Actually, most campaigns send out a collection team in the day after election day to take down the big sign as well as signs put up on public property. They also typically pick them up from lawns as requested.

Some will wait a day or two to celebrate the win but sign pickup

Most candidates keep the signs from one campaign to another. It takes a while for new signs to be printed at the beginning of a campaign. So, using old signs means getting signs up in the early days before your opponents and saving costs.

Can we talk about deaths per capita and military and civilians contributing to war effort per capita for a country that was NOT itself attacked?

Yes, there were U-Boats attacking merchant marines on the east coast and Japanese balloons flying in on the west. But the societal contribution to a war not in our soil was and is astonishing.

Both Trump and Musk have degrees from the supposedly reputable Wharton School of Business at the University of Pennsylvania.

If these two are evidence of their quality of graduates, it really raises questions about whether it was another US institution where ‘legacy’ and money buy admissions and it’s impossible not to graduate.

Most structural starship components would require large industrial replicators.

These seem to always be centrally located and powered.

What someone can do with a small home model would be quite different.

Clearly, the ability to be outside in appropriate clothing for activities isn’t being mandated. This is where a temperate climate enables ridiculous practices to persist.

All I can think about when I see this image is how in Ontario, the responsible provincial ministry requires all schools and ‘day nurseries’ (read day and after school care) to put the kids out in the yards twice a day unless the weather conditions are severe (Less than -20 or more than +30 Celsius.).

Parents are responsible to send their kids with suitable clothing for the cold. One rarely sees little girls in skirts in schools unless they are wearing tunic dresses over leggings.

In an earlier era, pre 1970s, when skirts were mandatory for girls, that meant switching to pants or snow pants from the skirts 3 times a day to go outside in winter (two breaks and leaving end of day).

I thought she’d directed episodes of Voyager too.

Memory Alpha credits her with Voyager episodes ‘Riddles’ and ‘Workforce Part II’.

There are exceptions. Someone who was up until recently a teacher may fall into the category of being in a position of trust or authority towards the minor. Without knowing the legal precedents, it’s hard to know how much of an edge case this is.

From the JusticeThe following factors may be taken into account when determining whether a relationship is exploitative of the young person:

From the* Justice Canada webpage on Age of Consent*

Sexual exploitation A 16 or 17 year old cannot consent to sexual activity if:

• their sexual partner is in position of trust or authority towards them, for example their teacher or coach
• the young person is dependent on their sexual partner, for example for care or support the relationship between the young person and their sexual partner is exploitative

The following factors may be taken into account when determining whether a relationship is exploitative of the young person:

• the young person's age
• the age difference between the young person and their partner
• how the relationship developed (for example, quickly, secretly, or over the internet)
• whether the partner may have controlled or influenced the young person

Martin Quinn (Montgomery Scott) was reportedly born in Paisley, Scotland.

Dropping in to note that I’m feeling very smuggly self-satisfied that I decided not to completely abandon my alias when we migrated from the other place.

I guess that I must now become an unrepentant SNW Scotty stan. I look forward to seeing the character grow.

I understand your reaction.

For me, this is in many ways a less dark and cynical take than DS9 In the Pale Moonlight and certainly the Section 31 references.

What was critical here was the difference between the journey of individual traumatized officers who had been forced repeatedly to take actions in wartime that compromised their values, and brought out capabilities they never sought to own, vs Starfleet leadership taking cynical action. It’s also a direct outcome of Starfleet’s cynical actions in having M’Benga develop the serum and then use it.

Starfleet’s postwar directive, and Pike’s insistence on pressing it with his senior officers, created the immediate crisis.

However, we need to take account of the fact that it was the ambassador’s own repeated insistence on confronting, engaging and attempting to recruit M’Benga to assist in his mission that led to the break.

M’Benga seemed to be processing his trauma and managing it as well as he could. He wasn’t at the point of exposing the ambassador’s deceit although he appeared to have been contemplating it.

It was the ambassador’s decision to seek M’Benga out again, in his own safe space, his private office, and own refusal to take M’Benga’s rejection that seemed to take the contemplation to action.

The cover up by Chapel and M’Benga is serious, and in the case of M’Benga this is the second case of his hiding something of significance from his captain. He’s an understandable but grey character, and we will have to see where the show takes him.

In Chapel’s case, we have been shown that her bright effervescence hides much darker experiences. It’s now easier to imagine how she will evolves to the very restrained version of herself in TOS.

I feel this is a very authentic portrayal of the chronic legacy unaddressed of trauma in individuals, how a military service and society will need to move on after a society-wide war when its individuals are not yet ready to do so, and how disasterous the potential outcomes when the divide been societal and individual needs in healing are ignored.

It’s not the 24th century Starfleet we’re seeing where there has been a long period of peace and officers can be treated effectively for trauma before returning to duty and it locks in with chronic effects.

I agree that it does not show Pike’s leadership in a positive light, but I find it realistic. What it does show is the gulf between war veterans and those senior officers who, while veterans of other kinds of conflicts, were not involved.

Starfleet needs senior officers, without direct personal history, like Pike to lead the peace and move forward, just as the western allies needed to find a way with some German leaders and scientists after WW2. But not every individual at the front can withstand the stress of that direct engagement with a former enemy.

Starfleet’s order to force veterans into direct contact with a former enemy was psychologically unhealthy and unrealistic, but a value-focused officer like Pike would not have the insight to see that.

This gulf was underscored at a personal level by Chapel’s conversation with Spock, when she could not share her experience with him and he could not ease her pain. The scene between them was an essential confirmation.

What I found interesting is that Number One had the best read on the situation. She saw the pressure the ambassador was putting directly on the veterans in the crew.

As the executive officer, it’s her job to manage personnel, to assess readiness, to deliver a functioning ship for the captain’s command. She accurately saw the problem and recommended action to mitigate the situation by reducing the time to deliver the ambassador to Starbase 24.

What she was not able to do however was to convince Pike to stand down a bit on Starfleet’s toxic order to require veterans of the war to show acceptance of the ambassador. Nor did we see her attempt to try to convince Pike. He was leading from his values and unable to really take measure of its impact on the individuals.

I find it interesting that this show is giving us episodes that show the negatives of Pike’s command style as well as the strengths. While we’ve seen the negatives in Kirk’s and Picard’s temperament’s and command styles acknowledged in the movies and in Picard, this seems to be the first time we’ve had it done with a hero captain in an ongoing television series when he’s in active command of the ship.

It’s got to be tough to be the VP at Paramount responsible for brand management of one of its two largest streaming franchises, and be told to manage the fallout of a business decision that flies directly in the face of both the Star Trek brand strategy and firm’s streaming strategy.

Half of Paramount+ demand is derived from the Trek and Yellowstone franchises. Their streaming strategy, as pitched to investors, is ‘franchises, faces and fandoms.’

Yet, they cancel and write-off one of only two successful digital animated originals from one of the key franchises, helmed by a legacy captain who remains one of the most beloved in a key demographic?

There just doesn’t seem to be a limit to the amount of hype I’m willing to soak up in anticipation of this crossover.

Nothing close to too much as yet.

Well, I have to give the OP credit for outrageous audacity.

Coming to the main community on the dedicated Star Trek instance to argue that users should subscribe elsewhere is inherently a criticism. It says a lot about the tolerance of the mods and admins here that it’s been left to stand.

I myself appreciate a well moderated community because I believe it enables more discussion not less.