Tell me more about your "Papa's Ranch" you like to keep in your fridge.

I feel like I stumbled into a very innocent and unaware thread involving stimulants and the world. People bickering about whether or not you should include caffeine or proper sleep in your schedule, while the rest of the world is just downing copious amounts of drugs trying to keep up and sane (neither are possible).

Holy fuck why is that so beautiful. You've unlocked something in me I didn't know was there and must pursue now.

ITT: A lot of people wanting to argue the headline and not the articles or legislation.

The plaintiffs said they would order drinks that included milk and would substitute the milk for non-dairy alternatives, such as soy, oat, coconut, or almond milk, and were charged an extra $0.50 to $0.80 for the substitution.

The lawsuit notes that Starbucks typically uses 2% milk for their milk-based products and would substitute that milk for another type of milk, such as 1% or skim, for no additional cost. Starbucks will also offer caffeine-less or sugar-free options for no additional cost.

Customers who are lactose-intolerant or have milk allergies may pay up to $2 extra at Dunkin’ Donuts when substituting oat or almond milk for dairy in their beverages. (from the link in the article)

The lawsuit against Dunkin’ points out that the chain already modifies its regular beverage offerings to remove caffeine and sugar at no additional cost for those with diabetes, weight-control issues or hypertension. The coffee company also asks customers about their allergies, informing them that their products may contain allergens. “Once Dunkin’ asks about allergies, and someone with a disability requests a dairy-free product as an accommodation, they can’t impose a surcharge — as they don’t for caffeine-free drinks, etc.,” Kanter said.

Kanter, the founding director of Syracuse University’s disability law and policy program, believes the lawsuit makes a strong case for discrimination under the ADA. “If a person qualifies as a person with a disability, and they’re entitled to an accommodation or modification — which in this case looks pretty simple as nondairy milk — they cannot be charged extra,” said Kanter.

The legislation is simple, and being tested currently in the courts with how it effects business practices. It's also telling how privileged most of you are on here, you imagine yourself as the "owner" who is shocked and dumbfounded by this turn of events. Anyone who has actually worked in the restaurant or service industry knows this is company bullshit.

The Alternative-Milk items are mere percentages of percentages. All Food Costs and future sale projections are calculated for proper ordering. They already have the items on hand....there would be no restructuring or change in conducting business under a judgement on this case. The use of other free alternatives (sugar-free,etc) for disabilities being used as advertising is a damning indication everyone skips over. Caffeine-free doesn't cost more to have or stock? Any of the Splenda/etc is corporeal and drops out of the Ether for everyone?

Again, the numbers are so low for alternative-milk your brain would skip a beat if you look at their figures.

Starbucks pays to produce one cup of regular coffee. Amateur speculative estimates range from $0.20 to $0.75.... Starbucks has recently been repurchasing its own shares and paying dividends to increase returns to investors....The costs of goods sold, depreciation and amortization expenses, and store operating expenses have declined over the last six years, with only general and administrative expenses rising. (link)

Starbucks isn't saying shit, they know the reality of how bad it actually looks. There is no "Woe is me" in any of their financial reportings so they just have to bite the bullet.

Starbucks also expects to continue robust store development in China, with net unit growth of approximately 13% annually. Globally, Starbucks expects to approach 45,000 stores by the end of 2025... Starbucks now expects global revenue growth in the range of 10% to 12% annually from fiscal 2023.... growth is expected to be in the range of 15% to 20% annually through fiscal 2025. Starbucks plans to resume its share buyback program reinstituting a healthy return of shareholder capital, yielding an annual EPS benefit of approximately 1%, net of incremental interest, beginning in fiscal year 2024. Between dividends and share buybacks, the company expects to return approximately $20 billion to its shareholders in the next three years. (link)

They're playing ball in China, we've all seen enough examples of companies having to bend the knee or getting out. I don't get why everyone is not happy about these events. Want a "free" market where large corporation monopolies exist? Sure, but you gotta at least allow some crumbs to fall for the peasants lest they get hangy again. Want freedom and inclusion for all groups of people to experience life? Starbucks is an American institution now by cultural standards, you can't academically refute that looking at any media or even economical standpoints. It's on every corner, reasonable accommodations should be made and enforced for the general public. This isn't a Ma and Pa coffee shop, this is why lower court judges exist and can weigh in on individual cases where they can seriously consider the context of the business standards.

obligatory:

My partner still visits reddit on mobile (the communities they want just are not here and they don't like to post), I know when showing me something we've clicked on a post to have to scroll past a "Presented" comment (ad), the communities stickied bot comment, then we finally get to the first real comment only for it to be some highly upvoted joke comment. Sprinkle in bots and native ad's, I seriously don't understand still putting up with it. It's like saying a shopping complex is still a social hot spot like a mall was back in the day.

I'm not sure what point you're trying to make unless you're saying no one has to create a Discord account, or have to download an app, or have to find an invite to locate the server. My keys are auto-generated and auto-saved, simple 20 second process. Forums are also a lot easier to sign up for than Discord, if you're worried about making another account I don't know what to tell ya because every service requires it.

The discussion seems very muddled and opinionated ITT because I'm not even sure if you're talking about a Discord Server or a forum/communication platform on a dedicated server. You might be able to slap together a Discord server faster, but the organizational power and not putting that extra work on users for Discord participation makes forum's superior. Part of the project development is sysadmin. If it's not, why take it FOSS at all? Discord is designed to take up your time, those pretty bots and "perks" keep you viewing. What could've been a well thought out message on a board with a reply now becomes 20+ texts which you're stuck communicating on. Rinse and repeat every day, on a forum you simply link the previous conversation and you're done.

I think it's a neutral wash atm, Discord may be packaged better to be mainstream but it's bloat all around with lots of negatives. Anyone saying Discord is better is just preference at this point, lots of counterintuitive comments like we need "real-time" communication but also anything else takes up project development, like Discord is some kind of time saver.

? What's the difference between setting up a free forum (they're everywhere) versus setting up Discord channels? It's the exact same process.

It rubs the lotion on it's skin.

Do you feel better that the NSA is spying on Canadians while Canadians spy on US citizens and the two countries exchange what they have on each other’s citizens?

but then,

do we need another traitor to hand over classified data to foreign adversaries to make you aware of it?

Government doing it in secret vs a citizen exposing it? I'm going to back my fellow citizen in this one.

This is happening because it’s the job of the NSA to gather data for intelligence purposes. They will sponge up any data they can legally obtain. And if you agree to data being shared with third parties, you’ve agreed that the data can be shared with the NSA. So it is.

That's some serious bootlicking there, you think they're only collecting "legally" obtained information? Let's also gloss over the anti-consumer practices that companies employ to obtain that sweet third party data on you.

"you’ve agreed that the data can be shared with the NSA. So it is." - JFC you have some weird logic going on in your head. Let's just forget what's required in today's society, the data that has to be shared to perform basic functions like employment now adays. The average citizen is not a privacy expert and no one is educated in K-12 to be consensual informed.