"Pride before Fall"

  • 🐕 I am attempting to get the site runnning as fast as possible. If you are experiencing slow page load times, please report it.
Don't use ESG. Simply because even the makers of ESG have not finalised it, no frameworks exist to test it. The big 4 are falling over themselves to try and be the first to understand and explain the taxonomies to scared companies, while the taxonomies are constantly under review. The S1 levels such as CO2 registration have not even been translated into measurable, usable forms by companies, accountants or auditors. The reporting cycle on the first 3 taxonomies is due in 2025 for 2024 for some but 2028 for most. In short, don't screech about something you don't understand, that cannot be measured and has not been finalised. Keep it simple and clean.
 
I have checked out some pages in the repository.
I would advise you to stop mentioning ESG scores in the context of these movements. You have a partially informed context on what ESG products are, but you are being mislead into thinking all of the aspects of the product are useless or related to SJW. For example ESG packages can be used to determine extranational associations between businesses and nations. They are often used to check if a company is associated with China or Russia or an enemy nation or government.
I have no doubt that in the next election cycle people against ESG will be painted as traitors and allies of enemy governments. Let's stay ahead of that ball.
uh, I don't give a fuck if they're partially useful, if they push faggot shit fuck it.
 
uh, I don't give a fuck if they're partially useful, if they push faggot shit fuck it.
And ESG is not used for checking business beneficiaries and contacts anyway. That's what other lists are used for, like UN, EU and US sanction lists and the CI databases and shit.

Edit: had coffee, feel less homicidal. Look, ESG is a regulatory reporting framework that's still very much in concept despite what they'll have you believe. And while companies will absolutely use it to get diversity points on the S part, it is the same as the CO2 neutral stickers on BP or Shell stuff. But at the moment, aside from some HR related stuff, the S is completely undeveloped. I think the laser focus on companies that push trans shit is better, because regardless of potential ESG points in the future, they're doing it right now.
 
Last edited:
Just include the ESG with a neutral definition so people can know what it is. Don't say if it's good or bad just "this is what it is meant to mean".

The conflictions of the score and what they are seeing with their own eyeballs might peak some people.
 
Neither the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI), the Principles for Responsible Investment (PRI) or the Sustainability Accounting Standards Board (SASB) have a way to score it because it's not yet implemented and finished. It's just greenwashing at the moment and has nothing to do with trans and lgbt products that you can point at even if have access to their annual statements and reports. ESG is general wokeness and should stay out of this website.
 
And ESG is not used for checking business beneficiaries and contacts anyway. That's what other lists are used for, like UN, EU and US sanction lists and the CI databases and shit.

Edit: had coffee, feel less homicidal. Look, ESG is a regulatory reporting framework that's still very much in concept despite what they'll have you believe. And while companies will absolutely use it to get diversity points on the S part, it is the same as the CO2 neutral stickers on BP or Shell stuff. But at the moment, aside from some HR related stuff, the S is completely undeveloped. I think the laser focus on companies that push trans shit is better, because regardless of potential ESG points in the future, they're doing it right now.
Then you can rewrite the small business page if you insist but you've basically just told me what I've said is true even if it's not officiated. You talk like a banker.
 
ESG is corporate sponsored social manipulation, using stake holders to push companies to do things that are neither profitable or desirable in the name of a "Greater Good" target·

Null is right this feel like pedantic nitpicking it doesn't matter that it is not "developed" fully it's corporate sponsored globalist faggotry.
 
I don't think Josh is doing this with an intent to hide, considering anyone can read this thread.

If you don't think these people stalk his posts with a burner account, I have a bridge to sell you.
Nah, I don't think so either, I just think that if people know who's behind the site it might discredit it a bit
I'm well aware that there are probably obsessed nutters who stalk his every move- it's hard not to be when you use this site for longer than a week or two- I'm more concerned about those nutters (and/or others with intent to attack) shutting the site down using its ties to Josh and the farms to discredit everything it says
 
For this to really kick off it needs Boomer appeal.
Martha and George from Facebook need to be able to understand and share the site,
not only do they have some of the most purchasing power, but also time and an established offline social network.
Thus it needs to be factual, simple and shareable.
It does no good if the most accurate information is written by someone with some outrageous username,
or if it links to someplace not meant for frail boned elders, e.g. here.

Alongside calling out companies that promote this kind of open social manipulation needs to be a way to establish a permanent awareness as to how these mega corporations,
e.g. Anheuser-Busch function. When people look at Bud Light they need to permanently see the overarching corporation, not just the brand.

Establishing how these companies profit by promoting these current ideals might be important, the insane concept of ESG scores for example.
Having ecological impact alongside social relations in one scoring system is going to at best lead to an overcompensation and or manipulation in either category.
Having no or little standard between the different groups handing out these ratings creates no viable standard in the score itself.

People need to return to a business sense that forgoes social issues and focuses solely on the product or service, if possible on some ecological sensibility.
This bizarre façade of being social activists whilst having your warehouse workers pissing in bottles is disgusting.

Tl;dr: Get aunt Martha outraged the totalitarians are trooning out her grandson.
 
Then you can rewrite the small business page if you insist but you've basically just told me what I've said is true even if it's not officiated. You talk like a banker.
You said no woke shit. I just wanted to warn you against using a system that means little aside from woke diversity and inclusion points.
 
Alongside calling out companies that promote this kind of open social manipulation needs to be a way to establish a permanent awareness as to how these mega corporations,
e.g. Anheuser-Busch function. When people look at Bud Light they need to permanently see the overarching corporation, not just the brand.
Agree with the whole post, but I fee like this is pretty important and something that could be added later. I had a guy tell me he didn't even realize Anheuser-Busch was owned by a non-American company. He had recently switched to Yuengling because of that reason, plus the Dylan Mulvaney thing. Boomers and normies are only just starting to wake up to this tranny shit, and the more they see just how far the tentacles reach, the better.
 
Google Chrome is rolling out a new version of their extension format which specifically kneecaps ad blockers. More to the point though, they have an official extensions marketplace. Average users aren't going to find an extension outside of that; those who do will be warned several times that installing it could make their computer spontaneously combust.
To be more specific, they'll be deprecating Manifest v2 extensions and only leaving Manifest v3, which was castrated from functions that made extensions like uBlock Origin work as efficiently as they do. This is more the case of Google cutting out a few API elements to hinder adblocking.

However there are two ways of getting out of it:

First is making uBlock Origin for Manifest v3 if it'll end up being possible to implement ad blocking via Manifest v3. Raymond Hill is already working on something like that in form of uBlock Origin Lite. It's still a massive work in progress but it shows that there is hope for adblocking on Manifest v3.

Second is that developers of Chromium based browsers, such as Vivaldi, Brave and Opera, will implement some sort of workaround themselves, depending on how Google will go about axing Manifest v2. And if everything else fails, the three browsers I've mentioned have their own ad blocker. They might not be as effective or robust as uBlock Origin but they do work.

But as far as fucking with 3rd party extensions go, there's only two ways it can go. Someone fools an extension maker into handing over the project and then pushes malicious code to it, or Google simply removes the extension from their store, which is the only way you can easily install extensions in Chrome. They've axed AdNauseam because of how much profit loss it was bringing Google, and they've axed Coincidence Detector due to it's antisemitic nature.

And unfortunately, if you want to reach the normies, you want your extension to be a click away. For most normies installing an adblocker in Chrome is already an alien concept, so imagine if you were to try and tell them how to sideload one. Especially in Chrome, where Google locked down sideloading a lot. And you sure as hell won't convince them to switch to anything else.
 
Neither the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI), the Principles for Responsible Investment (PRI) or the Sustainability Accounting Standards Board (SASB) have a way to score it because it's not yet implemented and finished.
So? Just include this in one of the info pages explaining what an ESG score is. Including this explanation would be more of a help than a hindrance IMHO.
You said no woke shit. I just wanted to warn you against using a system that means little aside from woke diversity and inclusion points.
I get what you're saying, but ESG helps paint a bigger picture of the companies that enthusiastically suck the girldick. As such I don't think including ESG scores would contribute to the scope creep Null is trying to avoid via the "no general woke shit" rule.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Toolbox
I really like the idea of having alternatives as well. The whole Bud Light debacle is a good sign but AB owns so many brands, it is harder to know what is or isn’t included.

There’s a bit of a running list in some of the BP threads but a dedicated site would be a much better place to contribute.
 
If you have something like this, or make it easy to generate, it can be shared on Twitter and vaguely reach the same message. @Point and Laugh is there a tranny style one?

I don't know how old this is, btw. I'm sure it's worse now.

1685416116313.png
 
If you have something like this, or make it easy to generate, it can be shared on Twitter and vaguely reach the same message. @Point and Laugh is there a tranny style one?

I don't know how old this is, btw. I'm sure it's worse now.

View attachment 5142334
I have never seen one that is specific to tranny nonsense but I’d be happy to create a graphic that can be scaled as needed.

The one you used as an example is recognizable and has decent impact but I’d like more visual appeal. Creating an easily shareable graphic is a great idea though. I’ll do some searching and see if there’s any floating around too.
 
Back