Sam L

I think it’s time we admit something quietly radical: the vulture should replace the bald eagle as the national bird of the United States. Not as a joke, not as an edgelord take, but as a sincere upgrade in symbolic accuracy.

America has always been a nation of stated ideals—liberty, equality, justice—paired with a long, awkward history of not quite living up to them. In that sense, the bald eagle is the perfect mascot: a bird that looks noble from a distance but, as Benjamin Franklin famously pointed out, is actually kind of a feathered opportunist. Majestic in silhouette, morally flexible in practice. A creature that will absolutely steal someone else’s lunch and then pose like it earned it. A symbol of aspiration, sure, but also of the gap between image and reality.

The vulture, by contrast, has never lied about what it is. It is as ugly as it wants to be, uninterested in pageantry, and completely free of the American obsession with pretending to be better than one’s behavior. The vulture does not posture. It does not preen. It does not demand admiration. It simply shows up, surveys the wreckage, and gets to work cleaning the world that other creatures have made a mess of.

There’s a strange, almost moral clarity in that. The vulture embodies a kind of ecological humility: you don’t have to be beautiful to be essential, and you don’t have to be admired to do the work that keeps everything else alive. It is a bird of consequence rather than performance.

If the eagle represents who America said it wanted to be, the vulture represents who America needs to become in its next evolutionary phase: honest about its flaws, unafraid to confront the messes it has inherited and created, and committed to the unglamorous labor of repair. A nation that stops pretending it’s perfect and starts doing the cleanup.

In that sense, the vulture isn’t just a better symbol—it’s an aspiration. A reminder that dignity doesn’t come from looking majestic. It comes from doing the work.

I would like to formally begin the campaign to recognize leftover French fries as a distinct and superior culinary category, separate from their freshly‑fried counterparts. People keep insisting they’re “worse,” but that’s only because they’ve been indoctrinated by Big Fry into believing crispness is the highest fry virtue. In reality, the cold, slightly wilted fry is the true test of character - like a potato that has seen things and returned wiser.

And let’s be honest: leftover fries are the only food that actually improves your moral fiber. Fresh fries encourage impulsive behavior, reckless consumption, and the kind of hubris that leads someone to say “I’ll just have a few” and then wake up surrounded by salt crystals like a crime scene. Leftover fries, however, demand reflection. They ask, “Are you really hungry, or are you just avoiding your inbox again?” That’s philosophy. That’s growth.

So yes, I will continue to argue - calmly, rationally, and with the full force of potato‑based jurisprudence -that leftover fries deserve respect. Not reheated. Not air‑fried. Not “revived.” As they are. Cold. Limp. A little tragic. A snack for those who have accepted the world as it is, not as they wish it to be. We can't all be Don Quixote.

It would be nice to be able to see the requested Duologs. A robust view of pending/requested duologs would help one manage their time commitment.

It is not immediately clear to me which flicks are contested and how based on the Flick tutorials. I attempted to find the FAQ page from when I was first perusing/signing up, but it is not clear to me on how to navigate to that page to see if it contains a summary.

In any event, it might be helpful as an enhancement to have a quick reference page of all flicks indicating which can be contested and which go immediately to jury. Alternatively, perhaps each Flick tutorial could have a quick reference box outlining the ground for contesting (if possible) or if the Flicker is able to retract. In any event, the format should be streamlined so that the basis of contestation (I don't know if this is a word) can be clearly referenced.

An example:
Loaded Question Flick has a heading "Contesting the flick: the established-premise defence"
False Information Tutorial does not have a heading for contesting but does have a header reading "The 500-character analysis." It could be revised to match the format: "Contesting the flick: the 500-character analysis" or something.

When signing up for Elenkia, it prompts for a display name, a username, and an email address. However, when signing in, it prompts for email address rather than username. This is a bit confusing for those of us too old to remember our passwords since password managers like Google or Microsoft store the "username" field along with the generated password.

Is there a way to change the underlying field labels to better facilitate the use of password managers along with the email sign-on? Or a way to permit the use of the username during sign-on rather than email only?

Admittedly, this is a minor feature issue, not a bug.

My thought is that I wanted to brag about the most amazing sports bet I ever placed, and also share my rationale for betting. This also can serve as a test for paragraphing, photo attachment, and tagging.

I place small bets against my favorite team in order to soften the blow if they lose. In the event that my team wins, I will be happy for the win. In the event that they lose, I will be cheered because I will make money.

Recently, five games would decide if my favorite hockey team could break a 10 year drought. I placed a parlay bet against those 5 outcomes.