So, did ANYONE here read the article? It's not the LCO decided not to pay. Barclays froze their accounts without warning in an effort to weed out fraud. It happened to several other non-profits as well.
So, did ANYONE here read the article?
That's a rhetorical question, right?
Honestly, the title is a click bait title. I read the article and the title could have been more topical with the same amount of words. It's a bullshit title. Oh hey it's the Guardian.
Sorry for tacking in with an unrelated question, but as someone who isn’t from an English-speaking country, could you elaborate as to what your last phrase means? Is the guardian considered a bad news outlet? I had the vague impression the brand was associated with more or less “better” quality reporting and/or journalism in general, and can remember donating to them years ago. I now wonder if something has changed of if I was supporting something bad in my ignorance 😕
The guardian has a tendency to have alarmist headlines.
So, did ANYONE here read the article? It's not the LCO decided not to pay. Barclays froze their accounts without warning in an effort to weed out fraud. It happened to several other non-profits as well.
That's a rhetorical question, right?
Honestly, the title is a click bait title. I read the article and the title could have been more topical with the same amount of words. It's a bullshit title. Oh hey it's the Guardian.
Sorry for tacking in with an unrelated question, but as someone who isn’t from an English-speaking country, could you elaborate as to what your last phrase means? Is the guardian considered a bad news outlet? I had the vague impression the brand was associated with more or less “better” quality reporting and/or journalism in general, and can remember donating to them years ago. I now wonder if something has changed of if I was supporting something bad in my ignorance 😕
The guardian has a tendency to have alarmist headlines.
Ain't nobody got time for dat.