I don’t exhale, rather I just close off my airway to stop the big inhale. It sounds super uncomfortable to try exhaling at that point, but with some practice I have been able to stop the inhale and that mutes the sneeze considerably. Also, I can plug my nose when I feel it start to tickle and stop the sneeze entirely.

The italics are a nice hint. Good Poe’s Law submission.

My friend who has never been in a long-term relationship wants to know what this means – how would you explain this agreement?

I’ll save anyone else a click, even Etsy doesn’t have anything even close to a tampon costume for a penis. That link does, however, somehow have a The "Rings of Saturn" Butthole in the search results, so… yeah.

I love that as of this writing, there are only two downvotes in this entire war.

I got that advice as well – the explanation given to me was that it’s almost always used incorrectly, so just be safe and don’t. However, I like the way it makes writing more closely resemble natural speech; we usually talk in conjoined clauses rather than complete sentences.

It’s a professional refrigerated salad bar, so I’d expect the same as you’d find in a restaurant. Maybe prep in the morning and dispose/repurpose into dinner in the evening. Such a cool idea, $1300 is a scary investment but it seems amazing.

I’ve been trying to get the semicolon to take off; haven’t had much luck though.

I don’t have experience with it personally, only heard about it from a possibility perspective – apparently prosecutors do a very thorough job screening jurors to make sure that never happens. Just knowing about jury nullification can get you dismissed. I don’t think you’re off the mark with that read, but where I think it comes back from kangaroo court and sov cit land is all jurors have to agree, even one objection to a nullification would stop it; if twelve strangers all agree, there’s probably some merit to it. But, certainly can be abused in the wrong hands.

Right, that’s my point – jury nullification is the mechanism by which juries find that a crime was committed by the letter of the law but the defendent is not guilty.