Citation needed.
replyThe comment is removed. I was also a bit confused, so I've looked it up. So a very rough overview: Under Trudeau in Canada some regulations around gender politics and climate change, got a bit out of hand in terms of absurd requirements to state how they are helpful in the matter. Even for trivial things, they were not a hard requirements but helpful.
replyUnlike the US gov in this post, they didn't slash projects with good intentions, they just changed and clarified the requirements.
Correction welcome, I am far away from canadian politics.
Same. I welcome correction, but I need evidence first. I'm not saying there wasn't something silly going on, but the commenter made it seem like the Canadian government did the opposite of DOGE to the same degree rather than just encourage connections to broader societal impact. Such a claim needs to be sourced.
replyInteresting that an entirely true comment has been removed via flagging. I not only helped write grants during the peak of that trend, but reviewed applications where I was expected to evaluate how other applicants satisfied those priorities of the funding body.
replyBecause it’s a stupid whataboutism
replyThe comment isn't removed, it's [dead]. Turn on showdead in your profile and you can still see it.
replyWeird that you want a citation for this but the GP.
replyYou find it odd I don't need additional sources for the link that comes sourced and has been in the news for the past few years? I find it "weird" you don't need citations at all.
replyHumans are a stupid stupid stupid bunch!
reply