the second part of my statement was directed at the person ive never seen nor heard of before, not either of yall.

someone being incorrect about one thing does not make them incorrect in another. the idea that someone should never be listened to or allowed to be considered correct because of something to do with them on an unrelated or only haphazardly related topic.
you wouldnt get away with refusing to sell a new bath tub to an alleged murderer who is said to have drowned people in a river.
"This is a big spit wad on the whole trans community. LGBT hates him for a reason. He isn't trans. He is a predator and he is disgusting. He is not just going to salons. He is going to small mom n pop shops and when they tell him they are uncomfortable he tries to sue them. He said little girls should be naked and have no privacy "
none of that matters. character evidence is bad evidence. unsupported conjecture.
plus seeing with the fact that resorting to personal attacks on someone you disagree with is a thing, you need to take that 10 and bring it down to a 2. that shit is unbecoming of such a good website.

its accurate enough to what would happen. there are quite a few variables but i think i covered the most likely case here.

"Ribbed for her pleasure"
Lel

I saw a lot of Zeus back in the day. Zeus actively lied to the community and individuals on many occasions about things both important and inconsequential even down to lying about having changed a user setting for someone.

Many universities offer free* counciling services to students, use the things you have access to yo.
*free as in no extra charge, you've already paid for it just like your on campus gym membership most people never use

More accurately, they've discovered that sterilizing equipment actually does anything against this stuff

Sars doesn't have a lead, it took 3 months for SARS to kill 5 people, its so far taken this less than a month to kill 8 (apparently it's already up to 25 if the next top level comment is to be believed)
Comparing end total to running total is disingenuous and obviously only done so you can have said something that isn't technically incorrect

I'd say like, depending on the size of the home like, 100-1000?

Like literally just spend 10 seconds googling the fucking name, he has his own Wikipedia page.

Well, there is you just have to live to like 50

SARS had half a year, this has had less than a month

Whose to say that it's not just the outside bits are gone and all the inside bits are still trying to murder you from the inside out just without a way to actually expel anything cause it's skin covering there now?

Understanding the law is never a requirement to punish someone for breaking it. "I didn't understand that murdering little Timmy for his lunch money was a crime officer you can't punish me for it"
It's sometimes used to lessen sentencing in cases where good faith is in play like with squatters rights and copyright (normally it's used to make punishments harsher for those that didn't have good faith and knew they were breaking the law, not lessen it for those that didn't)
And as Guest_ said, taking things case by case allows hella bias and prejudice to be or into it.
Take it case by case and boom the little [insert genre of person] kid sells lemonade all he wants but [insert other same category but different entry genre of person] kid can't because he's different and the official didn't like his genre.

Also SARS killed like 800 people that's not a plague that's an outbreak. Just for reference the 1720 plague killed 50 thousand people in a single city.