We should have stockpiles for just this sort of situation. They were either inadequately supplied or are sitting on resources.

https://www.phe.gov/about/sns/Pages/default.aspx

I'm not up to date on the issue but India had an issue with black money and people hoarding cash without reporting the income. The laws were passed to combat that IIRC.

This may be more work than some are willing to do but I took the opposite approach. I browse /r/all almost exclusively but I've got RES filtering any subreddit I don't want to see in my feed again. The list of filters gets long.

They sort of earned that by gaming the front page algorithms. The mods would repeatedly sticky 2 minute old posts and encouraged all their users to upvote the stickies. This caused any post of their choosing to surge into the the front page. They would have 1/4th of the front page full of posts less than 2 hours old pre-election.

It use to show up in my /r/all feed when NSFW filtering was off. Definitely stood out among the other NSFW content you would be scrolling past.

>There are some freaky good stalkers out there.

That doesn't quite do the situation justice. The stalking gets crowdsourced; often to people who are well practiced at it.

I feel like this outlook discredits a lot of wonderful young people out there.

It's important to make the distinction between Pure Science and anything on the sliding scale from technical description to ELI5. There are levels to it, you and I know.

Oh absolutely there is a sliding scale on both the actual practice of science as well as the reporting. From the practice of it, I know as simple anecdote I have participated in conducting research in hard science (physics), softer hard science (biology), social science (behavioral and economic), as well as straight policy analysis with a "scientific approach" through data science. The findings from those are reported differently and have stronger or weaker words and conclusions. I think that is where the practice sliding scale comes in, is how the researcher decided to write up and report their findings and appropriately identifying their methodology and short-comings.

From the journalism side I think you end up with the problem the wide spread field of journalism has, you have to be read by your audience. That means something with a wider audience is probably going to be more on the ELI5 side which means both the reader and the journalist have to take any reported findings more lightly.

The sliding scale, I believe, comes in with the rigor something is reported. That is both in the practice and the journalistic side. More details can give a more granular understanding showing limitations but some times broad strokes are necessary to get some information out to a wider audience or more quickly.