed that everyone would be dead, except for that one guy, who is still totally alive but is going to be missing for a while, then it’s highly unlikely.
Then again, this is a universe where magic exists, so a wizard did it.

Depending on how long MC was presumed dead, and if there were any issues with either his estate, or of his father, the shares could be held by the personal representative of either estate for quite some time. If there was any less than 7 years between when his father died, and when he came back, then it’s completely reasonable that he would be entitled to those shares. The longer it is after that seven years, the less likely it is that he would have the shares. The shares could’ve also been held by another entity, like a family trust or holding company. And as long as a trustee, or a controlling interest in the holding company, was still alive and willing, they could give him back the shares.

But: He wouldn’t have an officer or director position in the main company if he was presumed dead. Directors need to be re-appointed every year, and depending on the set-up of the corporation, you sometimes need to be a director in order to be an officer, or the officers need to be reappointed every year. A position like “chairman” was likely appointed to someone else rather quickly after the presumed death. Then again, it might also have the wildest bylaws ever written, likely by a wizard.

Banana also isn’t a valid answer, but if you have the chance, you always go Banana.

It probably was just bad writing for the sake of a forced story line, but the board can (generally) vote out the chair, and the shares going from a deceased person to another entity is called transmission. Transmissions do generally require the directors to sign a resolution or two though, and if they voted him out as the chair, then they likely would do what they could to prevent the transfer of the shares.

And even if they booted him as chair of the board, it likely wouldn’t have much of a financial effect.

Honestly, it’s possible, but I’ve never seen the show, and I don’t know if they break down the corporate structure.

Owning a majority of the stocks in a corporation, doesn’t automatically mean you have any real power.
Having the majority of shares, even if they are voting shares, doesn’t mean you are part of the board of directors. And if the shares that MC held were retractable and redeemable, even if they are voting shares, then the board can force the shareholder to redeem (aka sell) them back to the corporation, often at a pre-set price.

“But, the voting shareholders decide who’s on the board, and he had the majority of the shares!” I heard you say. Again, does he actually have voting shares, or just the majority of the shares issued?
Do we know what constitutes a quorum of the shareholders according to the bylaws of the corporation? AKA if he has 51% of the shares, but they need persons holding at least 60% of the voting shares in order to hold a vote, can he get enough shareholders together to hold a vote to change the directors before the directors vote that need needs to redeem his shares?

Was he completely forced to sell/redeem his shares, or was his officer role just removed? (aka, he’s no longer the President, the Secretary-Treasurer, or whatever). Shareholders are a step removed from choosing who the Officers are. Generally, Shareholders choose the Directors, the Directors choose the officers, and the Officers are the ones who issue the shares (even though they are often compelled to sign the share certificates by the Directors, the bylaws, or other resolutions).
So if he owns the majority of the shares, and was an officer, then he could very easily be removed as an officer, assuming that there wasn’t a stipulation in his original appointment. Again, I would need to see the articles, the bylaws, any Unanimous Shareholder Agreements, resolutions, and other agreements.

Also, everything I wrote might not be valid in your jurisdiction. Don’t take the late-night ramblings of anyone online as legal advice.

That’s 8 keystrokes, nice!

People answering a question like “Would you like to do X, or Y?” with “yes.”

I didn’t fucking ask “Would you like to do X or Y?”, so put down whatever solvent you are chugging, then give me your choice.