A “high five” to the state fair

Post #439,985 by rcareaga 9/25/21 10:42:23 AM 9/25/21 10:42:23 AM Reply	A “high five” to the state fair Something for mmoffitt to mull over: SACRAMENTO, Calif. - For the first time ever, the California State Fair will be holding a cannabis competition. The competition is open to all licensed growers in California, with three classified sections to enter: Indoor, Mixed Light and Outdoor. According to fair organizers, the competition will only award medals for the cannabis flower. They say seven individual cannabis plant compounds will be tested and identified for awards. Based on their levels of cannabinoid and terpenes concentration, 77 bronze, silver, gold and double gold medals will be awarded, including the Golden Bear trophy for “Best of California.” I’m rather surprised how easily legalization has gone down over here, particularly since I’m old enough to remember when mere possession of the stuff could bring down savage penalties. I wonder which lucky grower will be next year be able to market ~~his~~—pardon me, “their”—product with the coveted “Golden Bear” designation? cordially, I am so not on board with “nonbinary” pronouns: I am not going to address an individual (singular) with a plural pronoun. I am prepared, though, to address or refer to such people as “it,” acknowledging gender neutrality while at the same time observing the rules of grammar.
Post #439,986 by drook 9/25/21 11:29:39 AM 9/25/21 11:29:39 AM Reply	Re: Pronouns It's annoying that English grammar uses the plural forms to refer to unknown gender, but it's hardly new. "What will the winner do with their trophy?" Why do you find using a non-human pronoun more appropriate than a plural? -- Drew
Post #439,987 by Andrew Grygus 9/25/21 12:22:37 PM 9/25/21 12:22:37 PM Reply	Perhaps he is a . . . . GRAMMAR NAZI
Post #439,990 by rcareaga 9/25/21 2:01:03 PM 9/25/21 2:01:03 PM Reply	“It rubs the lotion on its skin or else it gets the hose again” Grammar Nazi? Jawohl! Look, as Scott observes, language changes over time, and these developments are, in the long view, morally neutral. I’d personally prefer a neologism or three—for example, “shem” as one unisex pronoun—that at least keeps subject and object in agreement with respect to number, but that’s just me. I’m not going to jump on someone if they go all nonbinary on me in conversation, but I reserve the right to roll my eyes (which is apparently known as “microaggression” in some campus circles these days. Rand shrugs. Oops!). Speaking merely of English, for I remain, unfortunately, a monoglot, the language exists in a state of tension between those who resist, and others who would aggressively further change. If the one camp has its way, English stagnates; if the latter party has its way absent some kind of cultural braking mechanism, English devolves into argot and, increasingly, into mutually incomprehensible dialects. So I range myself with the first camp, and while I’m aware that we can’t stop or even impede these things, we’re performing a useful function by slowing them down. Hell, I’m still waging rearguard actions on the lie/lay and “decimate” battlefields, even though these battles are lost. Anyway, the issue I really wanted to raise was weed at the state-freakin’ fair. churlishly,
Post #439,991 by Another Scott 9/25/21 2:49:36 PM 9/25/21 2:49:36 PM Reply	Ya gotta mention Hillary or Bernie for MM to notice it??
Post #439,993 by static 9/26/21 5:59:47 AM 9/26/21 5:59:47 AM Reply	Yes, We really do need a gender-neutral third-person singular personal pronoun. We don't really have one, despite multiple efforts to create one. So we have to use "they" which is technically for anything but a definite singular because English treats "zero" and "uncertain" the same as "plural". It does look like "they" is going to have to do the work. It has traction, after all. Wade.
Post #439,997 by boxley 9/26/21 12:50:34 PM 9/26/21 12:50:34 PM Reply	whats wrong with dem and dose? "Science is the belief in the ignorance of the experts" – Richard Feynman
Post #439,988 by Another Scott 9/25/21 1:21:13 PM 9/25/21 1:21:13 PM Reply	Language changes; it was ever thus. Yeah, language changing can be annoying, but what are you gonna do? https://public.oed.com/blog/a-brief-history-of-singular-they/ Singular they has become the pronoun of choice to replace he and she in cases where the gender of the antecedent – the word the pronoun refers to – is unknown, irrelevant, or nonbinary, or where gender needs to be concealed. It’s the word we use for sentences like Everyone loves his mother. But that’s nothing new. The Oxford English Dictionary traces singular they back to 1375, where it appears in the medieval romance William and the Werewolf. Except for the old-style language of that poem, its use of singular they to refer to an unnamed person seems very modern. Here’s the Middle English version: ‘Hastely hiȝed eche . . . þei neyȝþed so neiȝh . . . þere william & his worþi lef were liand i-fere.’ In modern English, that’s: ‘Each man hurried . . . till they drew near . . . where William and his darling were lying together.’ Since forms may exist in speech long before they’re written down, it’s likely that singular they was common even before the late fourteenth century. That makes an old form even older. [...] "Ain't" is still uncommon in written American English. We can still be happy about that, eh? ;-) Cheers, Scott.
Post #439,992 by static 9/26/21 5:54:48 AM 9/26/21 5:54:48 AM Reply	I wonder if the payment systems have been persuaded. I heard a few years ago that in Colorado all purchases of weed had to be in cash because the card processors wouldn't give the retailers merchant facilities. Which then creates a whole new problem of dealing with large amounts of cash. Wade.
Post #439,995 by drook 9/26/21 9:02:07 AM 9/26/21 9:02:07 AM Reply	They know under Biden they won't face federal prosecution So they're probably looking at how much they can make over 4 years, against the the risk of what might happen under the potential next administration. IOW I don't actually know, but I do know it's gonna happen. -- Drew
Post #439,996 by Another Scott 9/26/21 10:26:37 AM 9/26/21 10:26:37 AM Reply	NDAA RollCall (from 9/23) says there was a banking provision in the NDAA (National Defense Authorization Act). The House passed the act a few days later (yesterday?). I haven't checked to see if that provision was still in it. The question, as always, is the Senate. An amendment to the House defense authorization bill that would connect cannabis companies to the banking system has bipartisan support in both chambers, but its chances in the Senate are uncertain. Late on Tuesday evening, the House agreed by voice vote to adopt an amendment offered by Rep. Ed Perlmutter, D-Colo., that would bar federal banking regulators from taking action against banks that serve cannabis businesses operating legally under state law. The amendment attaches provisions of Perlmutter’s cannabis banking bill to the fiscal 2022 defense authorization bill. “I’ve been talking for years about the serious public safety threat that exists in our communities. The SAFE Banking Act will strengthen the security of our financial system and keep bad actors like cartels out of the cannabis industry,” Perlmutter said in a statement, using the acronym for the bill’s title. He added that he will work with colleagues in the Senate to ensure that provisions make it into the final bill. Supporters of such legislation say shutting legal cannabis businesses out of the banking system forces them into cash transactions that involve greater risks, including for theft and money laundering. [...] Cheers, Scott.
Post #440,002 by static 9/27/21 1:30:58 AM 9/27/21 1:30:58 AM Reply	Nice.
Post #440,005 by malraux 9/27/21 10:13:11 AM 9/27/21 10:13:12 AM Reply	Every other highway billboard over here is selling cannabis Most of them with delivery services too. The other interesting trend is the humor content of the ads, eg. "Get your kicks on Route 420". Regards, -scott Welcome to Rivendell, Mr. Anderson.
Post #440,009 by rcareaga 9/27/21 1:01:05 PM 9/27/21 1:01:05 PM Reply	Re: Every other highway billboard over here is selling cannabis There was a billboard in Berkeley recently that read something like: “68 strains of cannabis field-tested here. Also, 220 burritos.” cordially,
Post #440,013 by malraux 9/27/21 7:21:34 PM 9/27/21 7:21:34 PM Reply	Seems to be national then. Regards, -scott Welcome to Rivendell, Mr. Anderson.
Post #440,023 by crazy 9/28/21 6:30:54 AM 9/28/21 6:30:54 AM Reply	Non-prosecution isn't enough. How many bankers do you know? They are a conservative bunch. And I don't mean as regards to not liking pot smokers, I just mean as what they need to do to manage risk. The national and internationals won't touch it. So then it becomes a matter of the locals. Or becomes a matter of the Wall Streeters creating local banks just to serve the pot industry. And then it becomes a matter of the nationals refusing to do business with them. Because a few anti cannabis senators threatened them. I think it will come down to a few select check cashing companies handling the financial transactions with a very large percentage cut. They are used to the risk and account for it and the large banks deal with them all the time.
Post #440,030 by CRConrad 9/28/21 6:50:12 PM 9/28/21 6:50:12 PM Reply	Maybe they should look into whether Estonian banks' debiting systems work over there.

Welcome to IWETHEY!