Definitely doesn’t sound like an issue with Tor Browser in Strict Mode. /s

The simple fact that buying a $300 device and to “not expect software updates” is not considered a scam is hilarious to me.

You didn’t get laid off because you discussed your wages.

You were laid off because you couldn’t keep your cards close to your chest and told the company y’all had been discussing wages.

Having the right to discuss it doesn’t mean you should do it in front of the boss.

In Denmark, I’m part of a union which publishes salary stats for every possible job title, management responsibility, education, in a fairly convoluted matrix. Still, this allows me to easily negotiate with companies and see how well they pay. There might be something organised by the government, but I’ve never had a need for it.

Germany has a principle of equal treatment. The only way to ensure this is respected is to discuss wages. There is a legal precedent that makes it completely unambiguous that discussing wages is protected. It may be uncomfortable, but that’s just social pressure, encouraged by companies.

https://www.hensche.de/Rechtsanwalt_Arbeitsrecht_Urteile_AGB_LAG_Mecklenburg-Vorpommern_2Sa237-09.html

You cannot prevent your employees from discussing wages. It is literally illegal to do so, and you cannot reprimand people for doing so.

Under the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA or the Act), employees have the right to communicate with their coworkers about their wages, as well as with labor organizations, worker centers, the media, and the public. Wages are a vital term and condition of employment, and discussions of wages are often preliminary to organizing or other actions for mutual aid or protection.

If you are an employee covered by the Act, you may discuss wages in face-to-face conversations, over the phone, and in written messages. Policies that specifically prohibit the discussion of wages are unlawful as are policies that chill employees from discussing their wages.

You may have discussions about wages when not at work, when you are on break, and even during work if employees are permitted to have other non-work conversations. You have these rights whether or not you are represented by a union.

https://www.nlrb.gov/about-nlrb/rights-we-protect/your-rights/your-rights-to-discuss-wages

Pedantic moment: “every business’ focus”, or “all businesses’ focus”, but not “every businesses’ focus”.

The irony is that Reddit thinks their internal search can in any way, shape or form compete with Google or other actual search engines. People use Google to find stuff on Reddit because Reddit’s own search is hopeless.

The irony that u/spez and others keep using landed gentry in the wrong way is hilarious.

Landed gentry bought their “title” (it’s not really a title, more a socio-political category). The first scenario you described, with someone buying the position of moderator… that’s 100% landed gentry. Commoners with wealth would buy a big house and property and then be considered landed gentry. It’s not something that was given to them like peerage (aka nobility).

The reality is that content producers and moderators are closer to cotters–somewhere in between serfs and husbandmen. They don’t own the land (e.g.: subs), but they work it. The only difference is that serfs and husbandmen could derive a profit from their labour, whereas most mods and content producers don’t (as far as I’m aware).

If we keep going with the middle-age titles, u/spez is much closer to a “lord of the manor” than he would care to realise. He owns the land, can choose who works it and who is able to make a profit and how much. He can withdraw that permission at any time, and he amasses vast amounts of wealth based on the work of the people who, effectively, work for him for free.