(going off-topic, talking about language) >So it should be blocked. Upd: many commenters here clearly misread my comment, or maybe it's my poor English. "It sh

(going off-topic, talking about language) >So it should be blocked. Upd: many commenters here clearly misread my comment, or maybe it's my poor English. "It should be blocked" means that it is in Putin's interest to block it, but better under some pretext. I am personally in a very sharp opposition to Putin's criminal syndicate. It's ambiguous, but I definitely think most English-speakers read a sentence like "So X should happen" to mean the speaker is prescribing an action they agree with. If I was writing about what I expected another group to do while avoiding implying I agreed with their logic or was trying to raise support for the action happening, I'd phrase it without the word "should" like "so it makes sense for them to do it". It might be reading too far into this, but this makes me very curious what differences there may be between languages and cultures in how they talk about "should", their expectations, and their own values vs other groups' values. I wonder if it's common for a sentence meaning "bad outcome X is likely [for others to do]" to be mistranslated into something read as "we should support making outcome X more likely, [it's really not so bad]".