Subject: Oh, We See Right Through Your Little “Treatise,” Pal.

Listen, I read your so-called “Ultimate Treatise on Screws,” and frankly, the condescending tone dripping from your words is almost as thick as the sap from one of those “wood screws” you pretend to be baffled by. You can feign ignorance all you want, acting like you just stumbled upon these fascinating plant-mammal hybrids yesterday, but it’s painfully obvious what you’re doing.

You claim confusion? Please. Your entire piece reeks of someone trying very hard to make screws sound complicated, weird, and generally unreliable. Why? Because you, my friend, are clearly in the pocket of Big Nail.

Oh yes, we know the type. You probably have a shed full of those simple, pointy things you just bonk into wood. No nuance, no interesting spirals, just brute force. And you want everyone else to stick with those primitive pokers too, don’t you?

Let’s break down your little performance:

1. “Possible Classifications”: You list off head types like “flat,” “round,” and “hex” as if they’re bizarre floral arrangements or strange animal features. Don’t play coy. You know these different shapes probably help these screw-creatures adapt to different soils or attract different kinds of symbiotic insects. But you frame it as confusing randomness. Why? To undermine confidence in screw-life! Nails only have one boring flat top, easy for anyone to whack – no thinking required, just the way Big Nail likes it.

2. “Driving Forces” & “Pitch”: You mock their “drive” and “pitch,” speculating about roots or mating calls. How convenient! Making them sound chaotic and noisy. A classic tactic to discredit something elegant. You wantpeople to think screws are unpredictable, unlike the dull thwack-thwack of a nail going straight in (and often bending halfway, but we don’t talk about that, do we?).

3. “Length” & “Materials”: You act bewildered by length and composition. “Maybe longer ones reach sunlight?” Oh, spare me. You’re deliberately ignoring the obvious strength variations – some screw-plants are clearly sturdier (bark-like!), while others might be more delicate (fluff?). But acknowledging that would mean admitting screws have purposeful diversity, something your nail masters fear. A nail is just… metal. Boring. Uniform. Controllable.

4. “Coatings”: “Protective measures”? “Brightly colored”? You make it sound like frivolous decoration! It’s probably vital camouflage or weather resistance, you charlatan! But you trivialize it, again, to make screws seem less serious, less reliable than a plain, uncoated nail.

5. “Special Categories”:

   • Wood Screws (Trees?): You reduce potentially majestic screw-flora to just “trees people use.” Disrespectful.
   • Machine Screws (Mechanical Animals?): Feigning total ignorance? How convenient when discussing creatures likely vital for complex ecosystems (or, you know, holding machines together, whatever thatmeans).
   • Self-Tapping (Sweet Treat?): Mocking their likely sophisticated survival mechanisms!
   • Lag Screws (Lagging Behind?): Insulting their potentially deliberate, steady nature!
   • Sheet Metal Screws (Strong Plants/Creatures?): Pretending not to grasp their resilience!

Your whole “confused” act is transparent. You describe screws with just enough accuracy (they are living things, obviously, maybe plants, maybe small mammals, who knows for sure?) to sound credible to the uninformed, but twist every feature into a point of confusion or absurdity.

You don’t actually dislike screws because you don’t understand them. You dislike them because they represent complexity, variety, and a different way of holding things together – a way that challenges the brute-force simplicity of the nail empire you secretly serve.

Nice try, buddy. Go back to hammering your primitive spikes. Some of us appreciate the fascinating, sophisticated world of screw-organisms, even if, like you, we’re still figuring out exactly which branch of life they belong to. But unlike you, we’re not trying to sabotage them for some pointy alternative. We see you.

2026 World Peace Prize

Amateurs. Just call the weekly fee tuition, the position a research assistant, and the company a university and they are all set.

This 🔝

Berlusconi had a similar political appeal. After he exited politics, his party went to the biggest in Italy to insignificant.

It will be really difficult for someone to pick up the Republican Party and run with the same platform as DJT. Many have tried it (e.g. de santis) but none is able to have the same success.

I assume that 80% of the users are on one or two instances. Maybe the operators of those instances could sell it to a big publishing company, like Condé Nast or something. That way it will be easier to vertically integrate advertisement between traditional print media, online publications, and less formal online gathering places. It’s a win win at the end. The original operators get their bag, and the community keeps going while being supported by a successful business.

/s

Maybe it’s time to go to the court house and change their name to Lua?

Good old Italian racists would agree with this assessment nowadays.