→ 106 messages moved to Android Hell

huh I was trying to just move that convo over since it was kind of huge and off-topic sort of

but I don't think it worked

okay yes it did. Chat is being weird for me. Maybe some mod thing. or caching. or something.

okay now it's beter

Yeah, better.

Russia vetoes UN demand that Russia stop attacking Ukraine ctvnews.ca/world/…

> Russia vetoed a U.N. Security Council resolution on Friday demanding that Moscow immediately stop its attack on Ukraine and withdraw all troops, a defeat the United States and its supporters knew was inevitable but said would highlight Russia's global isolation.

> The vote was 11 in favor, with Russia voting no and China, India and the United Arab Emirates abstaining, which showed significant but not total opposition to Russian President Vladimir Putin's invasion of his country's smaller and militarily weaker neighbor.

> The resolution's failure paves the way for supporters to call for a quick vote on a similar resolution in the 193-member U.N. General Assembly, where there are no vetoes. There was no immediate word on a timetable for an assembly vote.

They say China's abstention is seen as a positive thing, possibly a sign of a wedge driven between China and Russia over Ukraine?

@Cerberus China says it respects Ukraine's sovereignty and Russia's security concerns reuters.com/world/europe/…

Some details on what China has said so far

@Wipqozn Thanks, nice summary.

At least China specifically says Ukraine should not have been invaded.

But it refuses to say that Russia should not have invaded Ukraine.

@Cerberus fivethirtyeight.com / freakonomics.com should have a chart with your summarized lingual/legalist voting angles. ...what are our keywords, "specifically says", "refuses to say", "but"... is that a Decision Tree or Theoretical Linguistics (does "but" cause buffer overflows in Law, at "but specifically says", with error msg E_Difficult_to_Summarize)? :∫

@prosody-GabeVereableContext Umm I'm not sure I know what this is about.

@Cerberus "specifically says", "refuses to say", are some of the good/better expressions, which can be (beyond the Security Council resolutions) difficult to summarize. :/

Those expressions can be used to describe the positions of the great powers, yes.

And sorry for the unruly ping, but I wish 538 and that NYT column had a ruled chart of said positions of great powers. Sometimes there are such diagrams (if not, shown comically), but it is not a method of expression (or what do you call such chart/diagram/tree?) sotospeak.

@prosody-GabeVereableContext No need to apologize for pings, I don't get that many anyway haha.

Perhaps there is a website that keeps a table of S. C. voting.

Well all the pings sound the same, the least S.E. could do is custom ringtones. Maybe after SE goes open source. :P

Yes, there can be differences.

Between Axios's "algorithmic news", and Google News putting Snopes.com at the top of every page, I thought programmatic A.I. analysis would lead to these differentials being clear. But we do not even have linguistic nuance standards.