INTENSITY²
Start here => Free For ALL => Topic started by: ALL LIVES MATTER on May 11, 2020, 05:10:03 PM
-
Fuck this site. Fuck you all. See you 4 november to lick youre salty tears
#MAGA
-
:'(
-
Bye.
-
:bigcry:
-
:(
-
(https://media.giphy.com/media/FgJbAcKy4wwBa/giphy.gif)
-
(https://media.giphy.com/media/FgJbAcKy4wwBa/giphy.gif)
the epitome of a loudmouth woman. The poster child of loud moouth women everywhere.
Imagine being married to it?
-
(https://media.giphy.com/media/FgJbAcKy4wwBa/giphy.gif)
the epitome of a loudmouth woman. The poster child of loud moouth women everywhere.
Imagine being married to it?
Sorry, not sorry that a woman who speaks up and speaks her mind annoys you so much.
SO seems to be pretty content and I'm past the age of caring what another man thinks.
But this is 2020 and not 1950. So you can check your misogyny at the door on how you feel I should act and what I should say.
-
(https://media.giphy.com/media/FgJbAcKy4wwBa/giphy.gif)
the epitome of a loudmouth woman. The poster child of loud moouth women everywhere.
Imagine being married to it?
Sorry, not sorry that a woman who speaks up and speaks her mind annoys you so much.
SO seems to be pretty content and I'm past the age of caring what another man thinks.
But this is 2020 and not 1950. So you can check your misogyny at the door on how you feel I should act and what I should say.
a nutcase. looks like she needs a damn good spanking
-
You're being a prick.
-
You're being a prick.
Leftists should be given a firm "No!" Every time they have a stupid idea. Don't humour it. Call everything they say "ridiculous and immoral". No compromise and no negotiation.
-
You're a great advertisement for rightist ideology. Bereft of intelligence and basic human decency.
-
You're a great advertisement for rightist ideology. Bereft of intelligence and basic human decency.
The problem is Liberals enabled Progressives, like they did everywhere, before the Progressives took over and lay down their Authoritarian ideology
Trump's re-election is going to really suck for you
-
You're a great advertisement for rightist ideology. Bereft of intelligence and basic human decency.
The problem is Liberals enabled Progressives, like they did everywhere, before the Progressives took over and lay down their Authoritarian ideology
Trump's re-election is going to really suck for you
Why don't you make a musical devoted to your glorious leader...
-
You're a great advertisement for rightist ideology. Bereft of intelligence and basic human decency.
The problem is Liberals enabled Progressives, like they did everywhere, before the Progressives took over and lay down their Authoritarian ideology
Trump's re-election is going to really suck for you
Why don't you make a musical devoted to your glorious leader...
https://youtu.be/d0wAvE5jziQ
Sorry but even the drags him to it.....
-
You're a great advertisement for rightist ideology. Bereft of intelligence and basic human decency.
The problem is Liberals enabled Progressives, like they did everywhere, before the Progressives took over and lay down their Authoritarian ideology
Trump's re-election is going to really suck for you
Drop by after the election and you can drink my salty tears. Or kiss my hairy butt. Whichever the case may be.
I strongly suspect that it will be salty tears.
-
Didn't you quit this place, Al?
-
:facepalm2: :fp:
-
Al, I don't know if you are going through a shit ton of things but man, I really hope you pull through this.
What happened to the scary Al I remember shitting myself when I first joined but a relatively smart and a pretty cool guy?
If you need to quit, just quit and try and get your back on your feet and when your ready, feel free to come back.
-
Al, I don't know if you are going through a shit ton of things but man, I really hope you pull through this.
What happened to the scary Al I remember shitting myself when I first joined but a relatively smart and a pretty cool guy?
If you need to quit, just quit and try and get your back on your feet and when your ready, feel free to come back.
I had to re-read what I wrote to remember what I actually said.
I lost it.
-
Al, I don't know if you are going through a shit ton of things but man, I really hope you pull through this.
What happened to the scary Al I remember shitting myself when I first joined but a relatively smart and a pretty cool guy?
If you need to quit, just quit and try and get your back on your feet and when your ready, feel free to come back.
I had to re-read what I wrote to remember what I actually said.
I lost it.
:plus: for being big enough to say so . :thumbup:
-
Al, I don't know if you are going through a shit ton of things but man, I really hope you pull through this.
What happened to the scary Al I remember shitting myself when I first joined but a relatively smart and a pretty cool guy?
If you need to quit, just quit and try and get your back on your feet and when your ready, feel free to come back.
I had to re-read what I wrote to remember what I actually said.
I lost it.
What SBI said. I miss my old friend Al. :hug:
-
I enjoy exchanging potshots and insults with you, that should be pretty obvious otherwise I wouldn't try to aggravate you so deliberately.
The world is a shitstorm for all of us now. I hope to see you on the other side.
-
Al, I don't know if you are going through a shit ton of things but man, I really hope you pull through this.
What happened to the scary Al I remember shitting myself when I first joined but a relatively smart and a pretty cool guy?
If you need to quit, just quit and try and get your back on your feet and when your ready, feel free to come back.
I had to re-read what I wrote to remember what I actually said.
I lost it.
What SBI said!
-
Never get tempted by crazy. Not worth it
Fruit of the poisoned tree
-
I still love you, Al. :zoinks:
-
I hope to see you on the other side.
When I see you on the other side, Imma cyber punch your head. :zoinks:
Too soon? :dunno:
-
I hope to see you on the other side.
When I see you on the other side, Imma cyber punch your head. :zoinks:
Too soon? :dunno:
:lol1:
-
I hope to see you on the other side.
When I see you on the other side, Imma cyber punch your head. :zoinks:
Too soon? :dunno:
It's never too soon.
I'm gonna scrape you off the bottom of my shoe.
BTW I mean "the other side" in a strictly physical sense, as in "on the other side of this shitstorm, on I^2". Not in any metaphysical sense where we become best buddies in imaginary heaven.
-
I hope to see you on the other side.
When I see you on the other side, Imma cyber punch your head. :zoinks:
Too soon? :dunno:
It's never too soon.
I'm gonna scrape you off the bottom of my shoe.
BTW I mean "the other side" in a strictly physical sense, as in "on the other side of this shitstorm, on I^2". Not in any metaphysical sense where we become best buddies in imaginary heaven.
Yeah, I knew what you meant. I'm e-humping your leg right now. :zoinks:
-
...before the Progressives took over and lay down their Authoritarian ideology....
Meanwhile, on Planet Earth, in a quiet little pocket known as Straya, probably our most corrupt and regressive political leader is seeking to enact some more authoritarianism. Because he can.
https://www.smh.com.au/national/new-asio-law-one-more-step-towards-a-totalitarian-state-20200513-p54smi.html#comments
The idea that it is progressives who are the source of creeping authoritarianism because some progressives want people to be nice and use someone's preferred pronoun..... is ludicrous, laughable, delusional at best. It's guzzling the right-wing kool aid like there is no tomorrow.
-
Yeah, I always found that argument baffling.
-
...before the Progressives took over and lay down their Authoritarian ideology....
Meanwhile, on Planet Earth, in a quiet little pocket known as Straya, probably our most corrupt and regressive political leader is seeking to enact some more authoritarianism. Because he can.
https://www.smh.com.au/national/new-asio-law-one-more-step-towards-a-totalitarian-state-20200513-p54smi.html#comments
The idea that it is progressives who are the source of creeping authoritarianism because some progressives want people to be nice and use someone's preferred pronoun..... is ludicrous, laughable, delusional at best. It's guzzling the right-wing kool aid like there is no tomorrow.
good grief! :zombiefuck:
But hang on, you're saying this guy isn't one of them evil Progressives?
-
No Walkie, he's a good freedom-loving individual-rights-respecting conservative. Not one of them fascist progressives. I'm sure it's fake news.
-
:apondering: actually , to be fair to Al, i think the problem is that various groups in recent years have been harnessing aggressive identity politics to the pervasive neoloberal ideologiy and thereby passing themselves off as "Socialists"or "progressives". Which is fucking absurd, but there it is. People do, increasingly, uncritically buy this repackaging , and it works to give Socialism a bad name on the one hand , and to extract it's teeth on the other hand. That Al belongs to former group (those who have thereby learned to blame Socialism for all the neoliberal failings) is given away by his frequent anti-Feminist rants. And that I belong to the latter group (teeth extracted) is sadly obvious.
I just found this really, really interesting article in the Gaurdian, c 2016, which explains (amonst other things) why neoliberalism paradoxically leads to increased Authoritarianism:
https://www.theguardian.com/books/2016/apr/15/neoliberalism-ideology-problem-george-monbiot (https://www.theguardian.com/books/2016/apr/15/neoliberalism-ideology-problem-george-monbiot)
I was only looking for a decent, authoritative , definiton of neoliberalism :LOL:
But I was gobsmacked to find out just how relevant ithat article is to your link, Mo. You'll have to read quite a long way down before you see what I mean, but it's worth it. It's really worth it.
:apondering: This was the stupidest thread , on the stupidest board to present some kind of serious argument isn't it? :LOL: Ah well. We're all going to hell in a handcart anyway. Might as well enjoy the ride.
-
I was only looking for a decent, authoritative , definiton of neoliberalism
I read this as "I was only looking for a decent, authoritarian , definiton of neoliberalism "
-
^ :lol1: good luck with finding that
-
I'd love to see it, though. :laugh:
-
That's an excellent article Walkie, I've seen it before. More than once. The definitive article on neoliberalism. Chomsky, sadly, is older than dirt, but Varoufakis and Monbiot still carry on the fight. Monbiot has written a number of brilliant articles on this and related subjects.
This is good, particularly the second half where Chomsky describes neoliberalism:
https://youtu.be/tBzSLu3MZ6I
We already spoke about this elsewhere, how the destruction of empathy, compassion, and even the very idea of society, is a necessary part of diminishing the role of democratically elected governments and replacing that with unaccountable corporate tyranny. Meanwhile you've got millions of grown men terrified of a few women with penises and shouty students.
-
Just to add to the points you made already Walkie, the "progressive" parties in the developed world have already hitched their wagons to unrestrained neoliberalism, and identity politics is the only thing that differentiates them to any great extent from the so-called conservative parties. Having long since abandoned the role of c championing the working classes.
I'm using a bit of hyperbole. But you get the idea hopefully.
-
^ I do, ofc. very well put. And the Chomsky vid is great. I wouldn't think it was possible to condense so much relevant history into a 7 minute vid. If there were only some way to get everyone to watch it. :plus:
-
P.S. here's something you haven't seen before (probably). A remarkably good Marxist-feminist tract:
https://www.socialistparty.org.uk/books_pamphlets/Women_and_the_struggle_for_socialism
(https://www.socialistparty.org.uk/books_pamphlets/Women_and_the_struggle_for_socialism)
It's a bit heavy on sweeping generalistions, but not so bad as the other side; and the analysis is great; knocks Al's arguments into a cocked hat, not that he'd notice.
Coincidentally, the last local SP branch meeting was about identity politics, and i hesitated to log in, being depressed enough already. But then i was happy to learn that we were all of one mind in feeling that identity politics are effectively divisive; and that you can't combat prejudice by wagging your finger at a working class bloke, you'll only antagonise him. Which really ought t to be obvious, eh? Nonetheless, some other branches had hitched their wagon to Feminism in recent election campaigns, and were predictably hammerered.
Ofc, people (not unreasonably) expect that socialists will support all the variouis equal rights movements. And they do. So these branches thought they were responding (entirely honestly) to popular demand, and would thereby increase their vote (whereas they actually halved it, compared to previous elections) . But the Marxist approach is, basically, to first unite people behind a common cause . And if 99% of the world's populatuiion is exploited and oppressed by the other 1% , that really shouldn't be too difficult should it? All the rest of it pretty much follows naturally. But you really can't put the cart before the horse. :LOL:
None of that is hard to understand, is it? but it can't be reduced to a snappy slogan.
:apondering: Chomsky forgot to add ""snappy slogans"to his list of modern weapons of mass destruction, didn't he? (emo)
-
Walkie, that article is extremely long. It's up there in word count with some of Al's post, but stronger on coherence. I will get back to it.
I have no issue with identity politics, all politics is identity politics at some level. It's when you start telling the white guy who is worried about his job or working long hours for peanuts and worrying about paying the rent and feeding the kids that the problem is that he is too privileged... that's when you lose people. Identity politics can continue to be important but when it becomes the primary element of leftist politics, say goodbye to mainstream relevance.
-
In Australia we don't have a centre right and a centre left party any more. We have two flavours of conservative. As does the US. Obviously your pretend working class party can't run on their true platform, which is diminishing the role of government in favour of a minimally regulated and undemocratic private sector, but not quite as bad as the other guys. The advent of the career politician in leftist politics is problematic, people who make choices and decisions based on furthering their lucrative careers rather than the interests of those who voted for them.
-
^Do you have any greens in Australia? :-\
-
^Do you have any greens in Australia? :-\
Yes. 1 seat out of 150 or so in the lower house. 9/76 in the upper house.
I vote for them every election, we have preferential voting so it's not a wasted vote.
-
We have a green party as well. Still small but seem to be gaining in numbers each year. I don't see them ever becoming a majority party here but they offer good balance to opposing parties.
-
^Do you have any greens in Australia? :-\
Reading this out-of-context in "recent posts"", I half-expected a response like "Nah, mate, we only eat mealy grubs here" :LOL:
ofc, we have them in britain too, where folk are increasingly concerned about envirpnmental issues. Interesting development. I rather doubt that Politics is gonna save the Earth, but maybe the Earth can resue politics? I mean , it should be flaming obvious that Capitalism and Environment are two diametrically opposed forces and that the world is no longer big enough for both. Both the Greens and and the Left (what's left of it) are excruciatingly slow catching on, but the Greens have certainly edged somewhat left of the mainstream, and the Left is taking on more and more Green issues. A very wishy-washy response to, probably, the biggest crisis the human race has ever faced, but i find a teeny bit of hope in it.
ooh! We might be goong to hell in a green handcart. :green: That would make a change.
-
:laugh:
We've got a bunch of them here and they're all mental. Out of their tiny little minds.
-
I vote for the Greens here too.
-
:laugh:
We've got a bunch of them here and they're all mental. Out of their tiny little minds.
It's not that the green agenda is mental, it just seems like (sometimes) people with nutty agendas that lack any sort of relevance to most of us will gravitate towards the greens in search of a platform.
The same thing happened with the Nuclear Disarmament Party in Australia. It was started by the lead singer of a rock band back in the 80s, but as soon as they started getting a few votes and a bit of publicity.... every weird corner of the political spectrum gravitated towards them. The founder of the party actually ended up quitting his own party as they were ignoring the agenda that it was created for.
-
:laugh:
We've got a bunch of them here and they're all mental. Out of their tiny little minds.
It's not that the green agenda is mental, it just seems like (sometimes) people with nutty agendas that lack any sort of relevance to most of us will gravitate towards the greens in search of a platform.
The same thing happened with the Nuclear Disarmament Party in Australia. It was started by the lead singer of a rock band back in the 80s, but as soon as they started getting a few votes and a bit of publicity.... every weird corner of the political spectrum gravitated towards them. The founder of the party actually ended up quitting his own party as they were ignoring the agenda that it was created for.
Our greens are rarely in contact with reality, which is why they're a tiny minority, attracting only like-minded nutters.
-
I was only looking for a decent, authoritative , definiton of neoliberalism :LOL:
I saw a good definition just now:
Neoliberalism is a project to restore power to the upper echelons of society.
If you think about all the elements of neoliberalism, that is really what it is all about. Taking assets and services out of public hands and into the hands of private capital. Dismantle the ability of labour to organize and collectively bargain. Yada yada yada. Propaganda, oppression dressed up as freedom and individual rights, creating rifts in society so that we are too busy fighting each other to recognize the common enemy.
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z7MFJ4EFezQ
This is Monbiot, absolutely brilliantly explained and described as always.
-
Neoliberalism is a project to restore power to the upper echelons of society.
:hide:
Restore? They lost it at some point?
-
Neoliberalism is a project to restore power to the upper echelons of society.
:hide:
Restore? They lost it at some point?
They never fully lost it, of course.
But for a while there the wealthy were actually paying taxes, paying people a living wage, providing benefits, negotiating with the labour movement (unions) for mutual benefit, providing jobs in the countries in which they did business and not indulging in a "race to the bottom" that involved sending manufacturing and service jobs offshore wherever feasible, stuff like that.
Neoliberalism has been the process of rolling all of that back.
(https://static1.squarespace.com/static/567b7000dc5cb40b6b4ba08b/t/5aed5e4c0e2e72245d6945b9/1525505624096/politicomments.com+%283%29.jpg?format=1500w)
(https://i.imgflip.com/wj62b.jpg)
I wonder how Al would feel about his "goodbye and fuck you guys thread" being turned into a soapbox for progressives?
-
The trickle down idea always felt weird to me.
-
Why do you still allow racists and mysoginists to post their bile on this board? They're only here to cause trouble. They don't add any value to this place.
I was hoping things had changed.
-
So much of the internet is filtered into special interest echo chambers already, why go out of the way to make another one?
-
Racism and sexism aren't point of views. They're attacks. Someone has convinced you that this hate speech is free speech. It's not. Words and actions have consequences when you're an adult.
-
Someone has convinced me? Is it so hard to believe I might come to a conclusion on my own? You can toss the condescending crap, thanks.
Of course words and actions have consequences, but I choose not to participate in the consequence of using technology to prevent myself hearing the words I don't like.
-
How can somewhere be inclusive if attacks on a minority are allowed? I guess if it doesn't directly effect you then you don't care.
Someone has convinced me? Is it so hard to believe I might come to a conclusion on my own? You can toss the condescending crap, thanks.
Of course words and actions have consequences, but I choose not to participate in the consequence of using technology to prevent myself hearing the words I don't like.
-
I guess this exchange reinforces my point.
-
To be honest I don't understand the modern idea that the only way to be inclusive is to make sure that minorities never hear attacks against them. There are venues where a psychologically protected environment is critical to personal comfort, growth and development. This site isn't one of them. I believe it is very important in life to be exposed both to areas where you are protected, and areas where you are not.
It's not a binary either, if course. There is a kind of inclusivity to be had as well in being able to speak while knowing that you may face argument or derision, but you won't be cast out for your views.
Note that I am deliberately not naming which minorities I am part of and which ones I'm not, because I want my words to stand on their own merit and not because I am part of a protected class.
-
I guess this exchange reinforces my point.
In the original exchange here, dude shows up spewing hatred. People openly argue and scorn him. He eventually finds no receptive response. He's verbally shut diwn in great enough numbers that he eventually gives up and leaves. By that point, people who knew him in better times are genuinely concerned about his wellbeing.
Is that not a near-ideal response to racism and misogyny? But you are offended that you even had to see it happen?
-
I guess this exchange reinforces my point.
In the original exchange here, dude shows up spewing hatred. People openly argue and scorn him. He eventually finds no receptive response. He's verbally shut diwn in great enough numbers that he eventually gives up and leaves. By that point, people who knew him in better times are genuinely concerned about his wellbeing.
Is that not a near-ideal response to racism and misogyny? But you are offended that you even had to see it happen?
Well said and seconded! :plus:
-
The fun part of I^2 Is exchanging banter with idiots I don't agree with. Obviously everyone who disagrees with me is an idiot and I am under no obligation to pretend otherwise.
There are safe spaces for progressive lefties like me and there are safe spaces for brain dead regressives who guzzle the right wing kool aid. Already. This isn't one of those places.
-
Someone has convinced me? Is it so hard to believe I might come to a conclusion on my own? You can toss the condescending crap, thanks.
Go! Pyraxis! :good: :flame:
but does that make him think twice? nope, has to gallop straight back on his clodhopping milk-white charger with this one:
How can somewhere be inclusive if attacks on a minority are allowed? I guess if it doesn't directly effect you then you don't care.
Oooh, ooh ooh! look Miss! direct personal attack against a member of a minority ! Shall we ban FAD ? :apondering: Or shall we let him off, cos he's a spazz like us? and cos nobody told him (presumably) what dangerous animals those milk white chargers are.
FFS, Four Ace Deal , I was itching to post "'Welcome back". But then I read your posts :( and I saw all that karma you gave out to people for being ""righteous"' :zombiefuck:". And, sorry, just can't feel welcoming right now, not in the face of all that.
Please read Pyraxis'following posts. She makes some excellent points , especially this :
In the original exchange here, dude shows up spewing hatred. People openly argue and scorn him. He eventually finds no receptive response. He's verbally shut diwn in great enough numbers that he eventually gives up and leaves. By that point, people who knew him in better times are genuinely concerned about his wellbeing.
Is that not a near-ideal response to racism and misogyny? But you are offended that you even had to see it happen?
I totally agree, Pyraxis. :plus:
And finally, as regards that question of free speech:
Goebbels was in favor of free speech for views he liked. So was Stalin. If you’re really in favor of free speech, then you’re in favor of freedom of speech for precisely the views you despise. Otherwise, you’re not in favor of free speech.
― Noam Chomsky
-
FAD, I tend to agree with you a lot.
I^2 is not the place to come looking for people who agree with you.
I^2 is a good place to come if you want to learn to take on those who disagree with you.
If your ideas lack merit, you can always retreat to insults and bluster and word salad. That is a familiar tactic around here.
-
OMG FOURACEDEAL IS BACK!! :GA:
-
I saw all that karma you gave out to people for being ""righteous"' :zombiefuck:".
I just assumed it was intended like a Bill/Tedd surfer style slang meaning excellent, not some holy morality assessment. :lol1:
-
How do you people find the time to lurk each other's karma?!
-
How do you people find the time to lurk each other's karma?!
Good question! Too much time on their hands or are they just loving to stir shit!? Inquiring minds want to know! :laugh:
-
How do you people find the time to lurk each other's karma?!
you just click the karma stats link on the forum index . Takes no time at all, in fact. :laugh: and then you instantly find out if any old members are back (because you'll almost always see a bunch of "wecome back" karma for the member in question) or anything really dramatic has happened. And if you don't have time to read all the posts , it;'s an ultra- lazy way of finding most of the good ones. Certainly wouldn't call it "lurking". just quickly taking the forum pulse before getting up close. Also, sometimes it's actually heartwarming :)
I saw all that karma you gave out to people for being ""righteous"' :zombiefuck:".
I just assumed it was intended like a Bill/Tedd surfer style slang meaning excellent, not some holy morality assessment. :lol1:
I wish *sigh* , but that's not FAD;'s style; and if you actually look at the posts in question ....well, take Phoenix for an example: she went down as ""righteous", just for posting ":( " , which i'm pretty sure simply meant that that she was saddened by the whole thing . But it was positioned in such a way that you could take it as yet another ironic response to "I quit" if you really wanted to.
Welll, i;m perhaps getting over-analytical. :LOL: It's just that the word "righteous"is pretty much guaranteed to get up my nose, especially when used by the self-righteous, so i was all over that one like an angry rash when i saw it. :-[
-
Why do you still allow racists and mysoginists to post their bile on this board? They're only here to cause trouble. They don't add any value to this place.
I was hoping things had changed.
The board is mostly unmoderated, for better or worse, and has been since its inception 14 years ago. We do stop anything illegal, though.
What would you have us do instead?
And welcome back, btw.
-
And thanks for producing an excellent answer to FAD's comments, Py. +
-
How do you people find the time to lurk each other's karma?!
Like Walkie said, there's a karma stat link at the bottom of the index page. I looked at it because my karma had changed. :orly:
-
that's not FAD;'s style;
I really don't really know how it was intended, but when not used as slang it has religious connotations to me, and that doesn't seem like his style either. :lol1:
-
I guess I get frustrated the online world because the face to face punching of nazis was all the rage when I was younger. I have no time for them, or their enablers.
Anyway, what's up you old bastards (and gophers)?
-
How do you people find the time to lurk each other's karma?!
Like Walkie said, there's a karma stat link at the bottom of the index page. I looked at it because my karma had changed. :orly:
yep. forgot to mention that advantage to using the idex page link: it'actually the simplest and quickest way of checking who's changed your own karma. and you get all that other info as a bonus. It beats me why anybody ever does it the other way?
I sometines get the impression that some members think that karma is all about mudslinging? Far from it . Negs are highly unusual these days. It's almost all about sympathising, congratulating , welcoming etc. And sometimes people who are "at each others throats "in discussion can be found plussing each other in the karma, Thus karma also helps to keep these things in perspective.
-
I guess I get frustrated the online world because the face to face punching of nazis was all the rage when I was younger. I have no time for them, or their enablers.
Oh! beating up on "Nazis"is still all the rage here in the UK, but it's become something of sick joke, inasmuch as it tends to be led by comfortably -off middle class twits who have no idea what real life is like for poorer folk. And the definition of "nazi"has been extended and extended to include anyone who's poor, white and sick of being shat upon...or even (since much of the hostility moved online) poor , black and sick of being shat upon (given that usually can't tell folks'ethnicity just from their opinions, but that doesn't stop people from making facile assumptions) . Indeed , you only have to be articulate to be dismissed as "'overprivileged". Or in favour of Brexit (which seems to cover most of the working class and underclass, irrspective of ethnicity),
The underlying logic seems to be that if somebody complains about the housing crisis etc , or if they voted Brexit, then it follows that they must have swallowed all that Right Wing propaganda that tries to make scapegoats out of immigrants (and/or or the sick, the disabled, the unemployed etc.) Of course they haven't. Most working class people are not so brain dead that they can't think for themselves and identify the genuinely overprivileged as the main source of their problems. Or come up with any number of alternative socio-political explanations But if a few are daft enough to buy the right-wing propaganda, it's hard to blame them them for that, and actually worse-than-pointless to blame them, That only antagonises them further, to the benefit of the usual divide-and-rule scenario. If there's a way of breaking out of that (essentially Nazi) scenario, that surely isn't it.
Well, that's my view anyway. and I present it here just to make the point that there far too many different ways of defining the Nazis and -especially- the 'Nazi enablers"; and depending on which way you cut it, you can justifiably point that finger at just about anyone.I remain covinced that the pointing of fingers is the thing to be avoided. If the shat-upon (and sympathisers) could only join forces, then we would all cease to be minorities wouldn;t we? and become a force to be reckoned with. Instead, we're persuaded to join in with debating like a bunch of Victorian do-gooders about which of us really deserves to be heard, and which of us really deserves to have enough money to survive on, whilst all our observations are turned into straw men and weaponised against us.
(white, working class, disabled , dirt-poor, socialist female speaking here. Often mistaken for a member of the patronising classes, purely on account of being white and articulate. Really! :LOL:)
Anyway, what's up you old bastards (and gophers)?
ummmm...more of the same, evidently
and, welcome back! :dance: (I now feel able to say that sincerely :))
-
Anyway, what's up you old bastards (and gophers)?
The big plan today is a shower. :zoinks:
-
Did I know FAD? Somebody tell me please because I never remember these things and the name doesn't seem familiar but people change their names all the time. :facepalm2:
-
I guess I get frustrated the online world because the face to face punching of nazis was all the rage when I was younger. I have no time for them, or their enablers.
Oh! beating up on "Nazis"is still all the rage here in the UK, but it's become something of sick joke, inasmuch as it tends to be led by comfortably -off middle class twits who have no idea what real life is like for poorer folk. And the definition of "nazi"has been extended and extended to include anyone who's poor, white and sick of being shat upon...or even (since much of the hostility moved online) poor , black and sick of being shat upon (given that usually can't tell folks'ethnicity just from their opinions, but that doesn't stop people from making facile assumptions) . Indeed , you only have to be articulate to be dismissed as "'overprivileged". Or in favour of Brexit (which seems to cover most of the working class and underclass, irrspective of ethnicity),
The underlying logic seems to be that if somebody complains about the housing crisis etc , or if they voted Brexit, then it follows that they must have swallowed all that Right Wing propaganda that tries to make scapegoats out of immigrants (and/or or the sick, the disabled, the unemployed etc.) Of course they haven't. Most working class people are not so brain dead that they can't think for themselves and identify the genuinely overprivileged as the main source of their problems. Or come up with any number of alternative socio-political explanations But if a few are daft enough to buy the right-wing propaganda, it's hard to blame them them for that, and actually worse-than-pointless to blame them, That only antagonises them further, to the benefit of the usual divide-and-rule scenario. If there's a way of breaking out of that (essentially Nazi) scenario, that surely isn't it.
Well, that's my view anyway. and I present it here just to make the point that there far too many different ways of defining the Nazis and -especially- the 'Nazi enablers"; and depending on which way you cut it, you can justifiably point that finger at just about anyone.I remain covinced that the pointing of fingers is the thing to be avoided. If the shat-upon (and sympathisers) could only join forces, then we would all cease to be minorities wouldn;t we? and become a force to be reckoned with. Instead, we're persuaded to join in with debating like a bunch of Victorian do-gooders about which of us really deserves to be heard, and which of us really deserves to have enough money to survive on, whilst all our observations are turned into straw men and weaponised against us.
(white, working class, disabled , dirt-poor, socialist female speaking here. Often mistaken for a member of the patronising classes, purely on account of being white and articulate. Really! :LOL:)
Anyway, what's up you old bastards (and gophers)?
ummmm...more of the same, evidently
and, welcome back! :dance: (I now feel able to say that sincerely :))
Walkie, I think you have some issues with people other than myself and I'm glad to have given you the opportumity to vent but if that is all about me then I think there is a lot of projection involved.
-
I guess this exchange reinforces my point.
In the original exchange here, dude shows up spewing hatred. People openly argue and scorn him. He eventually finds no receptive response. He's verbally shut diwn in great enough numbers that he eventually gives up and leaves. By that point, people who knew him in better times are genuinely concerned about his wellbeing.
Is that not a near-ideal response to racism and misogyny? But you are offended that you even had to see it happen?
I apologies for rattling your cage Pyraxis. It wasn't my intention. Accept a heartfelt sorry from the Aces. I stopped reading when the thread early as my give-a-toss-ometer had reached zero so missed the pushback.
My bad. Those assholes make me ashamed to be part of the same species and sometimes I "tilt".
Can we start again?
-
https://independentaustralia.net/politics/politics-display/covid-19-highlights-failures-of-neoliberalism-and-privatisation,13908#disqus_thread
This article about the failures of neoliberalism is excellent and comes with my highest recommendation.
Welcome back FAD.
-
Walkie, I think you have some issues with people other than myself and I'm glad to have given you the opportumity to vent but if that is all about me then I think there is a lot of projection involved.
umm, no, it wasn't directed at you, Thought I'd made it pretty clear that you were no longer getting up my nose and was ready to sincerely welcome you back ? no? I find that term "nazi-enablers " (which you used. And that's precisely how far you come it, and no further, for all I can tell) to be almost universally inflammatory. But I'm quite sure that's not your intent, sooooo was trying to explain why yer average working class Brit would find it inflammatory when aimed at them (You live here , so you know how often that occurs, presumably. And I do believe it's a real problem ) .
Obviouslyy, Al is not a working class Brit, so it's not about Al either Nor is it about me, personally. I was just explaining it it from a perspective i can claim to be familiar with. ( I mean, I have working class credentials, so i think that lends me a bit of authority on that question, which I might otherwise lack)
I have no idea where you, yourself, fit (or- being a spazz- fail to fit :laugh:)on the social scale. but reckon the chances are that you are not especially over[rivileged, if at all, so would not try and get into a class war with you (especially not considering that some of my best friends have been middle class. :apondering: the usage of past tense is not meant to imply an acrimonious split up, btw. Merely pedantically acknowleging that most of them are now deceased)
Sorry that you took it personally. Maybe i should have posted that ""welcome back "bit at the top of my post instead of at the bottom?
-
Al strikes me as a typical working class Aussie in many ways though.
He has clearly bought into various nonsensical narratives about progressives and leftists and feminists. He is typical of the shift that has occurred, where large segments of the working class votes against their own interests, throwing their support and loyalty behind the forces of conservatism and neoliberalism - the precise things that are literally screwing them over.
Meanwhile it is the "woke" middle class and groups fighting for the rights of minorities that is taking leftist politics in new directions, away from being the champions of the working class. To the extent that much of the working class sees them as the enemy.
-
https://independentaustralia.net/politics/politics-display/covid-19-highlights-failures-of-neoliberalism-and-privatisation,13908#disqus_thread
This article about the failures of neoliberalism is excellent and comes with my highest recommendation.
Welcome back FAD.
haven't read it yet, but love the cartoon already:
:LMAO:
(https://independentaustralia.net/_lib/slir/w800/i/article/img/article-13908-hero.jpg)
-
Al strikes me as a typical working class Aussie in many ways though.
Umm yeah. I guess.
He has clearly bought into various nonsensical narratives about progressives and leftists and feminists. He is typical of the shift that has occurred, where large segments of the working class votes against their own interests, throwing their support and loyalty behind the forces of conservatism and neoliberalism - the precise things that are literally screwing them over.
but how typical is that really? dunno about Oz, but they don't need to bring anything like a majority of Brits over to the dark side. Taking over the Labour Party, emasculating the Trade Unions, and generally making folk feel too depressed and disempowered to bother to vote have had a big impact too.
Besides, you forget that most of the "progresives, lefists and feminists" are neoliberals in sheeps cclothing. Like Monbriot said, that ideology is so pervasive, it doesn't need a name anymore. It passes itself off as "just the way it is". Speaking from my own experience, a lot of working class Brits are very much aware that they're being had with all that , but they don't know where to turn.
The nearest thing we've had, over here, to a credible non-neoliberal platform is Corbyn's Labour Party. And look what happened to that.
Meanwhile it is the "woke" middle class and groups fighting for the rights of minorities that is taking leftist politics in new directions, away from being the champions of the working class. To the extent that much of the working class sees them as the enemy.
Count me in there. They are the enemy. :LOL: if you're gonna declare that the North faceof Everest is a "level playing field" just so long as you can get the requisite proportiion of "minorities"" playing at the top end , then you are dangerously deluded (not meaning you, Mo . I mean "one").
I mean, neoliberalism, in all its forms, is the enemy , never mind how nice a face it wears, and nevermind how much its heart bleeds for injustice. Damn! It's really hard to find anyone who isn;t undermining their stated goals, isn't it? :( Seems we're all as dumb as each other.
-
I'm both kinds of leftist. The type that believes in class struggle, and also the woke middle class type.
The left has lost the economic struggle (completely and utterly, the neoliberals have slaughtered the left and ploughed salt into the soil) and won the cultural struggle (to a large extent anyway).
Are you familiar with Thought Slime on YouTube? He did one episode "are liberals the enemy?" which expands on the theme of your last post.
-
I apologies for rattling your cage Pyraxis. It wasn't my intention. Accept a heartfelt sorry from the Aces. I stopped reading when the thread early as my give-a-toss-ometer had reached zero so missed the pushback.
My bad. Those assholes make me ashamed to be part of the same species and sometimes I "tilt".
Can we start again?
Absolutely, I'm not holding any ill will. I kind of relished the opportunity for a new bit of heated discussion. So thanks for the provocation. :2thumbsup:
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VEMOpOdfAxo
@Walkie, your last post reminded me strongly of this.
-
Absolutely, I'm not holding any ill will. I kind of relished the opportunity for a new bit of heated discussion. So thanks for the provocation. :2thumbsup:
This is the best thing about I^2, learning to disagree with passion and insults but not taking it personally when someone doesn't hold the same views as you do.
-
Anyway, what's up you old bastards (and gophers)?
Jack has been overly fixated on the organization of inside things, closets, cabinets, cupboards, refrigerators; if it has a door it seems I can't open it without adjusting something while in there, even though, and especially if, it's been recently organized. Have been working regular hours so it's not as if there's an abnormal amount of free time, but nervous energy needs an outlet so cleaning and organizing seems to be it. Just hoping the adjusting thing doesn't turn into some weird problem before things settle down. So that's what's up. Jack is being weirder than usual.
-
I'm bored silly but coping.
-
Al strikes me as a typical working class Aussie in many ways though...
There's an old joke that goes something like...
"Not every man you meet in Australia will be a drunk, racist wife-beater. Some will be British."
But seriously, no I don't think he is typical and it's not just Ozzies that can play court jester to the American 8Chan clowns.
-
I certainly hope Al isn't an average working class Aussie.
-
I'm both kinds of leftist. The type that believes in class struggle, and also the woke middle class type.
The left has lost the economic struggle (completely and utterly, the neoliberals have slaughtered the left and ploughed salt into the soil) and won the cultural struggle (to a large extent anyway).
Damn! you added a caveat whilst i was marshalling my arguments. Unfair :lol1: Were you reading my mind, perchance?
Ah well, i'm still gonna observe that ""leftist" cultural arguments dominate politics to about the same degree that the Roman Catholic Church did, a few centuries centuries back....and on more-or-less the same portions of the globe, oddly enough. No reason for complacency, IMO.
I should l also like to grumble that brotherly "love "" on that dodgy basis is about as genuine, and about as effective as the old Catholic notions of Christian love. No wonder Al finds it odious. 'That's not to say that all of these people are insincere, mind, just that you can't effectively love what you're not connecting with. Love just doesn't work that way. You just end up up falling in love with your own half-assed ideas about people, not the people themselves. If you've ever been the target of an unrequited obsession, then you'll know just how painful that be, on a personal level. Multiply by several billion.
Are you familiar with Thought Slime on YouTube? He did one episode "are liberals the enemy?" which expands on the theme of your last post.]Are you familiar with Thought Slime on YouTube? He did one episode "are liberals the enemy?" which expands on the theme of your last post.
I wasn't, but followed your link and watched it right through. Agreed with him right through as well :2thumbsup:
-
Thought Slime is excellent. A great introduction to genuine Leftism. Another really good youtube dude is Philosophy Tube.
I found both while I was going through a phase of really despising Jordan Peterson. Since then it has settled down to a general sense of loathing, and amazement at his success. Both have done excellent, and scathing, and funny, reviews of Mr Peterson.
It's a sad reflection on modern thought among the masses that these guys have only a tiny fraction of the following of various rightist dimwits.
-
So it looks like the herd immunity approach in Sweden didn't work out so well:
https://www.sfgate.com/science/article/Sweden-herd-immunity-experiment-backfires-covid-15289437.php?utm_campaign=CMS%20Sharing%20Tools%20(Desktop)&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_medium=referral&fbclid=IwAR2SIuMa_zpqegeip3e23rjA0x45tfVlDfQpwOFCZS7VluI1UTU9TAvCA5o
-
It is too early to say how well Sweden's strategy went, countries that went into full lockdown have to open up their economies eventually, so let's see how that goes.
I can't see herd immunity working, you can get reiinfected with the virus and any immunity will be short term. Like a year or 2. So you could reach herd immunity at huge cost and then 2 years later, bang, you're back to square 1.
Brazil is going to have some awful stats over coming months. Other countries will also be hit very hard.
-
:pwned:
I certainly hope Al isn't an average working class Aussie.
Ah, yeah, he's not. I would be swimming to NZ if everyone was that opiniated and anal retentive.
I meant in terms of how he understands the issues and politics and economics etc. His lack of insight and knowledge makes him vulnerable to a slew of right wing propaganda.
-
It is too early to say how well Sweden's strategy went, countries that went into full lockdown have to open up their economies eventually, so let's see how that goes.
I can't see herd immunity working, you can get reiinfected with the virus and any immunity will be short term. Like a year or 2. So you could reach herd immunity at huge cost and then 2 years later, bang, you're back to square 1.
Brazil is going to have some awful stats over coming months. Other countries will also be hit very hard.
The virus also keeps mutating. I can't remember which article I read (although it was from a credible source) but it has mutated in a way that makes it more contagious than it was previously.
Ontario (Canada) has started Phase 1 of a three step plan to re-open the economy. They opened up parks so people could get outside but stressed social distancing. Apparently the 10k people in Trinity Bellwoods Park in Toronto didn't get the memo. People were packed in there. So now we have a spike from Mothers Day and since last weekend was a holiday weekend, we'll have another spike in about a week. People are exhausted and they're choosing not to follow the guidelines now. We'll be fucked before the fall hits.
-
We need a good vaccine. Not like the flu vaccine which is about 40% effective in a good year. Or we need a very effective treatment. The alternatives don't bear thinking about. None of us can afford further lockdowns either.
-
The virus also keeps mutating. I can't remember which article I read (although it was from a credible source) but it has mutated in a way that makes it more contagious than it was previously.
Ontario (Canada) has started Phase 1 of a three step plan to re-open the economy. They opened up parks so people could get outside but stressed social distancing. Apparently the 10k people in Trinity Bellwoods Park in Toronto didn't get the memo. People were packed in there. So now we have a spike from Mothers Day and since last weekend was a holiday weekend, we'll have another spike in about a week. People are exhausted and they're choosing not to follow the guidelines now. We'll be fucked before the fall hits.
It was found to be more contagious than first thought, but was that a mutation or a change in data quality? It's not like China was handing out real numbers, so statistics changed as more reliable data was added to the mix.
-
The virus also keeps mutating. I can't remember which article I read (although it was from a credible source) but it has mutated in a way that makes it more contagious than it was previously.
Ontario (Canada) has started Phase 1 of a three step plan to re-open the economy. They opened up parks so people could get outside but stressed social distancing. Apparently the 10k people in Trinity Bellwoods Park in Toronto didn't get the memo. People were packed in there. So now we have a spike from Mothers Day and since last weekend was a holiday weekend, we'll have another spike in about a week. People are exhausted and they're choosing not to follow the guidelines now. We'll be fucked before the fall hits.
It was found to be more contagious than first thought, but was that a mutation or a change in data quality? It's not like China was handing out real numbers, so statistics changed as more reliable data was added to the mix.
That's also very true.
We need a good vaccine. Not like the flu vaccine which is about 40% effective in a good year. Or we need a very effective treatment. The alternatives don't bear thinking about. None of us can afford further lockdowns either.
We do. I can't do anything outside of my property that would even come close to resembling my old life until we have one that works and is well circulated.
-
And the second wave is starting and growing in the US.
-
So it looks like the herd immunity approach in Sweden didn't work out so well:
https://www.sfgate.com/science/article/Sweden-herd-immunity-experiment-backfires-covid-15289437.php?utm_campaign=CMS%20Sharing%20Tools%20(Desktop)&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_medium=referral&fbclid=IwAR2SIuMa_zpqegeip3e23rjA0x45tfVlDfQpwOFCZS7VluI1UTU9TAvCA5o
Their strategy wasn't herd immunity as such but to do what most other countries did but without enforcing lockdown.
-
The virus also keeps mutating. I can't remember which article I read (although it was from a credible source) but it has mutated in a way that makes it more contagious than it was previously.
All viruses mutate. This one has done it a lot - it's how scientists are able to trace its origins.
-
We need a good vaccine. Not like the flu vaccine which is about 40% effective in a good year. Or we need a very effective treatment. The alternatives don't bear thinking about. None of us can afford further lockdowns either.
Yup. Fingers crossed.
With the dozens of vaccine trials underway, hopefully some will work well enough.
-
The virus also keeps mutating. I can't remember which article I read (although it was from a credible source) but it has mutated in a way that makes it more contagious than it was previously.
All viruses mutate. This one has done it a lot - it's how scientists are able to trace its origins.
Mutating so (in the same way that many other biohazards do) has allowed the scientists to identify "strains" within this strain, based upon how each infection affects the host or hostZZ.
Lots of study! Follow and document each case. Lots and lots of data to sift through!
Makes me think of the old Knack song, "My, My, My ... M-m-m-MY Corona!!"
-
So it looks like the herd immunity approach in Sweden didn't work out so well:
https://www.sfgate.com/science/article/Sweden-herd-immunity-experiment-backfires-covid-15289437.php?utm_campaign=CMS%20Sharing%20Tools%20(Desktop)&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_medium=referral&fbclid=IwAR2SIuMa_zpqegeip3e23rjA0x45tfVlDfQpwOFCZS7VluI1UTU9TAvCA5o
Their strategy wasn't herd immunity as such but to do what most other countries did but without enforcing lockdown.
... and your country seems to have a large percentage of cooperative populace.
Kind of a nice thing to see. Reminds me of traveling in Canada and being amazed at how clean the trains were and feeling shame for my own county and how so many mistreat treasures like state funded transportation.
I (enjoy?) hate to see these redneck assholes who get on national television here in the states, wearing a wife-beater and carrying a long gun on a sling, shouting shit like, "I live in a FREE country and you can't tell ME I have to wear a mask!"
Too many of those, here. We HAD to close some just because of assholes like those guys.
Someone should remind these guys that 1776 already happened.
-
The virus also keeps mutating. I can't remember which article I read (although it was from a credible source) but it has mutated in a way that makes it more contagious than it was previously.
All viruses mutate. This one has done it a lot - it's how scientists are able to trace its origins.
No they don't. Viruses that are DNA encoded hardly change at all. But viruses that are RNA encoded do
-
The virus also keeps mutating. I can't remember which article I read (although it was from a credible source) but it has mutated in a way that makes it more contagious than it was previously.
All viruses mutate. This one has done it a lot - it's how scientists are able to trace its origins.
No they don't. Viruses that are DNA encoded hardly change at all. But viruses that are RNA encoded do
Coronaviruses are RNA viruses, HPV is a DNA virus.
DNA is more stable, which is why humans don't mutate that much. Apart from superheroes, obviously. And mutant supervillains.
-
So it looks like the herd immunity approach in Sweden didn't work out so well:
https://www.sfgate.com/science/article/Sweden-herd-immunity-experiment-backfires-covid-15289437.php?utm_campaign=CMS%20Sharing%20Tools%20(Desktop)&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_medium=referral&fbclid=IwAR2SIuMa_zpqegeip3e23rjA0x45tfVlDfQpwOFCZS7VluI1UTU9TAvCA5o
Their strategy wasn't herd immunity as such but to do what most other countries did but without enforcing lockdown.
... and your country seems to have a large percentage of cooperative populace.
Kind of a nice thing to see. Reminds me of traveling in Canada and being amazed at how clean the trains were and feeling shame for my own county and how so many mistreat treasures like state funded transportation.
I (enjoy?) hate to see these redneck assholes who get on national television here in the states, wearing a wife-beater and carrying a long gun on a sling, shouting shit like, "I live in a FREE country and you can't tell ME I have to wear a mask!"
Too many of those, here. We HAD to close some just because of assholes like those guys.
Someone should remind these guys that 1776 already happened.
The Swedish are a cooperative bunch so I can see why they reasoned the way they did. But they failed utterly on protecting the elderly, and they never realised not everyone living here as that cooperative mindset.
As a result, our neighbouring countries are slowly opening up and resuming business while we are in the same limbo as the last several months. And guess what? Swedes are banned from entering Finland, Norway, and Denmark when they open their borders.
-
The virus also keeps mutating. I can't remember which article I read (although it was from a credible source) but it has mutated in a way that makes it more contagious than it was previously.
All viruses mutate. This one has done it a lot - it's how scientists are able to trace its origins.
No they don't. Viruses that are DNA encoded hardly change at all. But viruses that are RNA encoded do
Yes and no. DNA viruses mutate far less often since they have proofreading capabilities. RNA viruses don't have those, afaik, and so RNA virus mutation rates are a lot faster. But both kinds do mutate.
-
So it looks like the herd immunity approach in Sweden didn't work out so well:
https://www.sfgate.com/science/article/Sweden-herd-immunity-experiment-backfires-covid-15289437.php?utm_campaign=CMS%20Sharing%20Tools%20(Desktop)&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_medium=referral&fbclid=IwAR2SIuMa_zpqegeip3e23rjA0x45tfVlDfQpwOFCZS7VluI1UTU9TAvCA5o
Their strategy wasn't herd immunity as such but to do what most other countries did but without enforcing lockdown.
... and your country seems to have a large percentage of cooperative populace.
Kind of a nice thing to see. Reminds me of traveling in Canada and being amazed at how clean the trains were and feeling shame for my own county and how so many mistreat treasures like state funded transportation.
I (enjoy?) hate to see these redneck assholes who get on national television here in the states, wearing a wife-beater and carrying a long gun on a sling, shouting shit like, "I live in a FREE country and you can't tell ME I have to wear a mask!"
Too many of those, here. We HAD to close some just because of assholes like those guys.
Someone should remind these guys that 1776 already happened.
The Swedish are a cooperative bunch so I can see why they reasoned the way they did. But they failed utterly on protecting the elderly, and they never realised not everyone living here as that cooperative mindset.
As a result, our neighbouring countries are slowly opening up and resuming business while we are in the same limbo as the last several months. And guess what? Swedes are banned from entering Finland, Norway, and Denmark when they open their borders.
This country is preparing to drop the hammer on a ban of travel from Brazil. But, it's not just Brazil. Even if you have been to Brazil in the past two weeks, you will not be allowed in without a quarantine period.
-
So it looks like the herd immunity approach in Sweden didn't work out so well:
https://www.sfgate.com/science/article/Sweden-herd-immunity-experiment-backfires-covid-15289437.php?utm_campaign=CMS%20Sharing%20Tools%20(Desktop)&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_medium=referral&fbclid=IwAR2SIuMa_zpqegeip3e23rjA0x45tfVlDfQpwOFCZS7VluI1UTU9TAvCA5o
Their strategy wasn't herd immunity as such but to do what most other countries did but without enforcing lockdown.
... and your country seems to have a large percentage of cooperative populace.
Kind of a nice thing to see. Reminds me of traveling in Canada and being amazed at how clean the trains were and feeling shame for my own county and how so many mistreat treasures like state funded transportation.
I (enjoy?) hate to see these redneck assholes who get on national television here in the states, wearing a wife-beater and carrying a long gun on a sling, shouting shit like, "I live in a FREE country and you can't tell ME I have to wear a mask!"
Too many of those, here. We HAD to close some just because of assholes like those guys.
Someone should remind these guys that 1776 already happened.
The Swedish are a cooperative bunch so I can see why they reasoned the way they did. But they failed utterly on protecting the elderly, and they never realised not everyone living here as that cooperative mindset.
As a result, our neighbouring countries are slowly opening up and resuming business while we are in the same limbo as the last several months. And guess what? Swedes are banned from entering Finland, Norway, and Denmark when they open their borders.
This country is preparing to drop the hammer on a ban of travel from Brazil. But, it's not just Brazil. Even if you have been to Brazil in the past two weeks, you will not be allowed in without a quarantine period.
Why the ban from Brazil? I hadn't heard that one yet. In Canada, if you came back from anywhere (before they closed the borders) you had to quarantine for 2 weeks no matter where you traveled in from. The border is remaining closed for another month and then they'll reevaluate.
-
Brazil is the only place in worse shape than the USA right now. They're probably pointing fingers.
-
It's so Trump can tell everyone how he took another necessary decision to protect the US... ::)
-
I haven't been following any numbers outside of the US and Canada. The orange cheeto takes the stupidest shit to try and bolster himself.
-
Huh. Covid-19 has even infected Al's " Ï quit " thread. :LOL:
...and just when we were beginning to turn it into a cosy little leftist chatroom :laugh:
Anyways this little comment from DD got me thinking:
Reminds me of traveling in Canada and being amazed at how clean the trains were and feeling shame for my own county and how so many mistreat treasures like state funded transportation.
I mean, for a moment that made me wonder if America was actually enviable in this respect :laugh: . But, no, I looked it up, and it's just the same shoddy deal we have in the UK, since privatisation . In our case, public transport absorbs an awful lot of taxplayers money in the form of subsidies (about the same as in the US) but that doesn't stop it becoming increasingly run down and inefficient as well as increasingly costly for the user . Outside London, almost nobody uses it unless they really don't have any other choice; and the dwindling passenger numbers only make matters worse. And that inevitably mean a lower grade of traveller on average, because aside from pensioners (whose local travel is entirely subsidised, in the form of free passes), schoolchildren (ditto) and low-paid workers, you've still got all the drunks, crackheads, rowdy youths etc using public transport, and becoming ever more conspicuous by dint of the absence of other groups Plus, now that we no longer have bus conductors (it's cheaper to get the driver to do both jobs) the antisocial behaviour on buses is almost totally out-of-control, and bus journeys are grindingly slow It's a grim situation, created not by bad people so much as bad political choices. .
Found an article online that neatly explains the difference between US and Canada:
https://www.vox.com/2015/8/10/9118199/public-transportation-subway-buses
It seems you can improve things considerably without opting for State ownership. Japan has also done a pretty good with subsidised private transport (but structured very differently than ours) .
Still, most UK travellers are thoroughly disillusioned with privatisation, and want to go back to a fully nationalised system . And that very much includes myself. Now that private transport is such a huge threat to the environment, I don't think we can afford to mess about. Investing enough in in public transport to create a really attractive and affordable alternative to travelling by car ought to be a priority. Once people have got themselves a taxed, insured, roadworthy car, then it's a damned sight cheaper, as well as as a damned sight more convenient, a damned sight less time-consuming and a damned sight more pleasant to just use the thing for every trip (at least here in Britain). Public transport has to up its game considerably to stand a chance of competing with that. :(
-
I haven't been following any numbers outside of the US and Canada. The orange cheeto takes the stupidest shit to try and bolster himself.
Think of it like this: "M-m-m-MY Corona!!"
-
I haven't been following any numbers outside of the US and Canada. The orange cheeto takes the stupidest shit to try and bolster himself.
Think of it like this: "M-m-m-MY Corona!!"
:lol1: :plus:
-
I can not be the one to call it, but I feel I have ruined that song forever.
-
Huh. Covid-19 has even infected Al's " Ï quit " thread. :LOL:
...and just when we were beginning to turn it into a cosy little leftist chatroom :laugh:
Anyways this little comment from DD got me thinking:
Reminds me of traveling in Canada and being amazed at how clean the trains were and feeling shame for my own county and how so many mistreat treasures like state funded transportation.
I mean, for a moment that made me wonder if America was actually enviable in this respect :laugh: . But, no, I looked it up, and it's just the same shoddy deal we have in the UK, since privatisation . In our case, public transport absorbs an awful lot of taxplayers money in the form of subsidies (about the same as in the US) but that doesn't stop it becoming increasingly run down and inefficient as well as increasingly costly for the user . Outside London, almost nobody uses it unless they really don't have any other choice; and the dwindling passenger numbers only make matters worse. And that inevitably mean a lower grade of traveller on average, because aside from pensioners (whose local travel is entirely subsidised, in the form of free passes), schoolchildren (ditto) and low-paid workers, you've still got all the drunks, crackheads, rowdy youths etc using public transport, and becoming ever more conspicuous by dint of the absence of other groups Plus, now that we no longer have bus conductors (it's cheaper to get the driver to do both jobs) the antisocial behaviour on buses is almost totally out-of-control, and bus journeys are grindingly slow It's a grim situation, created not by bad people so much as bad political choices. .
Found an article online that neatly explains the difference between US and Canada:
https://www.vox.com/2015/8/10/9118199/public-transportation-subway-buses
It seems you can improve things considerably without opting for State ownership. Japan has also done a pretty good with subsidised private transport (but structured very differently than ours) .
Still, most UK travellers are thoroughly disillusioned with privatisation, and want to go back to a fully nationalised system . And that very much includes myself. Now that private transport is such a huge threat to the environment, I don't think we can afford to mess about. Investing enough in in public transport to create a really attractive and affordable alternative to travelling by car ought to be a priority. Once people have got themselves a taxed, insured, roadworthy car, then it's a damned sight cheaper, as well as as a damned sight more convenient, a damned sight less time-consuming and a damned sight more pleasant to just use the thing for every trip (at least here in Britain). Public transport has to up its game considerably to stand a chance of competing with that. :(
I have to walk back some of the comments on UK rail travel. Until a couple of years ago I was a frequent commuter on trains. I find them better, more regular and many times cleaner than before privatisation. Nationalised British Rail was a byword for shitty - when they were running between strikes. They were literally a punchline to jokes. People calling for the railways to be nationalised are generally not old enough to remember just how shit they were.
Long hall between large cities can be expensive, especially in and out of London. That could be addressed to take traffic off the roads. If HS2 gets finished and travel subsidised that could be nice. It would remove traffic from the regional airports too.
-
On the subject of privatisation and the state of the trains prior to privatisation: one of the cornerstones of neoliberalism is privatizing public assets.
Now it is difficult to justify a public asset or service that is in good shape and that people enjoy the benefit of. So first you need to defund the asset or service, demotivate the employees, get it to the point where people are calling for something to be done. THEN you sell it off to private capital.
Once you are aware of this you start to notice that it is in the process of happening in other areas.
-
OK! I QUIT!
No more humanity for me!
How in hell does building community awareness of instances of police brutality by protesting include destroying a Target store, many other stores looted as well, burning parked cars, overturning cars, bludgeoning old ladies in wheel chairs and hosing them over with fire extinguisher chemicals? So many other atrocities ...
It became a riot over in Minneapolis.
Talking about the four cops who allowed the death of a suspect due to the crushing of is neck for eight minutes.
Nothing good here.
-
Once it gets to that level, what you are seeing in Minneapolis, it's not protest.
It's people becoming so angry that social order breaks down.
There is an idea called "the social contract" and it's gotta work both ways.
Why are people so angry and what can we do about it? Tell people to be less angry?
Also I thought it was 3 cops who allowed the death. And one cop who did a lot more than just "allow" the death.
-
I wouldn't be sure it was anything to do with anger, not without further info. to confirm.
There are a small minority of people (mostly young men) who get a buzz out of violent confrontation and will join any protest for the chance to provoke and take part in the violence. I went to college with one of them. He cheerfully admitted to me that he didn't give a damn about any of the issues; he was there for personal gratification, simple as that. I was stunned, because i'd never even heard of that phenomenon before; but I've certainly heard of it, from any number of sources, since.
I'm guessing there were probably a few like that guy invollved. They should not be dignified with the term "protestor", not f we can possibly avoid it, nor confused with the genuine protestors. No use telling them that they're bringing shame on whichever movement they purport to represent. They really don't give a damn. That college "friend" told me he didn't even care which of two opposing factions he joined, he was that far from caring about social justice or anything like that.
-
There's video out that that one of the "looters" at an Auto Zone in MN is actually a cop. That happens a lot in situations like this. At the G20 summit in Toronto, they found out that it was people protesting who had burnt out the cop cars, it was the cops who had done it to make the public more sympathetic to their cause by blaming the people protesting.
-
There's video out that that one of the "looters" at an Auto Zone in MN is actually a cop. That happens a lot in situations like this. At the G20 summit in Toronto, they found out that it was people protesting who had burnt out the cop cars, it was the cops who had done it to make the public more sympathetic to their cause by blaming the people protesting.
It's a pity that not-so-simple truth rarely makes front page news :( and even when it does, it comes so long after the event that most people already have a different picture permanently burned into their brains :(.
We need to teach kids to withhold judgement, from an early age, methinks .
-
Sorry - typo. That should says it WASN'T the protestors who burnt out the cop cars, it was the cops. My brain is mush tonight.
-
^NP, i guessed you meant WASN'T. Shoulda thought to correct that when quoting you. Sorry!
-
No worries. I texted my son tonight saying I wanted to bawl and instead I ended up typing I want to brawl. So he sent me the theme song to Super Mario Smash Bros brawl. :facepalm2: :laugh:
-
^ :lol1:
-
Once it gets to that level, what you are seeing in Minneapolis, it's not protest.
It's people becoming so angry that social order breaks down.
There is an idea called "the social contract" and it's gotta work both ways.
Why are people so angry and what can we do about it? Tell people to be less angry?
Also I thought it was 3 cops who allowed the death. And one cop who did a lot more than just "allow" the death.
You are correct and I was not clear. As I understand the reports, four cops were fired for being involved (and they were all involved, if you ask me, but you did not, so I am going to tell you what I think in case you might) but only one cop was physically responsible for this singular brutality resulting in the death of the suspect. The other three cops did nothing to stop this travesty of civil rights.
I am pissed, too.
Not so much at the cop who had taken the suspect down and cuffed him and eventually killed him. I am mostly pissed at the other three who took little note of what was happening to "the suspect" while their partner killed someone, (accidentally, maybe - too late for any of that!). One guy losing his shit and going nuts can happen, but three other "brothers in arms" not even giving half a shit while your buddy over holds and kills a suspect is a bit too far.
I still do not think breaking into businesses and stealing everything they can promotes community awareness of police brutality.
The message is broken.
Oh, and back to the cops, Of what criminal behavior was this individual suspected? I have heard that George Floyd, their suspect, resisted arrest.
I have not seen that video.
-
Forgery.
The cops claimed that he resisted arrest but there is new cctv evidence showing the opposite. Body cam footage is being examined now, not yet made public.
Would the cops involved ever admit it if he was being compliant and they killed him anyway? That's a rhetorical question.
-
(1) I am mostly pissed at the other three who took little note of what was happening to "the suspect" while their partner killed someone, (accidentally, maybe - too late for any of that!).
(2) I still do not think breaking into businesses and stealing everything they can promotes community awareness of police brutality.
First up, I agree strongly with your sentiment. Maybe we could dance around a bit in terms of the words we would use, that's about it.
(1) It depends on how you define "accidentally". He didn't "accidentally" kneel on his neck for 5 minutes. He didn't "accidentally" ignore the guy's pleas that he couldn't breathe and the members of the public who told him to stop, that he was killing the guy. Being extremely generous you could say that it was "reckless endangerment". It probably wasn't the cop's intention to kill the guy, but a reasonable person could have foreseen that death was a likely result of deliberately brutalising a suspect in the way that he did.
(2) Obviously they've gone past "maybe if we raise awareness the cops will stop killing us". And, as Walkie said, I've got no doubt that there are people who love chaos and violence and disorder who are drawn to the sort of breakdown in law and order that we are seeing now. The rioters aren't trying to make the world a better place. Rioters rarely are.
-
The cops should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law.
As should the "protesters" who use the opportunity for their own violent tendencies.
Humanity is overrated.
-
The vast majority of protesters were peaceful. I know people who were there. Remember that there's footage of a cop inciting violence himself because he damn well knows that it just takes one to start and more will follow and then it's far easier to point the finger all "all those angry looting protesters" than to keep a shining light on the PD.
Rioting is not the initial wanted act of a community. Rioting happens after all other courses of action have been tried and failed. It's anger in action because something has to change. At this point, after everything that has been thrown at the Black community, I don't blame them one bit.
-
Humanity is overrated.
That is why I Quit!
I might even disavow Darwin and go back to being some kind of apedawg or something.
Quarantine has only shown patchy results.
:o
-
(1) I am mostly pissed at the other three who took little note of what was happening to "the suspect" while their partner killed someone, (accidentally, maybe - too late for any of that!).
(2) I still do not think breaking into businesses and stealing everything they can promotes community awareness of police brutality.
First up, I agree strongly with your sentiment. Maybe we could dance around a bit in terms of the words we would use, that's about it.
(1) It depends on how you define "accidentally". He didn't "accidentally" kneel on his neck for 5 minutes. He didn't "accidentally" ignore the guy's pleas that he couldn't breathe and the members of the public who told him to stop, that he was killing the guy. Being extremely generous you could say that it was "reckless endangerment". It probably wasn't the cop's intention to kill the guy, but a reasonable person could have foreseen that death was a likely result of deliberately brutalising a suspect in the way that he did.
I was thinking of the implications associated with a simple layman's understanding of the legal use of the word accidental (or involuntary) where there must be consideration, demonstration or proof of some element of "intent" or negligence while prosecuting the most serious crimes, such as homicide.
Other factors determine guilt, in this case a distinct video of the crime contributes to that determination. Intent, as I understand, is used mainly to "establish" just how terribly heinous the particular crime is and intent is often reflected during sentencing of a guilty person.
These four cops share responsibility for this crime. Use of the word, "accidental" in my previous post was not meant to mitigate any of their culpability.
George Floyd did not have a chance to answer many of the questions surrounding the crime he was suspected of committing.
Someone must "pay" for this. At least four someones.
(2) Obviously they've gone past "maybe if we raise awareness the cops will stop killing us". And, as Walkie said, I've got no doubt that there are people who love chaos and violence and disorder who are drawn to the sort of breakdown in law and order that we are seeing now. The rioters aren't trying to make the world a better place. Rioters rarely are.
I would absopositutively agree. I think that there was a large gathering of people genuinely protesting peacefully, hugging, crying, shouting, probably pushing the limits what could be called peaceable assembly when some few decide to escalate by vandalizing a police car.
Many of the bystanders thought that was a good idea and off we go for a three day riot.
Kind of difficult to prosecute a mob, but I think we should try like HELL!
-
Seems we're all in broad agreement on this topic :) and basically picking nits. But then some of those nits are pretty damned important
I think that there was a large gathering of people genuinely protesting peacefully, hugging, crying, shouting, probably pushing the limits what could be called peaceable assembly when some few decide to escalate by vandalizing a police car.
Many of the bystanders thought that was a good idea and off we go for a three day riot.
would like to remind you of the pssibilty that people who were pushing the limits might well have been there for the aggro in the first place, just like that college "friend"of mine who would join demos in "support"' of any issue you like , with that express purpose in mind. Nobody wants them, but there's nothing you can do to stop them turning up.
Also Phoenix;s point might be relevant here:
There's video out that that one of the "looters" at an Auto Zone in MN is actually a cop. That happens a lot in situations like this. At the G20 summit in Toronto, they found out that it was people protesting who had burnt out the cop cars, it was the cops who had done it to make the public more sympathetic to their cause by blaming the people protesting.
Given that this was an anti-police demo, the cops would, once again, have been strongly motivated to make the protestors look like the bad guys. Can we be sure that they didn't sneakily light the torch, so to speak?
Oh! looks like they did, according to Phoenix's other post (unless her third sentence referred to a dfferent demo? )
The vast majority of protesters were peaceful. I know people who were there. Remember that there's footage of a cop inciting violence himself because he damn well knows that it just takes one to start and more will follow and then it's far easier to point the finger all "all those angry looting protesters" than to keep a shining light on the PD.
Kind of difficult to prosecute a mob, but I think we should try like HELL!
Don't worry, that already happens all over the world (Tianenmen Square? and the present day riots in Hong kong? Ofc, I could pick examples closer to home, from the so-called democratic world, but so could you. You're surely more familiar with American history and current affairs than I am)
In my country it's not at all uncommon for protestors to be be arrested and prosecuted . The problem is that whenever video evidence has emerged (and /or witness accounts given credence) it's all-too-often become clear that the cops were not only using excessive force (not dissiimilar to the arrest of George floyd) but picking out peaceful protesors to arrest more often than not. And, ofc, it's often that spectacle of innocent people being brutally mistreated that sparks off the angry backlash from nearby protestors . So the cops' behaviour becomes self-justifying, retrospectively, just so long as their version is accepted. I find no reason to suppose that's a purely British phenomenon.
In short, they really are trying like HELL to prosecute a mob, as you put it. Already. And I think that we actually need less of that.
-
The cop who killed Floyd has been charged with murder.
That won't stick. The prosecutors know that. It's for show.
Best outcome would be a conviction for manslaughter, and throw the prick into the general prison population.
-
The cop who killed Floyd has been charged with murder.
That won't stick. The prosecutors know that. It's for show.
Best outcome would be a conviction for manslaughter, and throw the prick into the general prison population.
Yeah, thats exactly what I expect to happen to this slime ball. And he has a proven track record of brutality and being a trump supporter. I hope he is shower raped and shanked.
-
He will get protective custody. Prick wouldn't last a week in general population.
-
A riot is the language of the unheard
How true is that now?
-
My son was the first to clue me about the street clothed cop on camera looting.
That happened very early on while most of the state sanctioned spy cameras were still working, seen as possibly the spark plug that started the worst of it.
I'll bet he had help.
While none of that surprises me, it is just so damn wrong!
After last night's happenings nationwide, it seems that quite a few people agree with our view.
-
At the G20 summit in Toronto, they found out that it was people protesting who had burnt out the cop cars, it was the cops who had done it to make the public more sympathetic to their cause by blaming the people protesting.
just wanna check, are you quite sure about this, Phoenix? on what evidence? obviously i was totally willing to take your word in this context, but felt i'd better check that before i repeated it elsewhere ("mate on autistic forum" not qute counting as reliable source, generally speaking :laugh: ) ; so i;ve just done a couple of hours of research online (didn't mean to spend that long but it proved really tricky) . To put the results in a nutshell: even people who have no love of the police, who know very well what the police are capable of, and would clearly like it to be true (as would I) are dismissing it as a debunked conspiracy theory. I've just given up on finding anything solid after reading this article:
https://redpowermedia.wordpress.com/2014/10/17/the-red-power-conspiracy-theory-and-the-burning-rcmp-cars/ (https://redpowermedia.wordpress.com/2014/10/17/the-red-power-conspiracy-theory-and-the-burning-rcmp-cars/)
I still wouldn't completely rule out a successful cover-up (cos I'm just not the sort to completely rule out any feasible possibility) But it certainly doesn't look like anybody ever managed to nail them.
-
The cop who killed Floyd has been charged with murder.
That won't stick. The prosecutors know that. It's for show.
Best outcome would be a conviction for manslaughter, and throw the prick into the general prison population.
This I would 100% agree with, does the guy still have his job? I think he should be in prison with the worst people out there, doubt he would last very long if the worst comes.
Better yet pray he doesn't drop the soap....
-
At the G20 summit in Toronto, they found out that it was people protesting who had burnt out the cop cars, it was the cops who had done it to make the public more sympathetic to their cause by blaming the people protesting.
just wanna check, are you quite sure about this, Phoenix? on what evidence? obviously i was totally willing to take your word in this context, but felt i'd better check that before i repeated it elsewhere ("mate on autistic forum" not qute counting as reliable source, generally speaking :laugh: ) ; so i;ve just done a couple of hours of research online (didn't mean to spend that long but it proved really tricky) . To put the results in a nutshell: even people who have no love of the police, who know very well what the police are capable of, and would clearly like it to be true (as would I) are dismissing it as a debunked conspiracy theory. I've just given up on finding anything solid after reading this article:
https://redpowermedia.wordpress.com/2014/10/17/the-red-power-conspiracy-theory-and-the-burning-rcmp-cars/ (https://redpowermedia.wordpress.com/2014/10/17/the-red-power-conspiracy-theory-and-the-burning-rcmp-cars/)
I still wouldn't completely rule out a successful cover-up (cos I'm just not the sort to completely rule out any feasible possibility) But it certainly doesn't look like anybody ever managed to nail them.
It was a major clusterfuck in Toronto and I may be confusing my details. My dog died so I don't have the energy nor the desire to dig into what it was all about. But there was this massive deal of rogue cops. I could easily be wrong which is fine. Tbh, I don't care at this point. It's been a shit day, friend. xxoo
-
At the G20 summit in Toronto, they found out that it was people protesting who had burnt out the cop cars, it was the cops who had done it to make the public more sympathetic to their cause by blaming the people protesting.
just wanna check, are you quite sure about this, Phoenix? on what evidence? obviously i was totally willing to take your word in this context, but felt i'd better check that before i repeated it elsewhere ("mate on autistic forum" not qute counting as reliable source, generally speaking :laugh: ) ; so i;ve just done a couple of hours of research online (didn't mean to spend that long but it proved really tricky) . To put the results in a nutshell: even people who have no love of the police, who know very well what the police are capable of, and would clearly like it to be true (as would I) are dismissing it as a debunked conspiracy theory. I've just given up on finding anything solid after reading this article:
https://redpowermedia.wordpress.com/2014/10/17/the-red-power-conspiracy-theory-and-the-burning-rcmp-cars/ (https://redpowermedia.wordpress.com/2014/10/17/the-red-power-conspiracy-theory-and-the-burning-rcmp-cars/)
I still wouldn't completely rule out a successful cover-up (cos I'm just not the sort to completely rule out any feasible possibility) But it certainly doesn't look like anybody ever managed to nail them.
It was a major clusterfuck in Toronto and I may be confusing my details. My dog died so I don't have the energy nor the desire to dig into what it was all about. But there was this massive deal of rogue cops. I could easily be wrong which is fine. Tbh, I don't care at this point. It's been a shit day, friend. xxoo
FWIW, rest, shut out the crap clusterfuck of the world. Be selfish and focus on what you need to do to heal or vent your rage and frustrations. Long ago, a very dear friend of mine spoke of her desire to go to the top of a mountain and WAIL/SCREAM/CRY as her marriage and life changed. She did! I never got the sequel to that, but, she recovered and lives on for her own Mongrel Horde. She runs a dog sanctuary in Santa Fe New Mexico called "Bridging the Worlds". If you want to do the same. do it, whatever it takes for your grief and frustration to have an outlet/release. My dear friend, focus on yourself, your family and your fur babies. The rest of the world can take a flying fuck and it will still be here when your ready to resume dealing with it.
Namaste
-
:hug:
-
At the G20 summit in Toronto, they found out that it was people protesting who had burnt out the cop cars, it was the cops who had done it to make the public more sympathetic to their cause by blaming the people protesting.
just wanna check, are you quite sure about this, Phoenix? on what evidence? obviously i was totally willing to take your word in this context, but felt i'd better check that before i repeated it elsewhere ("mate on autistic forum" not qute counting as reliable source, generally speaking :laugh: ) ; so i;ve just done a couple of hours of research online (didn't mean to spend that long but it proved really tricky) . To put the results in a nutshell: even people who have no love of the police, who know very well what the police are capable of, and would clearly like it to be true (as would I) are dismissing it as a debunked conspiracy theory. I've just given up on finding anything solid after reading this article:
https://redpowermedia.wordpress.com/2014/10/17/the-red-power-conspiracy-theory-and-the-burning-rcmp-cars/ (https://redpowermedia.wordpress.com/2014/10/17/the-red-power-conspiracy-theory-and-the-burning-rcmp-cars/)
I still wouldn't completely rule out a successful cover-up (cos I'm just not the sort to completely rule out any feasible possibility) But it certainly doesn't look like anybody ever managed to nail them.
It was a major clusterfuck in Toronto and I may be confusing my details. My dog died so I don't have the energy nor the desire to dig into what it was all about. But there was this massive deal of rogue cops. I could easily be wrong which is fine. Tbh, I don't care at this point. It's been a shit day, friend. xxoo
NP Phoenix. TBH, was not expecting a reply from yourself near so soon, not under present circumstances (shoulda said, shouldn't i ? :-[) so thank you very much for that! And - should definitely clarify, this time - am not expecting you to research it at all . Just throwing in a link , in case anyone cares to follow it.
For my own part, I just thought it would have been irresponsible of me not to register my newfound doubts ASAP, given that I'd underscored what you said by quotng you twice over without checking first. :emb: Especially afer I read the Indigenous peoples' angle on that story . I think I understand why they would want to be so very careful to get all their facts straight before pointing the finger at anyone.
But anyway , I've done that now,in suitably timely fashion, and i figure we can all let it rest now, or not, whichever suits. Frankly, I think we probably all have better things to do with our time; and am totally with Dunc et al. in feeling that you should just take care of yourself, right now :hug:
I already felt sorry to intrude with that, and am even sorrier now :(
Oh! and btw, I know, I know (just noticed) I forgot yet again to correct your typo :-[ :laugh: I'm sure we can all figure out what you meant though.
-
This is fairly long but I think he's got it right.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v4amCfVbA_c
-
It's kind of a valid point....
-
This is fairly long but I think he's got it right.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v4amCfVbA_c
Not available in Straya.
-
Twelve states deployed National Guard units last night. Fifteen more states have National Guard activated and on stand by.
Is it time to do something, yet?
OK. What?
-
Useful differentiation tool
-
Big dogs at Indianapolis Metropolitan Police Department have declared that venturing into the downtown area is not safe. The announcement recommends that people should avoid coming downtown if possible.
Multiple shootings, bludgeoning and stabbing deaths or serious injuries during last night's encounters have law enforcement even MORE on edge than before.
-
After trying to enforce a curfew in Indianapolis, many protesters showed up in suburbia with ill intentions. Our small town had some trouble last night.
I live ten blocks from center city and when I went that way walking the dog, I could see police lines forming and traffic barricades being placed.
That was late yesterday before dark.
I can still see lights flashing from there.
-
Sitting out enjoying the birds, my coffee, pipe and dog, I heard a large noise fifty or so feet away. Then some male grunting, whooping and laughter.
My next door neighbor, a fireman who works odd hours and arrives home at even odder hours full of caffeine, so yeah, probably another early morning BBQ/drunk fest with his buddies or something.
Then hammering on metal sounds. OK, now I am interested. He just bought a huge anvil, over seven hundred pounds. Took four guys to unload it. KOOL find!
BUT, they were putting away their hammer when I approached, because they had just been issued these brand new, air powered pepper guns. Basically it is a paintball gun of very high quality and power, but it shoots little latex balls of pepper powder instead of paint.
They just got four for each truck company (six guys) and are supposed to take them home and become familiar before training begins today.
Of course this is what we all cackled about for the next half hour.
Another sign of our times, though. The fact that the fire department feels the need to be able to disperse crowds in order to do their jobs being taken so lightly speaks volumes.
-
Sitting out enjoying the birds, my coffee, pipe and dog, I heard a large noise fifty or so feet away. Then some male grunting, whooping and laughter.
My next door neighbor, a fireman who works odd hours and arrives home at even odder hours full of caffeine, so yeah, probably another early morning BBQ/drunk fest with his buddies or something.
Then hammering on metal sounds. OK, now I am interested. He just bought a huge anvil, over seven hundred pounds. Took four guys to unload it. KOOL find!
BUT, they were putting away their hammer when I approached, because they had just been issued these brand new, air powered pepper guns. Basically it is a paintball gun of very high quality and power, but it shoots little latex balls of pepper powder instead of paint.
They just got four for each truck company (six guys) and are supposed to take them home and become familiar before training begins today.
Of course this is what we all cackled about for the next half hour.
Another sign of our times, though. The fact that the fire department feels the need to be able to disperse crowds in order to do their jobs being taken so lightly speaks volumes.
Doesn't arming them move them from "Heroes" to "Oppressors" in one swoop?
-
Sitting out enjoying the birds, my coffee, pipe and dog, I heard a large noise fifty or so feet away. Then some male grunting, whooping and laughter.
My next door neighbor, a fireman who works odd hours and arrives home at even odder hours full of caffeine, so yeah, probably another early morning BBQ/drunk fest with his buddies or something.
Then hammering on metal sounds. OK, now I am interested. He just bought a huge anvil, over seven hundred pounds. Took four guys to unload it. KOOL find!
BUT, they were putting away their hammer when I approached, because they had just been issued these brand new, air powered pepper guns. Basically it is a paintball gun of very high quality and power, but it shoots little latex balls of pepper powder instead of paint.
They just got four for each truck company (six guys) and are supposed to take them home and become familiar before training begins today.
Of course this is what we all cackled about for the next half hour.
Another sign of our times, though. The fact that the fire department feels the need to be able to disperse crowds in order to do their jobs being taken so lightly speaks volumes.
Doesn't arming them move them from "Heroes" to "Oppressors" in one swoop?
One way of looking at it and why I made the comment.
The firemen normally do not go armed, since they are supported by a police presence, which is WELL armed.
They laughed at this "little" gun, though. It is just smaller by about 25% than an AR type carbine and thirty round magazine.
The ladder hose guy said he already has one of the most powerful weapons in town with his hose cannon.
:orly:
-
Sitting out enjoying the birds, my coffee, pipe and dog, I heard a large noise fifty or so feet away. Then some male grunting, whooping and laughter.
My next door neighbor, a fireman who works odd hours and arrives home at even odder hours full of caffeine, so yeah, probably another early morning BBQ/drunk fest with his buddies or something.
Then hammering on metal sounds. OK, now I am interested. He just bought a huge anvil, over seven hundred pounds. Took four guys to unload it. KOOL find!
BUT, they were putting away their hammer when I approached, because they had just been issued these brand new, air powered pepper guns. Basically it is a paintball gun of very high quality and power, but it shoots little latex balls of pepper powder instead of paint.
They just got four for each truck company (six guys) and are supposed to take them home and become familiar before training begins today.
Of course this is what we all cackled about for the next half hour.
Another sign of our times, though. The fact that the fire department feels the need to be able to disperse crowds in order to do their jobs being taken so lightly speaks volumes.
Doesn't arming them move them from "Heroes" to "Oppressors" in one swoop?
One way of looking at it and why I made the comment.
The firemen normally do not go armed, since they are supported by a police presence, which is WELL armed.
They laughed at this "little" gun, though. It is just smaller by about 25% than an AR type carbine and thirty round magazine.
The ladder hose guy said he already has one of the most powerful weapons in town with his hose cannon.
:orly:
Whever you mix a militarised force with a protesting mob, it's only a matter of time until something very bad happens. #BloodySunday
-
I tend to agree with that.
-
Bad things are already happening.
-
Surprising so many people terrified of infecting Covidand wanting to be locked down indefinitely & to stay in their homes and never come out for fear of infecting or being infected. Now everyone is out and looting and not giving a damn about social distancing. Guess Covid is over
African-American Black people are not similar to the Aboriginal people.
Black Americans follow a story closer to the Convicts and Aboriginals follow a story closer to the Native Americans.
-
Yeah it is kind of ironic.
I've heard people say that the protests are important enough that it's worth risking covid, but there seem to be an awful lot more who are just saying screw it, as if the numbers weren't still high.
-
Changing your username to All Lives Matter is a shit thing to do, Al.
-
Changing your username to All Lives Matter is a shit thing to do, Al.
Agreed! :plus:
Your comparing apples to oranges to bananas. The african americans were brought here as slaves, now it seems that they are being hunted down like animals, aborigines were also enslaved as well as hunted down like animals, native americans were enslaved originally and then hunted down like animals. A lot of similarities, and not many differences. I remember back in the 70's, my friend Fred, spoke of an Australian policy of keeping Australia WHITE. And he agreed with it, one of many contradictions of the man, I knew! :( So how did that work out? How did apartheid work out?
The histories are there, I've read many of them and it's sickening and horrifying about the many forms of white privilege over the centuries and the horror stories of white on white, black on black, asian on asian atrocities. I could go on and on. But I'll stop here with this one thought.
THOSE WHO FORGET HISTORY ARE CONDEMNED TO REPEAT IT!
-
Ok, that was a bit wordy, so I'll simplify it. In this country, "All lives Matter" has become associated with the groups that align with trumpolini. As in "All lives Matter"........if your white! "If your black or otherwise, they don't care!" White Power, errr, PRIVILEGE is all they care about.
Have a nice day!
-
"All Lives Matter" is a racist dog whistle.
If someone says "Save The Rainforest" we know that they don't mean "fuck all other types of forest". We don't insist that they say "Save All Forests".
-
I was just wondering what Al would say about the current mess. I guess I know, now. Bigots will be bigots.
-
I strongly support the protesters.
But nobody who thought the virus was real suddenly thinks it has gone away now, like Trump said it would in April. The protests are a disaster for containment and, barring a major miracle, the 2nd wave late this year is gonna be hell.
-
That's the only reason I didn't go to my local protest although the police made sure to give it enough space to accommodate all of the people and still help them distance.
-
I strongly support the protesters.
But nobody who thought the virus was real suddenly thinks it has gone away now, like Trump said it would in April. The protests are a disaster for containment and, barring a major miracle, the 2nd wave late this year is gonna be hell.
That.
Nothing local really here, I'm deep in Trump country close to the WV line...some protests in Pittsburgh.
SO opened the bar Friday after the county got the green light. Trying to enforce social distancing in a bar is like herding cats. Not to mention half of the population here will NOT wear masks.
Thankfully we're pretty rural and the cases have been very few, but aware that could change in a heartbeat with how this is reported to spread...it's worrisome to say the least.
My diabetic MIL with COPD is chomping at the bit to go out to eat and back to her marathon shopping trips.
I'm afraid the next two months might morph into one hell of a shitshow.
-
Very true. Yesterday we got: Chief Public Health Officer Dr. Theresa Tam has issued a clear warning that Canada could see “explosive growth” in new cases if reopening is not done with caution.
Ontario is too eager right now
-
Ontario is too eager right now
Everyone is too eager.
As an introvert that never went out before this shit hit the fan this was a little nuts when it came to local shopping when you ran out of milk, but I can't say it really affected me.
Watching everyone else totally lose their shit though...was unsettling to say the least. I guess I never understood that social interaction was almost like a moderate drinking problem to the normal set. The withdrawal was downright ugly in some.
-
We had protesters around here today. Well, in Gothenburg, the second-largest city in Sweden, which is about 15 km away from where I live. They were supposed to be no more than 50 - the maximum allowed number of people gathering - but apparently there were hundreds or even thousands. Meanwhile health care workers have begged and pleaded with people to not go out and protest because they're already swamped with work.
I do understand and sympathise with the protesters in the US where racial injustices are ongoing and have been for hundreds of years, but here? A show-your-support action is misguided at best. Our society is very, very far from perfect and racism does exist, but all they achieve here is a covid petri dish where no lives really matter.
-
We had protesters around here today. Well, in Gothenburg, the second-largest city in Sweden, which is about 15 km away from where I live. They were supposed to be no more than 50 - the maximum allowed number of people gathering - but apparently there were hundreds or even thousands. Meanwhile health care workers have begged and pleaded with people to not go out and protest because they're already swamped with work.
I do understand and sympathise with the protesters in the US where racial injustices are ongoing and have been for hundreds of years, but here? A show-your-support action is misguided at best. Our society is very, very far from perfect and racism does exist, but all they achieve here is a covid petri dish where no lives really matter.
QFT! :plus:
-
If it was 'Black Lives Matter TOO' do you think the all lives matter fucktards would get it? :wanker:
-
If it was 'Black Lives Matter TOO' do you think the all lives matter fucktards would get it? :wanker:
I don't know, Dunc, I would hope so, even if it was just a fraction of the magatard/fucktards. According to what I am seeing even trumpolini's fucktard base is eroding. I have hope.
-
:dunno:
-
Anyone with any introspection and understanding of what is going on in culture HAS to back Conservative voices if they are honest and give a damn.
I see the word "Conservative" & I now associate it with sane. I see "Left" or "Liberal" and without reading more, I groan inwardly
-
Where did it all go so wrong for you, I wonder.
-
Anyone with any introspection and understanding of what is going on in culture HAS to back Conservative voices if they are honest and give a damn.
I see the word "Conservative" & I now associate it with sane. I see "Left" or "Liberal" and without reading more, I groan inwardly
Ah! I now see how it is that you keep dismissing the rest of us as "dishonest". In your world-view, all rational people naturally share your opinions. My Dad had the same POV, although, intersetingly, he espoused a number of different opinions from yourself. He was exceedingly hard to get along with too. I enjoyed arguing with him and he enjoed arguing back, but everybody else was careful not to say anything to upset him, amd would duck out of sight when we argued on account of his explosive temper (fortunately, all bark and no bite) .
Seems that both you and my Dad represent a rather large subset of the Aspie population. Clearly we're certainly not all the same, so attempts to explain your subgroupt in terms of any familiar autism paradigm would be bound to be over-simplistic, and might do more harm than good. But let's explain my own POV briefly : I've noticed that we're apt to overvalue rationality, especially when young; and to identify with what you might call the left side of our brains, even to the point of suppressing everything else. And that makes us natural born bigots. Some of us escape that mould, and develop an equally strong capacity for creative and empathetic thinking , some of us don't.
I shouldn't think I've convinced you, I've almost certainly offended you. But that's my honest POV believe it or not. I really loved my Dad . He did much less harm than my NT mother did, and we had a deep and enduring bond that i never had with anybody else in my family. But he was definitely a raging bigot, and so are you, I'm sorry to say.
Note, I'm not trying to say that only bigots espouse right wing beliefs nor that bigots can never espouse left wing beliefs. Seems to that whole pletheora of conflicting beliefs can equally appeal to different individuals, depending mostly on their life experience., and everybody's "truth"is inevitably different from everybody else's "truth". That's why it pays to pay close attention to others: that is certain to expand our world view , even if we wholly disagee with their conclusions.
-
In other words, it's a common negative aspie trait to think you're right and the rest of humanity is wrong. :zoinks:
-
In other words, it's a common negative aspie trait to think you're right and the rest of humanity is wrong. :zoinks:
ummmm, yeah. i kinda like think that my post had a tad more grist to it than that. but...yeah :laugh:
-
re. this ALL LIVES MATTER thing, i feel stupidly impelled to put my head in the noose.
I didn't, at first sight, see WTFwas wrong with that statement, no more than Al did. I guess I haven;t come across it often enough, nor in the right sort of context, to appreciate it's usage as a racist dog whistle.
And when I researched it, found out that I'm not the only naive one, not by a long chalk.
To my mind (go on laugh, insult, unfriend me or whatever) I imagined that as a sort of rallying call, for all of the oppressed minorities (who would surely make up an enormous unstoppable majority ) to get bhind the same banner. I mean, much like when British gays marched alongside the striking miners, recognising that both groups had a lot in common (both being victims of police brutality) . That kind of solidarity on a universal scale would be bloody phenomenal, and- idealist that i am- i still live in hope of it actually happening someday.
But, Ok, Ok, I;ve done my rearch now and know that some people mean STFU about black people when they say it., and that casts a big shadow over anybody else who innocently picks up that slogan. Which can't be ignored, but its a pity. Some of us (me inclided, evidently) just can't keep up with what ain't considered politically correct, and sometimes baulk at what a bloody great minefield that's become, which doesn't help anybody's cause.... not unless they have a "divide and conquer"agenda.
Here's a pretty good explanation of why that slogan is offebsive, for anybody else who might be confused
https://www.sportsnet.ca/basketball/nba/explaining-lives-matter-actually-means-say/
Got it now. And will be very careful not to ever say that, But I really don't like the verbal witch-hunting approach of some of the anti-racist folk . We've had way too much of that in Britain lately (I mean, like, people would burn you in effgy as a "racist"", just for supporting Brexit, and refused to listen to any of the non-racist reasons, because they already know what ypu think, FFS ) It's hateful annd divisive. And now I'm stumped as to where I stand. When these BLM demos broke out, I was quite simply wildly enthusiastic, but now it seems too much of this verbal policing has crept in. Can I honestly and realistically support BLM , whilst still deploring that? I dunno, I really don't. :dunno:
-
It pays to remember that something like half the population identifies with a set of ideologies that I disagree with.
It is all too easy to fall into a trap where one consumes only information (propaganda) that reinforces your own prejudices, paints opposing views as stupid and even evil, and does not even prompt consideration of opposing viewpoints. It is pretty easy to spot people who have fallen into this trap by their sweeping generalisations and general sense of wonder that some people don't believe the same things they do.
As painful as it might be, one needs to consider all viewpoints and understand them well enough to make strong arguments based on viewpoints that you don't agree with.
One of the ways to put this into good use is to "steel man" your opponents views. This can be used where someone makes a stupid blanket statement with no facts or logic to back it up.... and then you describe their argument and the reasons for supporting their argument much better than they can and ask if they agree. THEN you are on a good footing to describe where you disagree.
If you can't do this, then you may need to reconsider whether you have considered all the facts and come to a strong and backable conclusion, or whether you have been swayed by propaganda and/or personal bias.
-
Walkie, that excessive policing of incorrect speech or mistaken views is sometimes referred to as "cancel culture".
I don't like it. It is much more helpful to try to help people to be better, to explain why they are wrong.
Give them a few chances at least to understand and to at least try to stop being an ignorant boofhead.
-
In other words, it's a common negative aspie trait to think you're right and the rest of humanity is wrong. :zoinks:
:lol1:
-
Walkie, that excessive policing of incorrect speech or mistaken views is sometimes referred to as "cancel culture".
I don't like it. It is much more helpful to try to help people to be better, to explain why they are wrong.
Give them a few chances at least to understand and to at least try to stop being an ignorant boofhead.
can't disagree with anthing you said this post or the previous. that term "cancel culture" might be helpful . thanks.
as for the rest, i don't see how it adresses my frustration, and thinking maybe wasn't intended to, just you rambling on at a tangent? (can't say i never do that myself :LOL:)
obviously i can't put the world to rights just be honing my debating skills, nor any which way, come to that. i just wish we could all be more open to seeing each others POV. amd not so fast to judge. But that would demand better education, self-education, psychotherapy, etc. for the whole stupid lot of us.
Points of view are highly individual, born of individual experience, emotion , prejudice etc. with logic playing a minor, supporting role. even- or rather, especially - in those of us who believe ourselves to be super- logical. Because logic, like stats, can be used to support pretty much any damned position you like, depending what data you feed it. Data selection mostly occurs on an unconscious level , so you really need practice at fearless introspection , if you'd rather not be entrenched in unreasonable/unrealistic points-of-view. It usually takes skill, as well as close, respectful, individual attention , often over a considerable timespan , to pull someone out of such viewpoints.
What i'm looking at, all too often, and especially where racism is concerned- is a bunch of idiots doing their damnedest to entrench other folk in their unrealistic mindsets, by refusing to listen to their (often legitimate) concerns, judging them, and tarring them with the same broad bush they apply to brutal, mindless thugs, on the slenderst evidence of wrongdoing, nothing more than a thought or a word. You can damage people by remote; you can make them feel guilty and worthless just by broadcasting that sort of message on the media; but you cant so easily undo that sort of damage by remote.
I find that depressing. When you do that to people who are not especially intelligent, not especially articulate, have low socio- economic status etc, then they have no realistic defence at their disposal; the best they can do, by way of self-defence, is lash out. And that's bound to compound the problem. ofc. No matter what manner of defence i might have at my own disposal, I'm apt to feel helpless in the face of all that , ofc, because i actually do want to put the world to rights. Don't we all?
(emo)
-
Anyone with any introspection and understanding of what is going on in culture HAS to back Conservative voices if they are honest and give a damn.
I see the word "Conservative" & I now associate it with sane. I see "Left" or "Liberal" and without reading more, I groan inwardly
When cops start murdering entitled, racist white assholes just because of the colour of their skin I promise I'll march for them too.
-
can't disagree with anthing you said this post or the previous. that term "cancel culture" might be helpful . thanks.
as for the rest, i don't see how it adresses my frustration, and thinking maybe wasn't intended to, just you rambling on at a tangent? (can't say i never do that myself :LOL:)
Pretty much me rambling on at a tangent. Kinda saying why those people are so frustrating and impossible to have a meaningful discussion with.
An observation on those who don't seek to learn, but rather seek to reinforce their biases until all they can do is regurgitate right-wing propaganda and spew hate towards those who do not agree with them.
-
can't disagree with anthing you said this post or the previous. that term "cancel culture" might be helpful . thanks.
as for the rest, i don't see how it adresses my frustration, and thinking maybe wasn't intended to, just you rambling on at a tangent? (can't say i never do that myself :LOL:)
Pretty much me rambling on at a tangent. Kinda saying why those people are so frustrating and impossible to have a meaningful discussion with.
An observation on those who don't seek to learn, but rather seek to reinforce their biases until all they can do is regurgitate right-wing propaganda and spew hate towards those who do not agree with them.
I had a "friend"who pretty much fit that description once. He had a good heart , but it wasn't easy to reach it. It took me a couple of decades or so to really get through to him. But i kept trying to gently prise him open and adress his underlying problems, because i cared, and because he was hurting himself , more than anybody else in actuality. He was a really crap friend, as friends go, but, to my amazement the more self-aware he bacame, and the less biased he became, the more of a genuine, caring friend he became. Towards the end of his life, he was actually there for me when i (unexpectedly) badly needed a friend ; and actually providing things i needed, not the last thing i needed, as was formerly his wont :laugh:
I shouldn't be surprised by that outcome. That makes perfect sense. it's just that i wasn't really expecting to influence him that much (just backing a long-shot, as i often like to do) nor was i looking for emotional support nor anything like that (I used to specialise in one-way friendships, because i don;t like people blundering about in my head , thanks :laugh: And it made me feel "useful" ofc. I don't wanna pretend to be "selfless")
Ofc that's no sort of fix for our large scale social problems. We surely need a much quicker fix than that. But , equally, we don't need people taking the opposite tack, never mind how noble their motives might be, that's bound to turn out really badly for all concerned.
-
An observation on those who don't seek to learn, but rather seek to reinforce their biases until all they can do is regurgitate right-wing propaganda and spew hate towards those who do not agree with them.
PS I feel its worth adding that you can substitute pretty much any ideology for right-wing, there.
Okay, okay, it's my experience, TBH, that those who want to learn are apt to gravitate towards the left (albeit painfully slowly in some cases) but, for one thing: how can we be sure that my own bias towards the left isn't influencing my perceptions? and for another: it's pretty damned obvious to me that quite a of those who "regurgitate propaganda and spew hate towards those who do not agree with them"consider themse;ves left wing, and are generally regarded as such. It would be nice and simple if those people were exclusively right wing, but they're not.
If we take Al as a handy example, it's painfully clear from many of his posts, that he feels personally affronted by the "left-wing"hatespeech, and that this was one major factor in pushing him to the right. Not exactly the desired effect (I should hope) .
-
There are some things though that defy party lines and simply become about humanity. The current protests and what the Black population is fighting for is about humanity. That has nothing to do with the left or right ideology and that's when I lose compassion for people who refuse to acknowledge that no matter what party you side with, Black people are born with less advantage, less opportunity, are overlooked for job promotions, are less trusted, are assumed to be gang affiliated when they're young, have women clutch their purses when they get into an elevator etc etc etc.
-
There are some things though that defy party lines and simply become about humanity.
Mitt Romney marching with BLM protesters showed that very well.
Although the lack of humanity and lack of recognition of the problems facing minorities does tend to coagulate around certain right wing groups and leaders.
-
There are some things though that defy party lines and simply become about humanity.
Mitt Romney marching with BLM protesters showed that very well.
Although the lack of humanity and lack of recognition of the problems facing minorities does tend to coagulate around certain right wing groups and leaders.
Agreed. I was thinking more along the lines of people screaming it's all leftist agenda when it's about humanity.
-
PS I feel its worth adding that you can (1) substitute pretty much any ideology for right-wing, there.
Okay, okay, it's my experience, TBH, that those who want to learn are apt to gravitate towards the left (albeit painfully slowly in some cases) but, for one thing: (2) how can we be sure that my own bias towards the left isn't influencing my perceptions? and for another: it's pretty damned obvious to me that quite a of those who "regurgitate propaganda and spew hate towards those who do not agree with them"(3) consider themse;ves left wing, and are generally regarded as such. It would be nice and simple if those people were exclusively right wing, but they're not.
If we take Al as a handy example, it's painfully clear from many of his posts, that he feels personally affronted by the "(4) left-wing"hatespeech, and that this was one major factor in pushing him to the right. Not exactly the desired effect (I should hope) .
(1) Absolutely. I have lefty friends online who are in a constant state of disbelief that right wing parties keep getting elected among other things like lack of action on climate change. I tell them that they need to get out of their progressive bubbles more.
(2) You can be absolutely certain that your left-wing bias is influencing your perceptions. I know for sure that mine is. As painful as it is, I do try to learn about and understand conservative and right-wing perspectives.
(3) Yes, there are plenty of examples of these. The Democrats in the US are seen as radically left-wing by many in the US, but as Chomsky states they abandoned the working class 4 decades ago and it's probably fair to say that they have abandoned the middle class now as well. Sam Harris, his views are often bordering on alt-right, and yet he considers himself a lefty.
(4) Left-Wing hate speech? That is what conservative groups have become very good at, picking out some shouty college students and claiming that free speech is under threat. While support for actual freedom of speech is on the rise and is much higher among progressives than among conservatives.
The reality is that conservative groups have become a lot better at selling their narratives than the progressives have ever been. They have turned it into a science. It has become a culture war. The reality is that we've made a LOT of progress socially over the past few decades, far more than most of us would have thought possible, and there is bound to be some pushback. Meanwhile the left has not simply lost the economic struggle, they have effectively joined forces with the right. The only economically left wing politicians in the US, for example, that I can think of would be AOC and Bernie Sanders. Hillary Clinton? Joe Biden? Wall Street Pete? Anything but left wing economically.
-
https://boingboing.net/2020/06/09/cops-slash-dozens-of-car-tires.html
Cops and national guard went around a K Mart car park and slashed every tyre on every car.
Who actually believes their made-up reasons for doing this? Of course they weren't going to come out and admit that it was an act of spite towards protesters.
-
There must be video surveillance from the store into the parking lot and they've now pissed off the wrong people. They don't care much for media but now that you've gone after ALL the media, the media will go after you.
-
There must be video surveillance from the store into the parking lot and they've now pissed off the wrong people. They don't care much for media but now that you've gone after ALL the media, the media will go after you.
Cops have been assaulting media, shooting media with rubber bullets, arresting media. It seems like they already think of the media as their enemy. I hope the media does change its tune after this and demand that cops be held accountable.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-06-02/channel-7-journalists-assaulted-police-george-floyd-protesters/12312056
"In these examples, journalists have been shot with rubber bullets, targeted with stun grenades, tear-gassed, physically attacked, pepper-sprayed and arrested," Bellingcat analyst Nick Waters said in a report.
"Although in some incidents it is possible the journalists were hit or affected accidentally, in the majority of the cases we have recorded the journalists are clearly identifiable as press, and it is clear that they are being deliberately targeted.
"This pattern of violence against journalists is replicated in several cities, but appears most intense in Minneapolis."
This is how organizations with toxic and violent cultures, that think they are above the law, behave.
-
Nice reply, Mo. :) Just gonna, skip the yup , yup, yup and be a teeny bit picky here:
(4) Left-Wing hate speech? That is what conservative groups have become very good at, picking out some shouty college students and claiming that free speech is under threat. While support for actual freedom of speech is on the rise and is much higher among progressives than among conservatives.
Er, play fair, I put that phrase in quote marks , didn't I? :laugh: And you rubbed them out. I don't think any of those folk are genuinely left wing, as well you know. I think you're probably right about support for actual free speech being on the rise, but that;s to say we've just been through the absolute nadir, here in sunny Britain. The hatespeech towards Brexiters, for one obvious example, was singularly vituperous, extremely widspread and singularly toxic for the white lower classes - who still have bugger all to show for their natural-born advantage except for their precious (and curiously impotent) white hides. Lazy bastards :laugh: And that hasn't simmerered down so much as attached itself to other issues., such as overpopulation (which still has to be approached very gingerly and apologetically. for fear of the "racist"accusations). But, anyway, hatespeech against the lower classes is not, and never was, just a "free speech" issue , nor is it just a "racism" related issue , it's multi-pronged. It is and always was totally permissible to be prejudiced against the poor (just so long as they're predominately white, ofc. and so long as you're not genuinely left wing) and so the right and the pseudo left can happily go to town on the poor whenever they're looking around for a scapegoat; and they can couch their attack in any terms they fancy, just so long as it's half way credible. ""Benefts scroungers" was still a popular jibe, until it came to lockdown. :apondering: They might have to be a bit careful from now on :LOL:
Anyways, just because Al had his very own cock-eyed take on it, dosn't mean it's not real.
The reality is that we've made a LOT of progress socially over the past few decades, far more than most of us would have thought possible, and there is bound to be some pushback.
Ummm, from a British point of view , we made a heckova lot of progress socially following WW2. which trailed to a halt and went into reverse during the seventies. The past four decades have all been relentless pushback. I'm pretty sure you know that already though. I just mean to ask , what does "we" mean in this context? And to observe that, if your pushback has only just started, I hope to god that you dont have to suffer four decades or more of this thing.
Meanwhile the left has not simply lost the economic struggle, they have effectively joined forces with the right. The only economically left wing politicians in the US, for example, that I can think of would be AOC and Bernie Sanders. Hillary Clinton? Joe Biden? Wall Street Pete? Anything but left wing economically.
Exactltly. But the economic struggle is the thing, isn't it? If you're not willing to put your money where your mouth is, then you're definitely not left wing. Just hot air. :(
-
There must be video surveillance from the store into the parking lot and they've now pissed off the wrong people. They don't care much for media but now that you've gone after ALL the media, the media will go after you.
Cops have been assaulting media, shooting media with rubber bullets, arresting media. It seems like they already think of the media as their enemy. I hope the media does change its tune after this and demand that cops be held accountable.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-06-02/channel-7-journalists-assaulted-police-george-floyd-protesters/12312056
"In these examples, journalists have been shot with rubber bullets, targeted with stun grenades, tear-gassed, physically attacked, pepper-sprayed and arrested," Bellingcat analyst Nick Waters said in a report.
"Although in some incidents it is possible the journalists were hit or affected accidentally, in the majority of the cases we have recorded the journalists are clearly identifiable as press, and it is clear that they are being deliberately targeted.
"This pattern of violence against journalists is replicated in several cities, but appears most intense in Minneapolis."
This is how organizations with toxic and violent cultures, that think they are above the law, behave.
Oh I know. I was aware but they're usually doing it in the hype of the protest when adrenaline is coursing. To be this covert and sneaky and intentional in a different way, it will escalate things because it changes the dynamic of the "relationship" for lack of a better word. They've gone from intentionally hurting people to also intentionally damaging property belonging to the people they intend to abuse.
-
Sorry Walkie, yes, I knew that you don't believe that "left wing hate speech" is an actual thing. Sorry for leaving off the quotation marks. I am violently in agreement with you.
By social progress I mean, for one thing, how overt racism has declined. You don't often see comedians in blackface and putting on bad Indian accents and playing up to racial stereotypes for laughs these days. The racist jokes we used to tell when I was at school were horrendous, but if my kids went to school and told one of those jokes I'd likely get a call from the headmaster and a "please explain". You can be openly gay these days without too much risk of being thrown off a cliff (as was happening on a semi-regular basis in Sydney's Eastern Suburbs in the 80s, and the cops pretty much didn't even bother to investigate) or arrested. Gay couples can adopt kids. Gay men don't need to befriend or recruit young ladies to use as "handbags" (pretend girlfriends for gay dudes). Cops have gone from bashing people for trying to hold a gay pride march in Sydney to having their own float in the parade.
In terms of economic progress, despite huge gains in productivity, the working class has often gone backwards in terms of real income, job security and getting enough hours to be able to afford the basics, and social welfare and public services like health and transport have (of course) been deliberately defunded. That's what I'm talking about in terms of the left losing the economic struggle. But at least the billionaires are doing okay.
-
Oh I know. I was aware but they're usually doing it in the hype of the protest when adrenaline is coursing. To be this covert and sneaky and intentional in a different way, it will escalate things because it changes the dynamic of the "relationship" for lack of a better word. They've gone from intentionally hurting people to also intentionally damaging property belonging to the people they intend to abuse.
That's true, the cops can't exactly claim that they "accidentally" slashed their tyres. But rubber bullets in the head are difficult to prove as intentional. Of course, rubber bullets are supposed to be fired at the ground so if they are being fired at head height there is clear intent to do harm. Although, of course, being able to pin that intent on an individual cop is another thing.
Either way the cops have made their open hostility and violence towards the media very clear, and if you look at the way the media is reporting positively on calls to defund police departments, it seems like they are copping the backlash already.
-
Accidentally slashing the tyres of every car in a parking lot? Well, no less believable than that the old man slipped and fell rather than being pushed. ::)
-
Accidentally slashing the tyres of every car in a parking lot? Well, no less believable than that the old man slipped and fell rather than being pushed. ::)
The only time I ever "Accidentally" cut someones tires down, we were in a demolition derby and I was winning, but I did not want to win that way.
I can think of many ways to "secure" a parking lot full of cars without cutting tires.
Honestly, I can not believe this, but I have to. We are all witnesses.
FUCK!
They want to disband and defund this police force, I say, fine, start at the top.
-
Yup, they need to rethink the police. What they have doesn't work.
-
I think disbanding it and defunding it is a dumb idea unless it's going to be replaced with a whole new better trained force. The police system may be corrupt but not third world corrupt, and anarchistic gangs would be worse.
-
I'm assuming they'd not be closing down the entire force without having a think about what to replace it with.
-
The reality is that police can’t continue on as they are and changing the funding would support what they’re actually trained to do (basic policing) while also funding other organizations who can support the things they’re not trained to do. Especially mental health calls. No matter how much training you give the PD, it won’t be enough because it’s not their specialty and it shouldn’t be. They escalate situations that could be safely de-escalated with appropriate measures.
You strip them down to basic policing and it's basically about investing and divesting. Divest money from local and state/provincial police budgets and reinvesting it into communities, mental health services, and social service programs.
The model as it stands right now isn't working. Police are being sent for wellness checks instead of wellness social workers being sent and if you're dealing with someone with intense mental health issues (which happens a lot in the group home, shelter and homeless calls that they receive) they have a tendency to use excessive force or arrest when it's not needed.
-
I think disbanding it and defunding it is a dumb idea unless it's going to be replaced with a whole new better trained force. The police system may be corrupt but not third world corrupt, and anarchistic gangs would be worse.
While I agree with you fully, the insurmountable task of training for every possibility is not do-able.
BUT, some broad level of all training should include reminders to respect and protect every person's civil rights.
Allowing a suspect to breathe while being taken into custody should come well before constitutionally provided civil rights, however.
I do not believe all cops set their day to see who much harm they can do. Even that despicable lowlife, Chauvin most likely did not chuckle over coffee that morning saying shit like, "I gonna kill me a nigger today." And yet it happened.
(forgive the slur, apologies to the memory of Mr. Floyd) But I think just not caring (maybe it's just today for this cop, but every other cop and every other American is responsible for his behavior if it is wrong) is something that HAS to be constantly peer monitored, by each officer, of each officer by every other officer always.
-
I think reevaluating the protocol for wellness checks, like Phoenix said, is one important piece of fixing the system. A cop without psych intervention training shouldn't be put in a position of dealing with a potentially suicidal or unstable person. Nor should a social worker or crisis intervention worker be put in a position where they risk being shot at. Maybe the answer is cop/psych teams, maybe it's specialized training for certain cops who go out on those calls, but it's sickening to see a basic wellness check on a vulnerable person end in brutality because the cops involved viewed every behaviour through the lens of criminal violence.
-
I wish they put more on the force but there's not many of those teams at all. In a region near me that has over 1.2 million people there are only 2 teams. Just the other day the police were called for a wellness check for a young man with schziophrenia (his parents called because he was trying to start a fire) and he was shot and killed. The SIU was called in but they're not releasing any details to the media other than the officer had very minor injuries.
My issue with the cop/psych combo is that I've seen them in action and they weren't good. I have someone close to me who lives in a group home and they responded to a call regarding her (she's 16 biologically but at a grade 2 level developmentally) and it was made clear they were only there to be used as backup. The Psych was successful de-escalating and the cop got impatient and said it was taking too long and she either had to stop her behaviour immediately or go to jail. Obviously she freaked out because she was terrified and she started crying and hitting herself and he hauled her off to jail.
-
Many people always seem to think that more training or better training will "fix" these problems with police forces?
Training only works if cops are held accountable by the law and by their colleagues. Would better training have stopped those cops from slashing tyres? Training doesn't fix a toxic culture. The cop that killed George Floyd may not have woken up that day planning to kill a black person, but he did wake up with a sense of entitlement to use whatever level of force he wanted to and get away with it. He did wake up with a sense of entitlement to brutalise suspects, inflict suffering on them for whatever justification he had inside his own mind. He did wake up with a sense of entitlement that his colleagues would back him up while he used whatever level of force he wanted to, and the toxic culture meant that a man with a long list of complaints against him for excessive use of force was put in charge of a couple of new recruits. Is there a likelihood that the situation was deliberately escalated and the level of restraint used was excessive and prolonged in order for the new recruits to be shown "how these things are handled?".
Think about rubber bullets. Cops are trained or at least instructed to shoot them at the ground, and never to use them at close range and never to fire them at people's heads, as they can cause harm. All the training in the world doesn't fix the issue where cops actually want to harm protesters or journalists, and I don't for a second believe that cops are "accidentally" shooting rubber bullets at people's heads and chests at close range.
This is not a new problem. The new problem is that almost everyone is walking around with a high resolution video camera in their pocket and cops can't lie their way out of it. Although, of course, they still try.
-
Exactly. And when it comes to Chauvin and Floyd? Chauvin knew Floyd from a local bar and Floyd's co-workers say he had a beef with him so this really comes down to payback and not anything accidental. He figured he could get away with it and in most ways he did. Sure he's arrested but Floyd is dead and that's what he wanted.
-
https://www.theindychannel.com/news/local-news/arrest-of-woman-caught-on-video-during-indianapolis-protests-under-internal-investigation
This is a good one. Cop gropes a woman's breasts, woman pulls away from him, woman is savagely beaten by other cops. How does training fix this?
"Under investigation" is code for "we're trying to figure out how to make up a story that justifies cops' behaviour".
-
Exactly.
-
Exactly. And when it comes to Chauvin and Floyd? Chauvin knew Floyd from a local bar and Floyd's co-workers say he had a beef with him so this really comes down to payback and not anything accidental. He figured he could get away with it and in most ways he did. Sure he's arrested but Floyd is dead and that's what he wanted.
Was the intent to kill Floyd or was the intent to use his training in order to brutalise and inflict suffering on Floyd with no concern for his welfare or life?
He is arrested, but will he even be convicted? There is a good chance that he won't, the neck restraint used was legal and the question will be whether he can be held legally accountable for using the restraint for too long.
People act like this was a one-off, but the reality is that the killings are just the tip of the iceberg when it comes to excessive use of sub-lethal force.
-
I think he's going to be convicted (but the the other 3 may not) because the state can't afford the rioting that will come from letting him go free. Besides, he'd be a dead man walking if he were set free.
And I do think his intent was to kill Floyd. He wouldn't remove his knee until medics told him too. He refused to roll Floyd over on his side despite the fact that he was handcuffed. He wouldn't take his knee off even after being told Floyd had no pulse. If someone becomes unresponsive, you have zero need to keep your knee on his neck for an additional 2 minutes and 53 seconds. That's why I think he wanted him dead.
-
And this why Al has lost me as a friend and scrap is in strike one on FB. And this is being a libertarian will lose my support.
-
Phoenix, it either was a deliberate killing or it may as well have been. Chauvin certainly was confident of getting away with it, he killed Floyd while being filmed and in front of multiple witnesses. And with his fellow officers backing him up.
That, to me, smacks of a toxic culture and a lack of accountability. If training fixes those sort of criminal attitudes and behaviours, why do we need jails? Why not just give all convicted criminals more training?
-
And this why Al has lost me as a friend and scrap is in strike one on FB. And this is being a libertairian will lose my support.
Imagine the cognitive dissonance for Al. How could he possibly choose which group he hates more, cops or BLM?
-
Phoenix, it either was a deliberate killing or it may as well have been. Chauvin certainly was confident of getting away with it, he killed Floyd while being filmed and in front of multiple witnesses. And with his fellow officers backing him up.
That, to me, smacks of a toxic culture and a lack of accountability. If training fixes those sort of criminal attitudes and behaviours, why do we need jails? Why not just give all convicted criminals more training?
Exactly. And don't even get me started on the prison system, especially in the US where it's privatized and basically a straight shot from streets to prison for so many Black people, men in particular. There was a case (I forget which state and I wish I could find the actual case) that just went through the system. White male (19) and Black male (20) both committed the same crime, both seen by the same judge. White male got a couple of years Black male got over 20.
If I find it, I'll post it.
-
And this why Al has lost me as a friend and scrap is in strike one on FB. And this is being a libertairian will lose my support.
this is sweet and touching (not Joe Biden-type touching, normal touching)
No not really. You sound like you are talking gibberish, you buffoon
-
tempted to quote everybody here, but will limit myself to these :
[EDIT: Five new replies appeared whilst i was writing this, mostly pretty irrelevant :laugh: I refer to the previous discussion]
I think reevaluating the protocol for wellness checks, like Phoenix said, is one important piece of fixing the system. A cop without psych intervention training shouldn't be put in a position of dealing with a potentially suicidal or unstable person. Nor should a social worker or crisis intervention worker be put in a positionwhere they risk being shot at. Maybe the answer is cop/psych teams, maybe it's specialized training for certain cops who go out on those calls, but it's sickening to see a basic wellness check on a vulnerable person end in brutality because the cops involved viewed every behaviour through the lens of criminal violence.
I wish they put more on the force but there's not many of those teams at all. In a region near me that has over 1.2 million people there are only 2 teams. Just the other day the police were called for a wellness check for a young man with schziophrenia (his parents called because he was trying to start a fire) and he was shot and killed. The SIU was called in but they're not releasing any details to the media other than the officer had very minor injuries.
My issue with the cop/psych combo is that I've seen them in action and they weren't good. I have someone close to me who lives in a group home and they responded to a call regarding her (she's 16 biologically but at a grade 2 level developmentally) and it was made clear they were only there to be used as backup. The Psych was successful de-escalating and the cop got impatient and said it was taking too long and she either had to stop her behaviour immediately or go to jail. Obviously she freaked out because she was terrified and she started crying and hitting herself and he hauled her off to jail.
Hmm. why shouldn't a social worker or crisis intervention worker be put in a position where they risk being shot at?
One reason that springs to mind is: because they're more valuable than brutes like Chauvin, and we wouldn't want to risk losing them :laugh: but i'm sure that many would be happy to volunteer.
OK, i see other pragmatic reasons why not, and i very much take Phoenix' point about that team. Might be ifxed perhaps, by giving the psych worker authority over the policeman. and not vice versa?
But the whole freaking system clearly needs a radical overhaul. Tinkering with what's already in place is not gonna change things enough.
One radical thought i have is: how about training people who are going to be dealing with the public in delicate and potentially dangerous situations in the caring professions first? Then adding full police training and full police powers on top of that? I'd really like to see alll policeman replaced with people who had that sort of training.
Costly in the short term ofc, but the benefits to society could be enormous. And if it saved these escalations from occuring, that would entirely justify any financial investment
I don't know how it is the USA, but in Britain, we could start off pretty cheaply and easily by recruiting unemployed counsellors into the police (it pays to very careful with the spelling there :laugh:) We have something like 10 times as many trained counsellors than we have jobs for professional counsellors. This happens party because the caring professions are badly underfunded. and part;y because counselling courses are highly popular, one reason being that they are known to be useful tools for self-development. I've personally seen people sign up for those courses, and come out much better balanced and more sensitive. If the trainee can get a job as a professional counsllor, that's a bonus. Often, ofc. they don't get any sort of job at all, because we've way more people than we need. I'm sure that many of those people would love to do police training on top of that and wind up with a socially useful career. People cry out for such roles, even those with good salaries already. Most people would swap their good salary in a heartbeat for the chance to something meaningful instead. Such opportunities are wasted on oiks like Chauvin
But that's not all. We still need a thorough investigation, by psychologists into how that toxic cop culture develops, and what we can do to to undermine that development . We all know about it. It happens all over the world, and it's almost a cliche.
I believe that the findings of Stanley Milgrams famous obedience study are highly relevant here. It doesnt explain why a police officer will ""happily run over an old lady to get to a fellow officer in trouble " (words spoken to me by an actual british policeman once, at a social occasion) but it certainly explains why authoritarian power structures are apt to propagate atrocities. We badly need a whole new model, and not only in police forces.
As for police cover-ups, I think, to be fair, we have to bear in mind that decent, conscientious officers can too easily be coerced into co-operating with cover-ups; as was demonstrated by inquiries into the Hillsborough football disaster in England, possibly the most extensive Police cover-up to ever come to light. And it took 30 years to bring it to light. Thousands of wtnesses, including police officers were coerced into altering their statements; and one police officer said he found out, by chance, that his own statement had been altered without his knowlege or consent (No knowing how extensive that was). Increasinly huge nunbers of police became involved in the cover-up operation, not all of them willingly. All because the officer in charge of crowd control that day couldn't face it coming to light that his own bad decisions were responsible for 96 people being killed. Worse, it would have been substantially fewer than 96 dead , if not for his immediate actions to cover his own butt once he grasped what was happening; all of which served to interfere with rescue operations.
Nobody should have that much power. '
-
And this why Al has lost me as a friend and scrap is in strike one on FB. And this is being a libertairian will lose my support.
Imagine the cognitive dissonance for Al. How could he possibly choose which group he hates more, cops or BLM?
I have my limits and he can think of me what he wants.
-
And this why Al has lost me as a friend and scrap is in strike one on FB. And this is being a libertairian will lose my support.
Imagine the cognitive dissonance for Al. How could he possibly choose which group he hates more, cops or BLM?
I have my moments of hate and rage, but, I have to check myself at the door and get out of that state. It's not a good condition to live in. And it seems a lot of people are doing that these days. Especially Al, but, that's his choice.
Time to take my gibberish and go have a nice cup of tea and see if anything intelligent is on the boob tube.
-
And this why Al has lost me as a friend and scrap is in strike one on FB. And this is being a libertairian will lose my support.
Imagine the cognitive dissonance for Al. How could he possibly choose which group he hates more, cops or BLM?
I have my moments of hate and rage, but, I have to check myself at the door and get out of that state. It's not a good condition to live in. And it seems a lot of people are doing that these days. Especially Al, but, that's his choice.
Time to take my gibberish and go have a nice cup of tea and see if anything intelligent is on the boob tube.
This is a result of Feminism.
Men need to walk it off and blame the Patriarchy for causing this and also (whilst they are at it) consider themselves lucky to be the Patriarchal oppressors. Clearly a woman was really the victim here.
Yup, Feminism is cultural poison.
-
And this why Al has lost me as a friend and scrap is in strike one on FB. And this is being a libertairian will lose my support.
Imagine the cognitive dissonance for Al. How could he possibly choose which group he hates more, cops or BLM?
I have my moments of hate and rage, but, I have to check myself at the door and get out of that state. It's not a good condition to live in. And it seems a lot of people are doing that these days. Especially Al, but, that's his choice.
Time to take my gibberish and go have a nice cup of tea and see if anything intelligent is on the boob tube.
This is a result of Feminism.
Men need to walk it off and blame the Patriarchy for causing this and also (whilst they are at it) consider themselves lucky to be the Patriarchal oppressors. Clearly a woman was really the victim here.
Yup, Feminism is cultural poison.
Oh. And Eat shit Rock Hound.
-
HHHhhhhhhhhhhhmmmmmmm, misogyny, racism, white nationalism, just plain hatred. :apondering:
-
HHHhhhhhhhhhhhmmmmmmm, misogyny, racism, white nationalism, just plain hatred. :apondering:
Show me where I have done that and be very clear. Big claims demand big evidence.
-
HHHhhhhhhhhhhhmmmmmmm, misogyny, racism, white nationalism, just plain hatred. :apondering:
Show me where I have done that and be very clear. Big claims demand big evidence.
Your posts here and elsewhere, your user name and your support of trumpolini are all the evidence I need. Have a good life!
-
HHHhhhhhhhhhhhmmmmmmm, misogyny, racism, white nationalism, just plain hatred. :apondering:
Show me where I have done that and be very clear. Big claims demand big evidence.
Your posts here and elsewhere, your user name and your support of trumpolini are all the evidence I need. Have a good life!
You really don’t have much idea of what you are talking about and have decided to: capture a moment without context; scramble for what little context you can then base what can on the situation; then base a narrative around this; and lastly to promote said narrative warts and all.
-
I don't have any openings to give a fuck this week or next week. Looks like I'm booked to not give a fuck until July. I might be able to give a fuck then. Buh-bye.
-
I don't have any openings to give a fuck this week or next week. Looks like I'm booked to not give a fuck until July. I might be able to give a fuck then. Buh-bye.
I do not believe you have the intellectual goods to do much more. What we see is what we get from you. That is okay.
-
:laugh:
-
:laugh:
:clap:
-
On the subject "I Quit", it is 8 years today that I gave up smoking.
-
On the subject "I Quit", it is 8 years today that I gave up smoking.
Well done. That is by no means, an easy task.
-
On the subject "I Quit", it is 8 years today that I gave up smoking.
Well done. That is by no means, an easy task.
There are still days when I smell cigarette smoke and salivate. I guess you never "quit" anything, you just stop doing it.
-
On the subject "I Quit", it is 8 years today that I gave up smoking.
Well done. That is by no means, an easy task.
There are still days when I smell cigarette smoke and salivate. I guess you never "quit" anything, you just stop doing it.
That's very true. My Mum hasn't smoked in 34 years and she still won't stay she's a non-smoker, but rather that she doesn't smoke anymore. She said it's very much a head game for her.
-
On the subject "I Quit", it is 8 years today that I gave up smoking.
Well done. That is by no means, an easy task.
There are still days when I smell cigarette smoke and salivate. I guess you never "quit" anything, you just stop doing it.
It's been 15 years for me but I still miss it from time to time.
-
11 years here and I still have to remind myself I don't smoke when the impulse takes me. :facepalm2:
-
For me, since last Christmas. Still don't crave it.
-
My Mum hasn't smoked in 34 years and she still won't stay she's a non-smoker, but rather that she doesn't smoke anymore. She said it's very much a head game for her.
I'd never say I'm a non-smoker, just that I don't smoke anymore. The former would feel like a lie.
-
https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2020/06/17/boogaloo-steven-carrillo/?fbclid=IwAR2ztv4kq7722TwVdjrFx1w4L90VgdEpAMnmNcsmC7w6j_Nhhc5KP8tbwfk&utm_campaign=wp_main&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook
2 cops shot, one dead, near a peaceful BLM protest, by a white member of a right wing group to start a race war.
-
https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2020/06/17/boogaloo-steven-carrillo/?fbclid=IwAR2ztv4kq7722TwVdjrFx1w4L90VgdEpAMnmNcsmC7w6j_Nhhc5KP8tbwfk&utm_campaign=wp_main&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook
2 cops shot, one dead, near a peaceful BLM protest, by a white member of a right wing group to start a race war.
Yep, thats what trumpolini and his acolytes want. I'm sure al and his ilk would love that!
-
I'm totally not surprised, I'm just glad they caught him and they had proof to out him.
-
I can't say I was surprised either. :'(
-
sadly, you now have to subscribe to read articles in the Washington Post.
That's bit of a luxury for poor folk subsisting on benefits, isn't it? Especiallyl if they're living in the middle of Britain! :LOL:
-
Thankfully there's a bunch of other good quality, reality-biased news outlets who will gladly let you read all you want without paying a dime and will even ignore your ad blocker. Such as The Baffler and NPR. Screw WP.
-
Thankfully there's a bunch of other good quality, reality-biased news outlets who will gladly let you read all you want without paying a dime and will even ignore your ad blocker. Such as The Baffler and NPR. Screw WP.
I just love that term "reality-biased".
I looked up the Baffler, Sounds very intersting (thanks :) ) but clearly no substitute for the daly rag
The Baffler is America’s leading voice of interesting and unexpected left-wing political criticism, cultural analysis, short stories, poems and art. We publish six print issues annually, as well as online content every day of the cursed workweek.
Founded in 1988 by Thomas Frank as “the journal that blunts the cutting edge,” the magazine is currently edited by Jonathon Sturgeon and headquartered in New York.
...
Our regular subjects include Silicon Valley snake-oil, the deadening weight of consumer capitalism, our faithless media, and the redemptive promise of people claiming control of their own lives. Submit your own dyspeptic work for our consideration over here.
The Baffler is owned by the non-profit Baffler Foundation and the majority of our budget comes from tax-deductible donations. We are as charitable as a church, and certainly more fun.
Gotta love that ethos. :laugh:
For daily news and quality journalism the online version of our UK rag the Guardian is pretty damned good. They put their money where their left-wing mouth is and let you read as much as you like, subscription ofr no subscription. I do hope that they manage to get enough subsctions to keep that up!
But, really , its not that there's a dearth of decent, accessible news outlets, so much as it's extremely annoying that folks 'attempts to share and discuss news stories on forums like this are repeatedly undermined by the moneygrubbing publishers :grrr:
-
PS
Screw WP.
I think we have a smilie for that, don't we?
....ohhhhh, different WP. Well, well, what a coincidence. Seems like a most unfortunate acronym :evillaugh:
-
I like Washington Post and fully understand that they have to charge money.
-
I like Washington Post and fully understand that they have to charge money.
the could let people read enough articles per week for free that folk can follow up citations , for example, withoutt having to subscribe to every newspaper on earth. they wouldn't be losng any revenue that way. those who want to read that particu;ar paper on a daily basis would still have to subscribe. And as for the rest of us? well, what are the chances that we both care enough and can afford to subscribe to every online journal on earth? they just lose the chance to reel some of us in by hiding behind a paywall.
-
I'm not sure if the Washington Post allows limited free views or if some articles simply aren't pay to view, but I was able to view that article link. :dunno:
-
I can access that article without subscribing.
I'm pretty sure the Washington Post allows you to read one or two articles a week or month before paywalling you.
I don't pay subscriptions for online newspapers and I have been known to slip into incognito mode to get around those limits BUT I do get that journalism is in decline as a profession because their traditional revenue sources have dried up.
-
hmm. maybe the allowance is so niggardly that i used mine up already, just following occasional links on here? :dunno:
i vry much appreciate that newspapers need to generate funds somehow. but it seems pretty counterproductive to me, if those rags with a left-wing bias (not really talking about WP here, though) hide themselves beghind a paywall, supposing that their political stance is sincere. i mean, if the poorest readers can't realistically access quality journalism, then you'll surely get more of them turning to The Dail Mail , Fox news etc. thus strengthening the political right in the long term. So, hats off to the Guardian for not going the pay wall route; and i very much hope that works out for them.
As you said., Mo:
I do get that journalism is in decline as a profession because their traditional revenue sources have dried up.
Traditional sources meaning advertising?Yeah. it's an intersting situation. On the positive side, that could mean that capitalism loses its stranglehold on the media, couldn't it? or....yeah. well, there are plenty of potentially nregatve sides, ofc, depending on how the media adapt.
-
As you said., Mo:
I do get that journalism is in decline as a profession because their traditional revenue sources have dried up.
Traditional sources meaning advertising?Yeah. it's an intersting situation. On the positive side, that could mean that capitalism loses its stranglehold on the media, couldn't it? or....yeah. well, there are plenty of potentially nregatve sides, ofc, depending on how the media adapt.
Much of the media has already adapted by not paying article writers, or paying them only a pittance.
So a lot of the thoughtful articles that you see in the media are written by amateur writers, writing for media publications largely as a hobby, or perhaps in the hope that they can build a profile that will lead to paid employment in a related field.
Consider also that the media is still a great way to spread ideas, even if there is not a lot of money to be made in running media corporations any more. Ideological that are well funded and able to pay influencers and writers who are prepared to spread their propaganda are likely to be better at spreading their message than those that are less well organized and less well-funded. You can see this a lot throughout the media now.
-
US news media outlets tend to regurgitate each other, so if one source is blocked then it's usually easy to find another one who has echoed it.
-
US news media outlets tend to regurgitate each other, so if one source is blocked then it's usually easy to find another one who has echoed it.
That's pretty universal too.
Another thing that underfunded media outlets do these days is to print media releases pretty much word-for-word, as it saves on employing someone to investigate any claims made. Lobby groups, for example, will pay someone to put together an article for the media that is pretty much ready to publish. This is just one way that a strapped-for-cash media can be manipulated. It's not a new thing, but probably more noticeable these days.
-
https://outline.com/
Paste the link to the article into the box and click on create outline.
It still works with a few others as well...not with the Times any longer though.
-
I like Washington Post and fully understand that they have to charge money.
the could let people read enough articles per week for free that folk can follow up citations , for example, withoutt having to subscribe to every newspaper on earth. they wouldn't be losng any revenue that way. those who want to read that particu;ar paper on a daily basis would still have to subscribe. And as for the rest of us? well, what are the chances that we both care enough and can afford to subscribe to every online journal on earth? they just lose the chance to reel some of us in by hiding behind a paywall.
But I do think they would lose revenue that way. Publishing is not the money-making scheme it once was.
I guess it's up to each of us to choose what we want to pay for. I've chosen to subscribe to New York Times instead.
-
And, as MOSW pointed out, some "adapt" by not paying their writers, resulting in a bunch of amateur hacks producing content then quoted by the likes of Al.
Of course, not paying writers is not new in any way. I remember writing for some computer mags that would offer me free software instead of money. Said software was given to them for free for review purposes. ::)
-
I did the same thing once upon a time.
I was fourteen though. :zoinks:
-
Wrote for computer mags?
-
And, as MOSW pointed out, some "adapt" by not paying their writers, resulting in a bunch of amateur hacks producing content then quoted by the likes of Al.
Yep. And is Al gonna read quality journalism instead if it's hidden behind a paywall and he has to subscribe to read what it says? ofc not, if he subscribes to anything at all, it will be to something that confirms his bias. If all these outfits just give us just enough free reading per month that we can click on links to articles quoted on fora like this when the topic comes up in discussion, then the Als of this world get some exposure to quality (and relatively unbiased) journalism, which has surely got to be better than none at all?
As for papers that have a left-wing bias, like the Guardian: I do, like I said, very much applaud them for offering unlimited free reading online, because otherwise they're pretty much undercutting their whole raison d'etre aren't they? I've long thought it ironic that the price of their print edition is way beyond the means of the poorer people in the UK, which pretty much leaves them in the position of educating the educated and preaching to the choir; whilst the underclass get pulled towards the right by cheap, slogan-chanting tabloids . Nowadays, the internet gives them a chance to be freely availble to all, and they've seized that chance with both hands. Now, given that do need subscriptions to survive, that's a risky move; however supposing their left-wing bias is sincere, i should think it's an essential move, politically speaking; especially given that so many of our public libraries (where you could once-upon-a-time call in and read a wide selection of newpapers for free) have now been closed down.
I'm not suggest ing that WP and NYT should do the same, but it's a pretty poor do that you had to choose between them so categorically : full access to one, no access at all to the other. So, if they all do the same, then you can't check a variety of sources, when you suspect that significant information has been omitted - as I've done, on occasion, with a number of stories. Haven't you? and often that turns out to be painfully true . Beyonfd simp;e left-wing and right -wing bias, there are a whole bunch of other biases that influence reporters and editors, ofc , most often resulting in a "lie by omission" . The access to a wide range of sources that the internet has given us has made it possible for ordinary folk like us to get a more complete picture, when it matters. It's really sad to lose that facility, and could become deeply worrying, if it actually comes to the point that you can only get free access to those amateur sources that you despise.
I was taught, at school (in English Language classes) to avoid being over-influenced by media bias by reading a wide varietyy of news sources. Ofc that isn't practical on a daily basis (I don't even follow the new at all, on a daily basis, TBH. Sometimes I'm too caught up in other things) but i still do that whenever an issue is especially important or especially interesting to me. I have never fotgotten that excellent advice. Do they not teach that in schools anymore? does nobody care anymore? because it seems obvious ro me that, unless we happen to be pretty wealthy, we do need free access to a variety of news services in order to follow that advice.
That the Washingtn Post etc might lose a handful of paid subscriptions if they don't cut back on limited free viewing is by no ,eans a good enough argument to set against that general principle, IMO. I don't even believe that it's true. Getting all your news via the limited free subscription route would be such a faff, in practice, that only the dirt-poor (unab;e to afford a subscription anyway) or stubbornly tight-fisted (to the point of masochism) would bother '. I'm sure most of us get our news primarily from a single, preferred souce, whether that's online, in print, or TV, then supplement that with limited free viewing, as appropriate, sometimes checking citations in articles eleswhere, sometimes clicking on message-board links, sometimes digging for further info or alternative poits-of-view. None of that sort of activity would really justify subscribing to absolutely everything, so facilitating it wouldn;t resu;t in lost subscriptions; but conversely, cutrtailing that sort of activity would prevent theoccasional reader from developing a taste for a given source, and deciding to make that their primary news source , so potential subscribers would be lost.
Personally, I can say that if I'd had any disposable income, i would surely have subscribed to the NYT online at one pont, on the basis of a few really interesting articles of theirs that I'd read online (following a message board link) I was sorely tempted. anyway , because i used up my free allowance in no time, and could see quite a number of intrigueing headlines on their site that I wanted to follow . I has to sternly talk myself out of it. :laugh: Most people still do have disposable income , I believe? so I'm sure they must habe reeled in quite a number of folk who felt the same as me, but who would never have been exposed to the NYT otherwise. I've also been tempted into buying the print edition of mags , from my local newagent,. after reading online content. Again I'm sure I'm not the only one, and who could possibly keep track of that? In short, limited free vewing works brilliantly as advertising, can't believe the benefits don't outweigh the losses
-
The free content is shrinking as online newspapers struggle to stay in business. Yes, it sucks. At some point surely they will find other revenue models? Not a lot of people actually sign up for those subscriptions.
-
Wrote for computer mags?
Well one in particular, that paid me in review software.
-
White people who say, "All lives matter" are like the founding fathers who said "all men are created equal." while owning slaves!
-
White people who say, "All lives matter" are like the founding fathers who said "all men are created equal." while owning slaves!
I'm still waiting for the people who brought us "All Lives Matter" to get on the "All Trans Lives Matter" train.
-
White people who say, "All lives matter" are like the founding fathers who said "all men are created equal." while owning slaves!
I'm still waiting for the people who brought us "All Lives Matter" to get on the "All Trans Lives Matter" train.
:plus: They're also the same people who think it's okay to rip children away from their parents at the border.
-
Wrote for computer mags?
Well one in particular, that paid me in review software.
Which is fine if that is what you agreed to. Some of the ones I wrote for promised money but ended up offering software instead.
-
And, as MOSW pointed out, some "adapt" by not paying their writers, resulting in a bunch of amateur hacks producing content then quoted by the likes of Al.
Yep. And is Al gonna read quality journalism instead if it's hidden behind a paywall and he has to subscribe to read what it says? ofc not, if he subscribes to anything at all, it will be to something that confirms his bias. If all these outfits just give us just enough free reading per month that we can click on links to articles quoted on fora like this when the topic comes up in discussion, then the Als of this world get some exposure to quality (and relatively unbiased) journalism, which has surely got to be better than none at all?
As for papers that have a left-wing bias, like the Guardian: I do, like I said, very much applaud them for offering unlimited free reading online, because otherwise they're pretty much undercutting their whole raison d'etre aren't they? I've long thought it ironic that the price of their print edition is way beyond the means of the poorer people in the UK, which pretty much leaves them in the position of educating the educated and preaching to the choir; whilst the underclass get pulled towards the right by cheap, slogan-chanting tabloids . Nowadays, the internet gives them a chance to be freely availble to all, and they've seized that chance with both hands. Now, given that do need subscriptions to survive, that's a risky move; however supposing their left-wing bias is sincere, i should think it's an essential move, politically speaking; especially given that so many of our public libraries (where you could once-upon-a-time call in and read a wide selection of newpapers for free) have now been closed down.
I'm not suggest ing that WP and NYT should do the same, but it's a pretty poor do that you had to choose between them so categorically : full access to one, no access at all to the other. So, if they all do the same, then you can't check a variety of sources, when you suspect that significant information has been omitted - as I've done, on occasion, with a number of stories. Haven't you? and often that turns out to be painfully true . Beyonfd simp;e left-wing and right -wing bias, there are a whole bunch of other biases that influence reporters and editors, ofc , most often resulting in a "lie by omission" . The access to a wide range of sources that the internet has given us has made it possible for ordinary folk like us to get a more complete picture, when it matters. It's really sad to lose that facility, and could become deeply worrying, if it actually comes to the point that you can only get free access to those amateur sources that you despise.
I was taught, at school (in English Language classes) to avoid being over-influenced by media bias by reading a wide varietyy of news sources. Ofc that isn't practical on a daily basis (I don't even follow the new at all, on a daily basis, TBH. Sometimes I'm too caught up in other things) but i still do that whenever an issue is especially important or especially interesting to me. I have never fotgotten that excellent advice. Do they not teach that in schools anymore? does nobody care anymore? because it seems obvious ro me that, unless we happen to be pretty wealthy, we do need free access to a variety of news services in order to follow that advice.
That the Washingtn Post etc might lose a handful of paid subscriptions if they don't cut back on limited free viewing is by no ,eans a good enough argument to set against that general principle, IMO. I don't even believe that it's true. Getting all your news via the limited free subscription route would be such a faff, in practice, that only the dirt-poor (unab;e to afford a subscription anyway) or stubbornly tight-fisted (to the point of masochism) would bother '. I'm sure most of us get our news primarily from a single, preferred souce, whether that's online, in print, or TV, then supplement that with limited free viewing, as appropriate, sometimes checking citations in articles eleswhere, sometimes clicking on message-board links, sometimes digging for further info or alternative poits-of-view. None of that sort of activity would really justify subscribing to absolutely everything, so facilitating it wouldn;t resu;t in lost subscriptions; but conversely, cutrtailing that sort of activity would prevent theoccasional reader from developing a taste for a given source, and deciding to make that their primary news source , so potential subscribers would be lost.
Personally, I can say that if I'd had any disposable income, i would surely have subscribed to the NYT online at one pont, on the basis of a few really interesting articles of theirs that I'd read online (following a message board link) I was sorely tempted. anyway , because i used up my free allowance in no time, and could see quite a number of intrigueing headlines on their site that I wanted to follow . I has to sternly talk myself out of it. :laugh: Most people still do have disposable income , I believe? so I'm sure they must habe reeled in quite a number of folk who felt the same as me, but who would never have been exposed to the NYT otherwise. I've also been tempted into buying the print edition of mags , from my local newagent,. after reading online content. Again I'm sure I'm not the only one, and who could possibly keep track of that? In short, limited free vewing works brilliantly as advertising, can't believe the benefits don't outweigh the losses
The fact is that there are more free sources available out there than ever before. Before the interwebz, did you have regular, unpaid, access to anything like WP or NYT? Maybe through libraries and similar, but surely not in any significant numbers. Yet the best of the free sources available now frequently include a PayPal button, hoping for voluntary contributions, because it does cost money to produce good, reliable content.
It's interesting that now that there are so many sources available online for free, people start expecting the traditional sources to start giving their content away for free, too.
-
Just like Napster and PTP torrents did to music, right?
-
The fact is that there are more free sources available out there than ever before. Before the interwebz, did you have regular, unpaid, access to anything like WP or NYT? Maybe through libraries and similar, but surely not in any significant numbers. Yet the best of the free sources available now frequently include a PayPal button, hoping for voluntary contributions, because it does cost money to produce good, reliable content.
It's interesting that now that there are so many sources available online for free, people start expecting the traditional sources to start giving their content away for free, too.
I get what you're saying, but i'm not sure you even read what I was I was saying, because that isn't an answer, just another facile gripe about people expecting freebies.
But to answer your question: when i was a kid, I had free access to a wide range pf quality journals and newspapers in the school ;ibrary (I doubt that kids have that now, given that our underfunded State schools can't even afford to supply free textbooks any more) ; and as a young adult, I had access to the same via the local library , as well as access to free further education and free higher education; all of which is now in the past. This was before neoliberalism became the dominant theme in British politics, on the so-called Left, as well as the Right. I was brought up to beleve that the lower classes had just as much right to an eduction as everybody else, and to expect the State to support that right; because that's how it actually was, for an all-to-brief peroiod in postwar Britain. And, naturally, those of us who were born in that period all mistook that for the natural result of "progress"and "enlightenment", and never expected it to slam into reverse
I no longer expect that ofc , nor do I expect businesses to support that right instead. But when traditional souces such as the Guardian do support that right, via their online site, I applaud them , ofc, not because I personally like grabbing freebies, but because of the wider underlying social issues.
Hpw much does it actually cost these internet rags to let somebody who can't actually afford to subscribe browse for free? Precious little I should think. The only [problem, then, is how to squeeze money out of those who can afford it? There surely has to a better answer than simply continuing this retrogade motion back towards Victorian social mentality.
-
Just like Napster and PTP torrents did to music, right?
We'd need a new business model for news, which is not an easy thing and probably not comparable to what they're doing with music in the first place.
Look at something like NYT or WP. The problem is that unlike musicians, they're producing news daily, most of which will be - pardon the pun - old news before they'd even have time to spread.
Maybe something like iNews? Spotify for news? A monthly subscription allowing you to read them both, and other papers, too? And Spotify has till to show a profit, 12+ years after they first popped up.
-
The fact is that there are more free sources available out there than ever before. Before the interwebz, did you have regular, unpaid, access to anything like WP or NYT? Maybe through libraries and similar, but surely not in any significant numbers. Yet the best of the free sources available now frequently include a PayPal button, hoping for voluntary contributions, because it does cost money to produce good, reliable content.
It's interesting that now that there are so many sources available online for free, people start expecting the traditional sources to start giving their content away for free, too.
I get what you're saying, but i'm not sure you even read what I was I was saying, because that isn't an answer, just another facile gripe about people expecting freebies.
But to answer your question: when i was a kid, I had free access to a wide range pf quality journals and newspapers in the school ;ibrary (I doubt that kids have that now, given that our underfunded State schools can't even afford to supply free textbooks any more) ; and as a young adult, I had access to the same via the local library , as well as access to free further education and free higher education; all of which is now in the past. This was before neoliberalism became the dominant theme in British politics, on the so-called Left, as well as the Right. I was brought up to beleve that the lower classes had just as much right to an eduction as everybody else, and to expect the State to support that right; because that's how it actually was, for an all-to-brief peroiod in postwar Britain. And, naturally, those of us who were born in that period all mistook that for the natural result of "progress"and "enlightenment", and never expected it to slam into reverse
I no longer expect that ofc , nor do I expect businesses to support that right instead. But when traditional souces such as the Guardian do support that right, via their online site, I applaud them , ofc, not because I personally like grabbing freebies, but because of the wider underlying social issues.
Hpw much does it actually cost these internet rags to let somebody who can't actually afford to subscribe browse for free? Precious little I should think. The only [problem, then, is how to squeeze money out of those who can afford it? There surely has to a better answer than simply continuing this retrogade motion back towards Victorian social mentality.
I did read your post. I just don't agree with you.
How do you allow some people to read your content for free while at the same time making sure that others pay so that you can continue delivering that content? How do you find out who deserves their content for free and who doesn't? How much does it cost? I don't know, and I'm pretty sure you don't either. You want them to, and so you make a sweeping assumption, but you don't know.
No such thing as a free lunch, Walkie. It's not Victorian society mentality, simply a fact of life.
-
Library subscriptions seems a simple and already mentioned answer to the question of how to make it free for some. Then you have people paying for convenience of getting it direct to their own device or preferred format.
-
The fact is that there are more free sources available out there than ever before. Before the interwebz, did you have regular, unpaid, access to anything like WP or NYT? Maybe through libraries and similar, but surely not in any significant numbers. Yet the best of the free sources available now frequently include a PayPal button, hoping for voluntary contributions, because it does cost money to produce good, reliable content.
It's interesting that now that there are so many sources available online for free, people start expecting the traditional sources to start giving their content away for free, too.
I get what you're saying, but i'm not sure you even read what I was I was saying, because that isn't an answer, just another facile gripe about people expecting freebies.
But to answer your question: when i was a kid, I had free access to a wide range pf quality journals and newspapers in the school ;ibrary (I doubt that kids have that now, given that our underfunded State schools can't even afford to supply free textbooks any more) ; and as a young adult, I had access to the same via the local library , as well as access to free further education and free higher education; all of which is now in the past. This was before neoliberalism became the dominant theme in British politics, on the so-called Left, as well as the Right. I was brought up to beleve that the lower classes had just as much right to an eduction as everybody else, and to expect the State to support that right; because that's how it actually was, for an all-to-brief peroiod in postwar Britain. And, naturally, those of us who were born in that period all mistook that for the natural result of "progress"and "enlightenment", and never expected it to slam into reverse
I no longer expect that ofc , nor do I expect businesses to support that right instead. But when traditional souces such as the Guardian do support that right, via their online site, I applaud them , ofc, not because I personally like grabbing freebies, but because of the wider underlying social issues.
Hpw much does it actually cost these internet rags to let somebody who can't actually afford to subscribe browse for free? Precious little I should think. The only [problem, then, is how to squeeze money out of those who can afford it? There surely has to a better answer than simply continuing this retrogade motion back towards Victorian social mentality.
I did read your post. I just don't agree with you.
How do you allow some people to read your content for free while at the same time making sure that others pay so that you can continue delivering that content? How do you find out who deserves their content for free and who doesn't? How much does it cost? I don't know, and I'm pretty sure you don't either. You want them to, and so you make a sweeping assumption, but you don't know.
No such thing as a free lunch, Walkie. It's not Victorian society mentality, simply a fact of life.
Well, you didn't make it clear which parts of my post you disagreed with nor why? From your "No such thing as a free lunch", one might easlily get the impression that you disagree with the provision of free education, free library services and even free school lunches (which are actually still available to kids of poor parents in the UK, at time of writing. But given the rate of erosion of public services, not likely to last) come to that.
But you didn't say that, not exactly. So, for the moment, i'm still clinging to my estwhile impression that you're essentially left wing. Apologies if I got you wrong.
I'm not making any sweeping assumptions, just questioning the wisdom (from a left wing perspective, that is. Obviously, i don't expect the right wing to care) of letting market forces prove the decisive factor as to whether a news source survives or not, and who will have acess to it? There has to be a better way forward
Thus far, market forces, in that domain, have inevitably led to the explosion of the tabloid press in the UK and USA (dunno about Sweden) ; which in turn (one can unnervingly convincigly argue) has led to the election of Boris Johnson and Donald Trump. You mght disagree wiith argument ( I shan't attempt to present it in detail here) but you surely can't imagine that the overall effect would be positive?
I was trying to aguue that not only do we all hasbe a right to quality information, irrespective of our means, but that access to quality information for all is a social necessity ...at least for those of us who would rather not be governed by likes of Donal Trump, if we can possibly avoid it. Well, maybe Dona;d Trump is "simply a fact of life", along with every other manifestion of the "no free lunch" ethos; and nothing we can do about that but impotently make fun of the "ïdiots" who voted for him.
Like I said, I very much admire the Guardian Online for doing their bit in attempting to turn that journalistic tide; that is by making paid subscription entirely voluntary. That might prove impacticably idealistic , as you point out (though, hang on , the donation mode seems to work for Wikipedia doesn't it? ) But it's better to try doing something like that, than just shrug, call the whole deal a "fact of life"and do one's damnest to cling to one's revenue at all costs. If they went the same route as WP, and resorted to hiding their content begind a paywall, then I would cease to regard them as a genuinely left-wing paper, because that really does amount to givng up on one's left-wing ideals , IMO, and allowing the tabloids and suchlike to win the day. Can't find that especially blameworthy in WP's case (as far as I know, they're not left winfg?) just a great pity. because if we end up with nothing but the left wing sector allowing free access to quality jourmalism and noth ing left to balance that out but Fox News, the Sun, etc, welll that wouldn't bode well either , would it?
Do you really want free education for the masses to cease at age 16, and therafter become a privilege dependant on means? even when it comes to educating people in current affairs? It sounds like you do. But in that case, i don't think that you've thought through the consequences . It's not like the better-educated classes can insulate themselves from the wider social effects by hiding behing a pay wall , is it? Its not like they're happy with leaders like Trump and BJ (Not all of them , anyway)
-
Library subscriptions seems a simple and already mentioned answer to the question of how to make it free for some. Then you have people paying for convenience of getting it direct to their own device or preferred format.
It's great to see some constructive thinking on ths issue :plus: . errr, so sorry that i'm gonna have to desconstruct it, in this case.
Libraries provided something of an answer, back in the seventies and eighties , in the UK. Nowadays , infortunately, they really don;t.
[TLDR? I suggest skipping the following long-winded explanatory para}
We've sufferered a shockingly severe erosion of public servces in the interim , which has left public libtaries (inasmuch as we have a few left) pretty useless for the majority. I mean, it's not like people are going to spend a fiver on busfares (plus an awful lot of travel time) every day just to read the daily rag is it? much cheaper as well as a lot more convenient to have it delivered to their door... if they can afford it. The days when most folk had a public library within easy walking distance, that was open all hours six days a week is long gone. Of those that are left , they are often only open on tuesday and thurday mornings or somesuch much reduced schedule, no good for anything but borrowing books ( however , libtrary fines if you fail to return in good time have reached such prohibitive levels, that many of the poorer fo;k don't dare borrow books any more... especially not scatterbrains, like mysel :LOL: i used to be fricking determined to make the most of my local library, but eventiually got stung far too badly, far too many times over. )
Internet journalism offers a chance to plug that resultant gap . Though thatt's not a complete solution in itself. I mean, i recently heard a news report to the effect that only a minority of Socal Housing tenants in The UK have internet access. Most simply can't afford it. There was a really worthy initiatives , by one local council to adress that by providing free internet to their tenants, but we really need there to be a political will on the national level to adress that gap. Especially considering that the majority poor tenants (in the UK) now rent in the private sector (if they're not homeless) because we're desperately short of Social housing.
So , the way thngs stand, free acess to internet journalism only really helps a subset of the poor who can stretch to internet bills, but can't throw in subscriptions of top of that. Not a complete solution at all, but way better than nothing at all. And a pretty good solution if we can only get the whole world online.
I might also add that modern day poor people, on average, actually need convenience rather more than wealthy people do. Most are not unemployed , but rather desperately scatching around for a way to survive on considerably less than what most would consider a living wage. That kind of scratching around can seriously eat up your energy and leisure time.
It's a grim situation, all-in-all . and getting grimmer by the year. if we suppose that causes are essentially political , and potential solutions essentially political, then providing those who get the short end of the stick with the means to assess to realistically assess that, and to vote accordingly, is of paramount importance IMO.
I don't think it matters if a few ""unworthy" people wind up able to take advantage, just so long as that effect isn't big enough to make the system in question. unworkable. I dislike that argument because the "unworthy freeloader"is a pretty rare animal, IMO (and even turns out to be according to official statistics in some areas where it matters, eg benefits fraud) and he's been used to justify all kinds of cuts in the UK. It's like it doesn't matter anymore who goes without, just so long as nobody gets more than they're strictly entitled to .
In that light, voluntsry subscriptions might actually work. I'm pretty sure that most fo;k would be too ashamed to pretend to be too poor to pay, if they''re actually not . I think we've been taught to seriously understimate our fellow human beings ( :apondering: Didn't Mo post a link, not long ago, to a Chomsky vid that explained exactly how and why that happens?).
But more likely, the online news market just isn't taking off, because for whatever reason, it's not meeting the demand in any realistic way. Maybe too many folk get the paper edition already, and dont like paying twce, not just for the added convenience of accessing a different format? Maybe too many folk only want to dip into any given online sources occasionally, and a therefore not willing to commit? the possibilities are endless, no need to resort to blaming Freeloader Joe for every commercial failure. I freaking well hate that guy's spectre. I've watched a world-renowned Social Security system, get reduced, little by little, to a heap of stinking rubble, mostly on the pretext that we can't let Freeloader Joe get a piece of it. Are we, now going to do the exact same thingwith the world's media?
-
PS For the sake of giving people as broad and balanced a POV as poss, it would be great if the various serious news services could unite to offer a joint subscription, which would give folk acess to all of their online services at no extra cost. Yeah, yeah I know that doesn't fix the access to poor folk question,. But hey! I do believe that it's equally important to educate the wealthy. In. fact it's more important to educate the wealthy, because , in this consumerist society, increased wealth equals increased power doesn't it? Supposing, as I do, that the comparatively wealthy are not all natural -born bastards, it might be good if they were helped to make better-informed decisions, mightn't it?
-
I did read your post. I just don't agree with you.
How do you allow some people to read your content for free while at the same time making sure that others pay so that you can continue delivering that content? How do you find out who deserves their content for free and who doesn't? How much does it cost? I don't know, and I'm pretty sure you don't either. You want them to, and so you make a sweeping assumption, but you don't know.
No such thing as a free lunch, Walkie. It's not Victorian society mentality, simply a fact of life.
Well, you didn't make it clear which parts of my post you disagreed with nor why? From your "No such thing as a free lunch", one might easlily get the impression that you disagree with the provision of free education, free library services and even free school lunches (which are actually still available to kids of poor parents in the UK, at time of writing. But given the rate of erosion of public services, not likely to last) come to that.
Huh? How do you get from what I said to that?
But you didn't say that, not exactly. So, for the moment, i'm still clinging to my estwhile impression that you're essentially left wing. Apologies if I got you wrong.
I'm not sue what that's got to do with anything. This is about newspapers moving online and charging for their content. Politics is down the hall, second door to the right.
I'm not making any sweeping assumptions, just questioning the wisdom (from a left wing perspective, that is. Obviously, i don't expect the right wing to care) of letting market forces prove the decisive factor as to whether a news source survives or not, and who will have acess to it? There has to be a better way forward
NT and WP are both businesses and have to make money in order to support their businesses, pay their employees and freelancers, etc. Before there was an internet, no-one questioned their right to charge money for the daily printed copy. Why would today be any different?
If the left-wing perspective is to not allow them to do that, I'm against it. As for the better way forward, I'm all ears. But please make an actual practical suggestion instead of repeating wishful thinking - which, in my mind, is as sweeping as they come, the essence of it being "there has to be a better way".
Thus far, market forces, in that domain, have inevitably led to the explosion of the tabloid press in the UK and USA (dunno about Sweden) ; which in turn (one can unnervingly convincigly argue) has led to the election of Boris Johnson and Donald Trump. You mght disagree wiith argument ( I shan't attempt to present it in detail here) but you surely can't imagine that the overall effect would be positive?
Nope. That's about the fact that you need lots of money to create that concerted avalanche of misinformation and election-buying that ended with them both being elected. The tabloid press in the UK is not the reason why Boris wound up in Number Ten.
And NYT and WP both tried to expose Trump - and Boris, to a lesser extent - along the way. All the way. The fact that they are not free is neither here nor there. But there are lots of free sources online that did the same. There are actually a lot more of them today in the age of the interwebz than in the past when libraries were the source of "free" content.
And I use quotes because that content really isn't free either, it's just that it's paid for by means that aren't as obvious as the price of a printed paper.
I was trying to aguue that not only do we all hasbe a right to quality information, irrespective of our means, but that access to quality information for all is a social necessity ...at least for those of us who would rather not be governed by likes of Donal Trump, if we can possibly avoid it. Well, maybe Dona;d Trump is "simply a fact of life", along with every other manifestion of the "no free lunch" ethos; and nothing we can do about that but impotently make fun of the "ïdiots" who voted for him.
You're mixing arguments, but let's go with this for a moment and ask if NYT and WP should be forced to offer their content for free, in the name of providing quality information for all.
The rise of Trump is about the cult of the moron. People voted him there, people who think that all arguments are equal. People who equate Google search results with peer-reviewed scientific papers. People who are unable to critically read a piece of information, regardless of where it comes from.
And that's about something else entirely than NYT and WP charging us for their services.
Like I said, I very much admire the Guardian Online for doing their bit in attempting to turn that journalistic tide; that is by making paid subscription entirely voluntary. That might prove impacticably idealistic , as you point out (though, hang on , the donation mode seems to work for Wikipedia doesn't it? )
Yes and no. It is easy to disrupt Wikipedia for long enough to propagate any kind of news you like. It also doesn't provide daily news, not really. It gets its reports from whatever sources that its editors - anyone who's registered and edited content there in the past, really - read. There are countless example of online papers without enough resources getting their facts from a temp edit of Wikipedia.
Not saying that Wikipedia isn't useful, only that its existence doesn't prove the sustainability of its model when applied to news.
But it's better to try doing something like that, than just shrug, call the whole deal a "fact of life"and do one's damnest to cling to one's revenue at all costs. If they went the same route as WP, and resorted to hiding their content begind a paywall, then I would cease to regard them as a genuinely left-wing paper, because that really does amount to givng up on one's left-wing ideals , IMO, and allowing the tabloids and suchlike to win the day. Can't find that especially blameworthy in WP's case (as far as I know, they're not left winfg?) just a great pity. because if we end up with nothing but the left wing sector allowing free access to quality jourmalism and noth ing left to balance that out but Fox News, the Sun, etc, welll that wouldn't bode well either , would it?
The fact that WP elects to put their content behind a paywall decides their political bias?
I don't read news based on the ideologies of my sources. I don't think anyone should.
Do you really want free education for the masses to cease at age 16, and therafter become a privilege dependant on means? even when it comes to educating people in current affairs? It sounds like you do. But in that case, i don't think that you've thought through the consequences . It's not like the better-educated classes can insulate themselves from the wider social effects by hiding behing a pay wall , is it? Its not like they're happy with leaders like Trump and BJ (Not all of them , anyway)
Nope. I didn't say so, so please don't put words in my mouth.
I could just as well argue that you are, in effect, proposing state-owned media. And that's surely a recipe for objective, balanced news, right?
-
PS For the sake of giving people as broad and balanced a POV as poss, it would be great if the various serious news services could unite to offer a joint subscription, which would give folk acess to all of their online services at no extra cost. Yeah, yeah I know that doesn't fix the access to poor folk question,. But hey! I do believe that it's equally important to educate the wealthy. In. fact it's more important to educate the wealthy, because , in this consumerist society, increased wealth equals increased power doesn't it? Supposing, as I do, that the comparatively wealthy are not all natural -born bastards, it might be good if they were helped to make better-informed decisions, mightn't it?
And how would that work? Who would pay for it?
You are mixing issues here, with dubious assumptions and few facts. If you want to discuss a different society, built on free content and absolute justice for all, by all means, go ahead. But I'm not going to bother. For me, the discussion was fairly simple and about the right of NYT and WP and others to charge for their content to support their businesses. You're now moving to something else entirely, and I'm not interested.
-
PS For the sake of giving people as broad and balanced a POV as poss, it would be great if the various serious news services could unite to offer a joint subscription, which would give folk acess to all of their online services at no extra cost. Yeah, yeah I know that doesn't fix the access to poor folk question,. But hey! I do believe that it's equally important to educate the wealthy. In. fact it's more important to educate the wealthy, because , in this consumerist society, increased wealth equals increased power doesn't it? Supposing, as I do, that the comparatively wealthy are not all natural -born bastards, it might be good if they were helped to make better-informed decisions, mightn't it?
And how would that work? Who would pay for it?
You are mixing issues here, with dubious assumptions and few facts. If you want to discuss a different society, built on free content and absolute justice for all, by all means, go ahead. But I'm not going to bother. For me, the discussion was fairly simple and about the right of NYT and WP and others to charge for their content to support their businesses. You're now moving to something else entirely, and I'm not interested.
ummm, the above would work the same as all-in-one TV subscriptions and the like work (don't ask me how. I don't even subscribe to those things, let alone run them) and would be paid for by whomever wanted that sort of service, ofc.
I wasn't suggesting "free content" in that post you quoted. I thought that the word "subscription" implies monetary payment? and that the term 'no extra cost" equally implies that it would cost something. What more should I have said to make that obvious?
Basically, in that post, I'm just looking for ways of making online news subscriptions more wide-ranging and thus more attractive and informative for those who can afford them. No need to limit yourself to whichever publication supports your own bias; you can check out the other side at no extra cost . I dont know , ofc, but i suspect that a package like that would sell a lot better than present single-publication online subscriptions, so it would be win -win situation from a business perspective
... Oh yeah, i see that I also said "" I know that doesn't fix the access to poor folk question" so looks to me like i spelled out that I was talking of paid-for access in three different ways. (yet you still missed it) The benefit to society at large would be better-informed middle class, I would hope. Certainly not a universal panacea, but any small gain in the direction of making people, in general, think a bit more flexibly is worth pursuing IMO.
but, well, now I know that you're not reading my posts on this topic...not unless picking out a few keywords and stringing them together with your own preconceptions counts as reading. :laugh: then accusing me of making ""dubious assumptions" Sheeeesh. So if you're gonna stop pretending to read them , i guess i should be grateful for that much. You'd never guess , on this showing, but i actually don't much enjoy talking to myself .
-
oh! clean missed your other reply above, Odeon, which quite possibly deserves some sort of a reply from myself. Will get back to that later (haven't even read it as yet)
-
Eek! looks like I'll just have to bore you (and everybody else ) by responding , point by point, piecemeal, Odeon, cos my brain, my browser and my clumsy fingers especially have enormous difficulty with handling such a plethera of quotes. Well, let's start.
I did read your post. I just don't agree with you.
How do you allow some people to read your content for free while at the same time making sure that others pay so that you can continue delivering that content? How do you find out who deserves their content for free and who doesn't? How much does it cost? I don't know, and I'm pretty sure you don't either. You want them to, and so you make a sweeping assumption, but you don't know.
No such thing as a free lunch, Walkie. It's not Victorian society mentality, simply a fact of life.
Well, you didn't make it clear which parts of my post you disagreed with nor why? From your "No such thing as a free lunch", one might easlily get the impression that you disagree with the provision of free education, free library services and even free school lunches (which are actually still available to kids of poor parents in the UK, at time of writing. But given the rate of erosion of public services, not likely to last) come to that.
Huh? How do you get from what I said to that?
Err, because you actually said ""No such thing as a free lunch, Walkie. It's not Victorian society mentality, simply a fact of life.'" what's more, you said that in direct response to the following post from me:
But to answer your question: when i was a kid, I had free access to a wide range pf quality journals and newspapers in the school ;ibrary (I doubt that kids have that now, given that our underfunded State schools can't even afford to supply free textbooks any more) ; and as a young adult, I had access to the same via the local library , as well as access to free further education and free higher education; all of which is now in the past. This was before neoliberalism became the dominant theme in British politics, on the so-called Left, as well as the Right. I was brought up to beleve that the lower classes had just as much right to an eduction as everybody else, and to expect the State to support that right; because that's how it actually was, for an all-to-brief peroiod in postwar Britain. And, naturally, those of us who were born in that period all mistook that for the natural result of "progress"and "enlightenment", and never expected it to slam into reverse
I no longer expect that ofc , nor do I expect businesses to support that right instead. But when traditional souces such as the Guardian do support that right, via their online site, I applaud them , ofc, not because I personally like grabbing freebies, but because of the wider underlying social issues.
Hpw much does it actually cost these internet rags to let somebody who can't actually afford to subscribe browse for free? Precious little I should think. The only [problem, then, is how to squeeze money out of those who can afford it? There surely has to a better answer than simply continuing this retrogade motion back towards Victorian social mentality.
obviously (?) "No such thing as a free lunch" was a pretty damned sweeping dismissal of my point about the lower classes losing their right free education and free acess to educational material (and I do, implicitly include quality news reporting in my definition of educational material) . You might consider that irrelevant, but if you're gonna post "No such thing as a free lunch" in response to all that then you're gonna sound pretty reactionary. Especially given that it's the second time that you've jumped on me for applauding the Guardian's efforts to keep their online content freely accessible to all.
Oh! And please note, they haven't yet failed in those efforts and consequently gone under as a business. So in citing the Guardian , it's entirely possible that I'm citing a viable business model. But their optional subscription is not the only idea knocking around ; limited free access has also been discussed in this thread for instance; and you, yourself , mentioned the donate option that some publications have gone in for. If I haven't let myself be baited into trying to thrown in some totally origial idea all of of my own , so what? i don't think there's any need for that. I think that where there's a will, then there's probably a way, and i'm encouraged to see that some better minds than mine actually do have the will to adress this . Call that "wishful thinking"if you like.
-
But you didn't say that, not exactly. So, for the moment, i'm still clinging to my estwhile impression that you're essentially left wing. Apologies if I got you wrong.
I'm not sue what that's got to do with anything. This is about newspapers moving online and charging for their content. Politics is down the hall, second door to the right.
Come now, you can't seriously seperate journalism from politics? Not unless you're only reading the Sunday issues. Any question about journalism is essentially a political question, with at least two sides to it.
I'm not making any sweeping assumptions, just questioning the wisdom (from a left wing perspective, that is. Obviously, i don't expect the right wing to care) of letting market forces prove the decisive factor as to whether a news source survives or not, and who will have acess to it? There has to be a better way forward
NT and WP are both businesses and have to make money in order to support their businesses, pay their employees and freelancers, etc. Before there was an internet, no-one questioned their right to charge money for the daily printed copy. Why would today be any different?
Nobody's questioning their need to make money, nor their right to do so. That's just how you chose to (mis) read my comments.
Before we had the internet, we had better public services and hence better access, as i detailed in previous posts. Somehow, despite the fact that printed copies cost a shedload more (in raw materials, printing costs and distribution) than digital issues, news agencies were not ruined by the fact that the lower classes and others could quite easily access their material for free.
Now that we have the internet, it's not only highly ironic, but pretty damned incredible if we can't find a way to supply the necessary revenue without denying access to the (increasingly impiverished ) lower classes. And if some internet nobody like Walkie isn't supplying you with a detailed, foolproof, appropriate business model on demand, that really doesn't shake the validility of that observation.
If the left-wing perspective is to not allow them to do that, I'm against it. As for the better way forward, I'm all ears. But please make an actual practical suggestion instead of repeating wishful thinking - which, in my mind, is as sweeping as they come, the essence of it being "there has to be a better way".
The left wing perspective, as I understand it, is to care about free education for the massess, and to do everything possible to support it. You were not exactly talking like you cared."' As for the better way forward, I'm all ears." sounds a whole lot more promsing, but as for your other point, i think I already answered that , above
-
Thus far, market forces, in that domain, have inevitably led to the explosion of the tabloid press in the UK and USA (dunno about Sweden) ; which in turn (one can unnervingly convincigly argue) has led to the election of Boris Johnson and Donald Trump. You mght disagree wiith argument ( I shan't attempt to present it in detail here) but you surely can't imagine that the overall effect would be positive?
Nope. That's about the fact that you need lots of money to create that concerted avalanche of misinformation and election-buying that ended with them both being elected. The tabloid press in the UK is not the reason why Boris wound up in Number Ten.
what a pity. I misread that as " The tabloid press in the UK is not the only reason why Boris wound up in Number Ten." and almost agreed with you :LOL:
And NYT and WP both tried to expose Trump - and Boris, to a lesser extent - along the way. All the way. The fact that they are not free is neither here nor there.
However, the fact that they're quality papers with a correspondingly hefty cover price might be relevant , when you put that beside the fact the National Enquirer did not attempt to expose Trump (or so I've been given to undestand) but converesely buried all the dirt they'd collected on him , in the interests of preserving their highly profitable good relationship with him. Not that NE had a political bias in Trump's favour as such, just a bias towards selling as many copies as they could; which in this instance worked to much the same effect.
So one burning question, to my mind, is WTF can we do to stop publications like the NE have an overriding influence on most voters? Cheaper and easier access to more responsible reporting might conceivably help there, mightn't it?
But there are lots of free sources online that did the same. There are actually a lot more of them today in the age of the interwebz than in the past when libraries were the source of "free" content.
And I use quotes because that content really isn't free either, it's just that it's paid for by means that aren't as obvious as the price of a printed paper.
You don't say? Well, well , well , I learn something new every day. (Hasn't happenened yet, but it's only 3 PM)
And now , I have RL stuff to do, i fear. i'll try to get back to answer the rest of that post of yours later (please don't everybody groan at once :laugh:)
-
You're mixing arguments, but let's go with this for a moment and ask if NYT and WP should be forced to offer their content for free, in the name of providing quality information for all.
Hang on. I don't think they should be forced to do anything of the kind. Persuaded maybe, encouraged maybe, facilitated maybe. Forced? No, definitely not.
The rise of Trump is about the cult of the moron. People voted him there, people who think that all arguments are equal. People who equate Google search results with peer-reviewed scientific papers. People who are unable to critically read a piece of information, regardless of where it comes from.
That's about as useless and counterproductive an observation as possible. Lets blame the stupid people? Or better yet, shall we blame the stupid peoples'parents?
I'd much sooner hear some theories as how people in general got to be so stupid. One such theory credibly blames the tabloids for that as I'm sure you know :green: along with various other knock-on efffects of commercialism. Or you could credibly take issue with education . Or you might claim that there's "something in the water"... etc. chances are that whichever explanation you go with, it comes down to the underling cause(s) being social and/or political, and the corresponding potential solutions being equally social and political. Which is good news, i think. I mean, it's gotta to be easier to address than the prospect adressing the huge excess of utterly stupid people who just happened, by sheer coincidence, to get born at approximately the same point in history, and asking them to personally take responsibility for their gigantic fuck-ups. I really don't see that getting us anywhere.
On an educational level, we could perhaps try to implement a system that purposely trains kids in critical thinking. And which provides them with a wide variety of media to practice on :green: And hey! maybe it's not too late to try that on the adults, too?
And that's about something else entirely than NYT and WP charging us for their services.
Nope, it's all interconnected, IMO, as I hope my above example helps to demonstate?
Like I said, I very much admire the Guardian Online for doing their bit in attempting to turn that journalistic tide; that is by making paid subscription entirely voluntary. That might prove impacticably idealistic , as you point out (though, hang on , the donation mode seems to work for Wikipedia doesn't it? )
Yes and no. It is easy to disrupt Wikipedia for long enough to propagate any kind of news you like. It also doesn't provide daily news, not really. It gets its reports from whatever sources that its editors - anyone who's registered and edited content there in the past, really - read. There are countless example of online papers without enough resources getting their facts from a temp edit of Wikipedia.
Not saying that Wikipedia isn't useful, only that its existence doesn't prove the sustainability of its model when applied to news.
Fair enough.
But it's better to try doing something like that, than just shrug, call the whole deal a "fact of life"and do one's damnest to cling to one's revenue at all costs. If they went the same route as WP, and resorted to hiding their content begind a paywall, then I would cease to regard them as a genuinely left-wing paper, because that really does amount to givng up on one's left-wing ideals , IMO, and allowing the tabloids and suchlike to win the day. Can't find that especially blameworthy in WP's case (as far as I know, they're not left wing?) just a great pity. because if we end up with nothing but the left wing sector allowing free access to quality jourmalism and noth ing left to balance that out but Fox News, the Sun, etc, welll that wouldn't bode well either , would it?
The fact that WP elects to put their content behind a paywall decides their political bias?
No. Try reading that para again, if it matters. I think that a paper which had a sincere left wing bias would try to keep their content accessible to all, like the Guardian does; as that effort is consistent with left wing beliefs. I'm therefore guessing that WP is no such paper? Might be wrong (note I put a question mark on that?)
I don't read news based on the ideologies of my sources. I don't think anyone should.
Seems to me that news sources can't help but be biased by political ideology, though not always consciously biased. In the case of the tabloids, bias is flaming obvious, normally. In the case of the quality press, not so obvious, and reveals itself in its selection of newsworthy topics., rather than in its treatment of those topics.
I tend to think that a conscious, acknowledged bias is prefereable to unconscious bias . I'd sooner have no particular bias at all, but I just don't believe that's humanly possible . Next best is to sample a range of conficting biases, ofc. Which is why I'm so keen on the idea of a multi-journal package. And next best , after that, for me, is to go with a left-wing bias, because i find that papers with a right-wing bias are apt to exclude too many stories that i find very relevant and intersting from their pages; and not because those stories are in any way fake, but rather because the average right-wing reader would wish to dismiss them as fake; thus printing at all them might easily amount to economic suicide; maintaining circulation is, understandably, of paramount importance.
Do you really want free education for the masses to cease at age 16, and therafter become a privilege dependant on means? even when it comes to educating people in current affairs? It sounds like you do. But in that case, i don't think that you've thought through the consequences . It's not like the better-educated classes can insulate themselves from the wider social effects by hiding behing a pay wall , is it? Its not like they're happy with leaders like Trump and BJ (Not all of them , anyway)
Nope. I didn't say so, so please don't put words in my mouth.
OK, I'll try to resist. But are you willing to reciprocate? :eyelash: At least i try not to sound so certain of my misreadings (as it turns out) as you do of yours.
I could just as well argue that you are, in effect, proposing state-owned media. And that's surely a recipe for objective, balanced news, right?
Like I said, I very much admire the Guardian Online for doing their bit in attempting to turn that journalistic tide; that is by making paid subscription entirely voluntary. That might prove impacticably idealistic , as you point out (though, hang on , the donation mode seems to work for Wikipedia doesn't it? )[/quote]
Yes and no. It is easy to disrupt Wikipedia for long enough to propagate any kind of news you like. It also doesn't provide daily news, not really. It gets its reports from whatever sources that its editors - anyone who's registered and edited content there in the past, really - read. There are countless example of online papers without enough resources getting their facts from a temp edit of Wikipedia.
Not saying that Wikipedia isn't useful, only that its existence doesn't prove the sustainability of its model when applied to news.
But it's better to try doing something like that, than just shrug, call the whole deal a "fact of life"and do one's damnest to cling to one's revenue at all costs. If they went the same route as WP, and resorted to hiding their content begind a paywall, then I would cease to regard them as a genuinely left-wing paper, because that really does amount to givng up on one's left-wing ideals , IMO, and allowing the tabloids and suchlike to win the day. Can't find that especially blameworthy in WP's case (as far as I know, they're not left winfg?) just a great pity. because if we end up with nothing but the left wing sector allowing free access to quality jourmalism and noth ing left to balance that out but Fox News, the Sun, etc, welll that wouldn't bode well either , would it?
The fact that WP elects to put their content behind a paywall decides their political bias?
I don't read news based on the ideologies of my sources. I don't think anyone should.
Do you really want free education for the masses to cease at age 16, and therafter become a privilege dependant on means? even when it comes to educating people in current affairs? It sounds like you do. But in that case, i don't think that you've thought through the consequences . It's not like the better-educated classes can insulate themselves from the wider social effects by hiding behing a pay wall , is it? Its not like they're happy with leaders like Trump and BJ (Not all of them , anyway)
Nope. I didn't say so, so please don't put words in my mouth.
I could just as well argue that you are, in effect, proposing state-owned media. And that's surely a recipe for objective, balanced news, right?
[/quote]
Quite :lol1: and no, perish the thought of a state-owned media. I'm not propsing any such thing. Something more along the lines of a state-funded library service would suit me just fine...on condition that "librarians" are perfectly free to choose the content, ofc.
-
PS For the sake of giving people as broad and balanced a POV as poss, it would be great if the various serious news services could unite to offer a joint subscription, which would give folk acess to all of their online services at no extra cost. Yeah, yeah I know that doesn't fix the access to poor folk question,. But hey! I do believe that it's equally important to educate the wealthy. In. fact it's more important to educate the wealthy, because , in this consumerist society, increased wealth equals increased power doesn't it? Supposing, as I do, that the comparatively wealthy are not all natural -born bastards, it might be good if they were helped to make better-informed decisions, mightn't it?
And how would that work? Who would pay for it?
You are mixing issues here, with dubious assumptions and few facts. If you want to discuss a different society, built on free content and absolute justice for all, by all means, go ahead. But I'm not going to bother. For me, the discussion was fairly simple and about the right of NYT and WP and others to charge for their content to support their businesses. You're now moving to something else entirely, and I'm not interested.
ummm, the above would work the same as all-in-one TV subscriptions and the like work (don't ask me how. I don't even subscribe to those things, let alone run them) and would be paid for by whomever wanted that sort of service, ofc.
I wasn't suggesting "free content" in that post you quoted. I thought that the word "subscription" implies monetary payment? and that the term 'no extra cost" equally implies that it would cost something. What more should I have said to make that obvious?
Basically, in that post, I'm just looking for ways of making online news subscriptions more wide-ranging and thus more attractive and informative for those who can afford them. No need to limit yourself to whichever publication supports your own bias; you can check out the other side at no extra cost . I dont know , ofc, but i suspect that a package like that would sell a lot better than present single-publication online subscriptions, so it would be win -win situation from a business perspective
... Oh yeah, i see that I also said "" I know that doesn't fix the access to poor folk question" so looks to me like i spelled out that I was talking of paid-for access in three different ways. (yet you still missed it) The benefit to society at large would be better-informed middle class, I would hope. Certainly not a universal panacea, but any small gain in the direction of making people, in general, think a bit more flexibly is worth pursuing IMO.
but, well, now I know that you're not reading my posts on this topic...not unless picking out a few keywords and stringing them together with your own preconceptions counts as reading. :laugh: then accusing me of making ""dubious assumptions" Sheeeesh. So if you're gonna stop pretending to read them , i guess i should be grateful for that much. You'd never guess , on this showing, but i actually don't much enjoy talking to myself .
I know you only realised there was more after posting the above, but seriously, Walkie, if you're interested in a serious conversation, make sure *you* bread everything first. Makes your argument look worse.
-
oh! clean missed your other reply above, Odeon, which quite possibly deserves some sort of a reply from myself. Will get back to that later (haven't even read it as yet)
Hint: there is a "Modify" button.
-
Eek! looks like I'll just have to bore you (and everybody else ) by responding , point by point, piecemeal, Odeon, cos my brain, my browser and my clumsy fingers especially have enormous difficulty with handling such a plethera of quotes. Well, let's start.
I did read your post. I just don't agree with you.
How do you allow some people to read your content for free while at the same time making sure that others pay so that you can continue delivering that content? How do you find out who deserves their content for free and who doesn't? How much does it cost? I don't know, and I'm pretty sure you don't either. You want them to, and so you make a sweeping assumption, but you don't know.
No such thing as a free lunch, Walkie. It's not Victorian society mentality, simply a fact of life.
Well, you didn't make it clear which parts of my post you disagreed with nor why? From your "No such thing as a free lunch", one might easlily get the impression that you disagree with the provision of free education, free library services and even free school lunches (which are actually still available to kids of poor parents in the UK, at time of writing. But given the rate of erosion of public services, not likely to last) come to that.
Huh? How do you get from what I said to that?
Err, because you actually said ""No such thing as a free lunch, Walkie. It's not Victorian society mentality, simply a fact of life.'" what's more, you said that in direct response to the following post from me:
But to answer your question: when i was a kid, I had free access to a wide range pf quality journals and newspapers in the school ;ibrary (I doubt that kids have that now, given that our underfunded State schools can't even afford to supply free textbooks any more) ; and as a young adult, I had access to the same via the local library , as well as access to free further education and free higher education; all of which is now in the past. This was before neoliberalism became the dominant theme in British politics, on the so-called Left, as well as the Right. I was brought up to beleve that the lower classes had just as much right to an eduction as everybody else, and to expect the State to support that right; because that's how it actually was, for an all-to-brief peroiod in postwar Britain. And, naturally, those of us who were born in that period all mistook that for the natural result of "progress"and "enlightenment", and never expected it to slam into reverse
I no longer expect that ofc , nor do I expect businesses to support that right instead. But when traditional souces such as the Guardian do support that right, via their online site, I applaud them , ofc, not because I personally like grabbing freebies, but because of the wider underlying social issues.
Hpw much does it actually cost these internet rags to let somebody who can't actually afford to subscribe browse for free? Precious little I should think. The only [problem, then, is how to squeeze money out of those who can afford it? There surely has to a better answer than simply continuing this retrogade motion back towards Victorian social mentality.
obviously (?) "No such thing as a free lunch" was a pretty damned sweeping dismissal of my point about the lower classes losing their right free education and free acess to educational material (and I do, implicitly include quality news reporting in my definition of educational material) . You might consider that irrelevant, but if you're gonna post "No such thing as a free lunch" in response to all that then you're gonna sound pretty reactionary. Especially given that it's the second time that you've jumped on me for applauding the Guardian's efforts to keep their online content freely accessible to all.
Oh! And please note, they haven't yet failed in those efforts and consequently gone under as a business. So in citing the Guardian , it's entirely possible that I'm citing a viable business model. But their optional subscription is not the only idea knocking around ; limited free access has also been discussed in this thread for instance; and you, yourself , mentioned the donate option that some publications have gone in for. If I haven't let myself be baited into trying to thrown in some totally origial idea all of of my own , so what? i don't think there's any need for that. I think that where there's a will, then there's probably a way, and i'm encouraged to see that some better minds than mine actually do have the will to adress this . Call that "wishful thinking"if you like.
I stand by what I said but not your interpretation of it. You are the one twisting it, not me.
I'm not going to do your homework for you, though. If you want to argue for opening up that paywall, you'll have to explain how, and that means not simply reiterating earlier comments (re, for example, PayPal buttons an the like). You'll have to show that you understand a bit more than you let on about economics and the actual realities of running a business and employing people who know how to write.
If you don't think there is a need for that, then you're only arguing some starry-eyed ideology without a basis in reality and in that case I'm not interested and this discussion is over.
Oh, and btw: you're clearly assuming that NYT et al haven't looked into other business models. How do you know?
-
But you didn't say that, not exactly. So, for the moment, i'm still clinging to my estwhile impression that you're essentially left wing. Apologies if I got you wrong.
I'm not sue what that's got to do with anything. This is about newspapers moving online and charging for their content. Politics is down the hall, second door to the right.
Come now, you can't seriously seperate journalism from politics? Not unless you're only reading the Sunday issues. Any question about journalism is essentially a political question, with at least two sides to it.
I'm not making any sweeping assumptions, just questioning the wisdom (from a left wing perspective, that is. Obviously, i don't expect the right wing to care) of letting market forces prove the decisive factor as to whether a news source survives or not, and who will have acess to it? There has to be a better way forward
NT and WP are both businesses and have to make money in order to support their businesses, pay their employees and freelancers, etc. Before there was an internet, no-one questioned their right to charge money for the daily printed copy. Why would today be any different?
Nobody's questioning their need to make money, nor their right to do so. That's just how you chose to (mis) read my comments.
Before we had the internet, we had better public services and hence better access, as i detailed in previous posts. Somehow, despite the fact that printed copies cost a shedload more (in raw materials, printing costs and distribution) than digital issues, news agencies were not ruined by the fact that the lower classes and others could quite easily access their material for free.
Now that we have the internet, it's not only highly ironic, but pretty damned incredible if we can't find a way to supply the necessary revenue without denying access to the (increasingly impiverished ) lower classes. And if some internet nobody like Walkie isn't supplying you with a detailed, foolproof, appropriate business model on demand, that really doesn't shake the validility of that observation.
If the left-wing perspective is to not allow them to do that, I'm against it. As for the better way forward, I'm all ears. But please make an actual practical suggestion instead of repeating wishful thinking - which, in my mind, is as sweeping as they come, the essence of it being "there has to be a better way".
The left wing perspective, as I understand it, is to care about free education for the massess, and to do everything possible to support it. You were not exactly talking like you cared."' As for the better way forward, I'm all ears." sounds a whole lot more promsing, but as for your other point, i think I already answered that , above
You're opining, not arguing. You want there to be a better way but show precious little insight into how that would actually work.
A couple of points:
Before we had the internet, we had better public services and hence better access, as i detailed in previous posts.
You haven't detailed anything, Walkie, you've simply run variations of the same-old. What makes you think you had better access before the internet? Do you have any actual quantitative proof? A study, perhaps? Anything?
Do you realise - at all - why today's age is often labelled "the information age"? Do you dare to hazard a guess? Today, you have access to vast amounts of information, not for free but for a pittance. Yet you complain about NYT and WP charging for their services?
The libraries still exist. Here at least, you can still read papers from all over the globe for free. They're often yesterday's papers but that's fine - I remember that in the 80s while at uni, our library would be a couple of days late. Physical transport is such an inconvenience.
Did you know that the vast majority of photos were taken during the last year? And it's going to be the same again next year, and before long, that majority will have been taken during the last few months.
Now imagine how much *text* that has been produced during that same period of time.
Somehow, despite the fact that printed copies cost a shedload more (in raw materials, printing costs and distribution) than digital issues, news agencies were not ruined by the fact that the lower classes and others could quite easily access their material for free.
Let's see... I'm guessing daily prints of tens, maybe hundreds of thousands of copies for a large newspaper. Libraries would subscribe to their copies, maybe half a dozen to a dozen or so, so they would be paid for. How many libraries per village? Town? Large city? All you'd have to do was to get to the library and read. I think you can actually still do that. It's not free, it's paid for, though.
But this is not what you're suggesting for today's papers. You are suggesting the equivalent of hundreds, maybe thousands of papers being distributed to those in need, none of which will have been paid for.
Come now, you can't seriously seperate journalism from politics? Not unless you're only reading the Sunday issues. Any question about journalism is essentially a political question, with at least two sides to it.
Did you read what I actually wrote?
The fact that NYT and WP choose to charge for their content is not about politics. We are not discussing what's in that content.
Also, do you seriously want to move the argument in this direction? Because what I'm hearing then is an implied suggestion that the content should be provided for free and thus by the state or an organisation that pays for it? Seriously? Is that your grand idea?
Yeah, that's gone really well everywhere they've tried it.
And it's still not free. Somebody will have paid for it, most often the people.
-
You're mixing arguments, but let's go with this for a moment and ask if NYT and WP should be forced to offer their content for free, in the name of providing quality information for all.
Hang on. I don't think they should be forced to do anything of the kind. Persuaded maybe, encouraged maybe, facilitated maybe. Forced? No, definitely not.
My bad. You're just saying that because they hide behind paywalls, they can't possibly have left-wing, i.e. the (in this context) PC views.
The rise of Trump is about the cult of the moron. People voted him there, people who think that all arguments are equal. People who equate Google search results with peer-reviewed scientific papers. People who are unable to critically read a piece of information, regardless of where it comes from.
That's about as useless and counterproductive an observation as possible. Lets blame the stupid people? Or better yet, shall we blame the stupid peoples'parents?
How is it not useful? I am stating facts, often painfully obvious. If I'm assigning blame, then it's about the blaming the society that somehow allowed this to be the norm.
It's an entirely different discussion to think of ways to fix the cult of the moron, though. I have plenty of ideas but none of them concerns making NYT or WP free for all if there is no business case for it for them. Keep in mind, though, that I was born and raised in Finland, a country whose schools are still widely considered to be among the best in the world and where populists like Trump or Boris have yet to find their place.
I'd much sooner hear some theories as how people in general got to be so stupid. One such theory credibly blames the tabloids for that as I'm sure you know :green: along with various other knock-on efffects of commercialism. Or you could credibly take issue with education . Or you might claim that there's "something in the water"... etc. chances are that whichever explanation you go with, it comes down to the underling cause(s) being social and/or political, and the corresponding potential solutions being equally social and political. Which is good news, i think. I mean, it's gotta to be easier to address than the prospect adressing the huge excess of utterly stupid people who just happened, by sheer coincidence, to get born at approximately the same point in history, and asking them to personally take responsibility for their gigantic fuck-ups. I really don't see that getting us anywhere.
On an educational level, we could perhaps try to implement a system that purposely trains kids in critical thinking. And which provides them with a wide variety of media to practice on :green: And hey! maybe it's not too late to try that on the adults, too?
And that's about something else entirely than NYT and WP charging us for their services.
Nope, it's all interconnected, IMO, as I hope my above example helps to demonstate?
No, it doesn't. You again choose to engage in wishful thinking:
On an educational level, we could perhaps try to implement a system that purposely trains kids in critical thinking. And which provides them with a wide variety of media to practice on :green: And hey! maybe it's not too late to try that on the adults, too?
Please don't suggest that they're not already doing this, or at least trying? The question is not if we should attempt both but rather *how* we should do it. You're insulting a whole bunch of professionals in multiple countries if you're suggesting that they're not already doing their best to encourage critical thinking.
Like I said, I very much admire the Guardian Online for doing their bit in attempting to turn that journalistic tide; that is by making paid subscription entirely voluntary. That might prove impacticably idealistic , as you point out (though, hang on , the donation mode seems to work for Wikipedia doesn't it? )
Yes and no. It is easy to disrupt Wikipedia for long enough to propagate any kind of news you like. It also doesn't provide daily news, not really. It gets its reports from whatever sources that its editors - anyone who's registered and edited content there in the past, really - read. There are countless example of online papers without enough resources getting their facts from a temp edit of Wikipedia.
Not saying that Wikipedia isn't useful, only that its existence doesn't prove the sustainability of its model when applied to news.
Fair enough.
But it's better to try doing something like that, than just shrug, call the whole deal a "fact of life"and do one's damnest to cling to one's revenue at all costs. If they went the same route as WP, and resorted to hiding their content begind a paywall, then I would cease to regard them as a genuinely left-wing paper, because that really does amount to givng up on one's left-wing ideals , IMO, and allowing the tabloids and suchlike to win the day. Can't find that especially blameworthy in WP's case (as far as I know, they're not left wing?) just a great pity. because if we end up with nothing but the left wing sector allowing free access to quality jourmalism and noth ing left to balance that out but Fox News, the Sun, etc, welll that wouldn't bode well either , would it?
The fact that WP elects to put their content behind a paywall decides their political bias?
No. Try reading that para again, if it matters.
I did:
If they went the same route as WP, and resorted to hiding their content begind a paywall, then I would cease to regard them as a genuinely left-wing paper
And looking ahead, this:
I think that a paper which had a sincere left wing bias would try to keep their content accessible to all, like the Guardian does; as that effort is consistent with left wing beliefs. I'm therefore guessing that WP is no such paper? Might be wrong (note I put a question mark on that?)
Try reading your reply again. It does matter, just as you say but not in the way you thought. You define what's left-wing and discard everything that doesn't fit.
And btw, that's still not what we were discussing.
I don't read news based on the ideologies of my sources. I don't think anyone should.
Seems to me that news sources can't help but be biased by political ideology, though not always consciously biased. In the case of the tabloids, bias is flaming obvious, normally. In the case of the quality press, not so obvious, and reveals itself in its selection of newsworthy topics., rather than in its treatment of those topics.
You're not replying to what I wrote.
I tend to think that a conscious, acknowledged bias is prefereable to unconscious bias . I'd sooner have no particular bias at all, but I just don't believe that's humanly possible . Next best is to sample a range of conficting biases, ofc. Which is why I'm so keen on the idea of a multi-journal package. And next best , after that, for me, is to go with a left-wing bias, because i find that papers with a right-wing bias are apt to exclude too many stories that i find very relevant and intersting from their pages; and not because those stories are in any way fake, but rather because the average right-wing reader would wish to dismiss them as fake; thus printing at all them might easily amount to economic suicide; maintaining circulation is, understandably, of paramount importance.
And now you're blaming the stupid while trying to show them the light.
Do you really want free education for the masses to cease at age 16, and therafter become a privilege dependant on means? even when it comes to educating people in current affairs? It sounds like you do. But in that case, i don't think that you've thought through the consequences . It's not like the better-educated classes can insulate themselves from the wider social effects by hiding behing a pay wall , is it? Its not like they're happy with leaders like Trump and BJ (Not all of them , anyway)
Nope. I didn't say so, so please don't put words in my mouth.
OK, I'll try to resist. But are you willing to reciprocate? :eyelash: At least i try not to sound so certain of my misreadings (as it turns out) as you do of yours.
I could just as well argue that you are, in effect, proposing state-owned media. And that's surely a recipe for objective, balanced news, right?
Like I said, I very much admire the Guardian Online for doing their bit in attempting to turn that journalistic tide; that is by making paid subscription entirely voluntary. That might prove impacticably idealistic , as you point out (though, hang on , the donation mode seems to work for Wikipedia doesn't it? )
Yes and no. It is easy to disrupt Wikipedia for long enough to propagate any kind of news you like. It also doesn't provide daily news, not really. It gets its reports from whatever sources that its editors - anyone who's registered and edited content there in the past, really - read. There are countless example of online papers without enough resources getting their facts from a temp edit of Wikipedia.
Not saying that Wikipedia isn't useful, only that its existence doesn't prove the sustainability of its model when applied to news.
But it's better to try doing something like that, than just shrug, call the whole deal a "fact of life"and do one's damnest to cling to one's revenue at all costs. If they went the same route as WP, and resorted to hiding their content begind a paywall, then I would cease to regard them as a genuinely left-wing paper, because that really does amount to givng up on one's left-wing ideals , IMO, and allowing the tabloids and suchlike to win the day. Can't find that especially blameworthy in WP's case (as far as I know, they're not left winfg?) just a great pity. because if we end up with nothing but the left wing sector allowing free access to quality jourmalism and noth ing left to balance that out but Fox News, the Sun, etc, welll that wouldn't bode well either , would it?
The fact that WP elects to put their content behind a paywall decides their political bias?
I don't read news based on the ideologies of my sources. I don't think anyone should.
Do you really want free education for the masses to cease at age 16, and therafter become a privilege dependant on means? even when it comes to educating people in current affairs? It sounds like you do. But in that case, i don't think that you've thought through the consequences . It's not like the better-educated classes can insulate themselves from the wider social effects by hiding behing a pay wall , is it? Its not like they're happy with leaders like Trump and BJ (Not all of them , anyway)
Nope. I didn't say so, so please don't put words in my mouth.
I could just as well argue that you are, in effect, proposing state-owned media. And that's surely a recipe for objective, balanced news, right?
Quite :lol1: and no, perish the thought of a state-owned media. I'm not propsing any such thing. Something more along the lines of a state-funded library service would suit me just fine...on condition that "librarians" are perfectly free to choose the content, ofc.
You're just making sure that the state gets to filter the media, then.
How is this different?
-
I know you only realised there was more after posting the above, but seriously, Walkie, if you're interested in a serious conversation, make sure *you* bread everything first. Makes your argument look worse.
pretty sure you meant to say "read everything"? Now I've got this image stuck in my mind of me preparing loadsa food (by covering it in breadcumbs) before posting; which (leaving gluten issues aside) actually doesn't seem like a half-way bad idea , now you mention it :laugh: and reminds me that i'm apt to neglect myself when writing. Y ea, even when writing dumb-ass posts on a backwater forum like this, as if part of me thinks that might actually help to set the world to rights, or summat.
But yeah, my bad. Point taken. Thought I'd apologised already, but can't be arsed with scrolling back to check, In any case, there's surely no harm in apologing twice over, is there? Am sorry.
[Hint: there is a "Modify" button.
OK, rub it in why don't you. :laugh: Am still sorry. Will that do? here is a reason why I didn't think to use that button, but it's not a very intersting reason, nor excuse as such, just a further variation on the clunky biological hardware theme.
Now I should write some responses to your other points, but i think i'll have to cherry-pick a bit for the sake of brevity, for the sake of preserving what's left of my brain, and for the sake of avoiding turning into the latest incarnation of Al, if it isn't too late :LOL: . I mean this interchange is looking unnervingly familiar in terms of sprawling volume at the very least.
And having said that, I will presently make like a good girl who intends to look after herself, and go take a break .
-
Don't worry, Walkie. No need to take a break. The difference between Al and the rest of us is that we will know when it's time to take one and say so.
-
Can't figure out if that is meant as a backhanded insult. :LOL:
-
I didn't read every word, but I don't think there is anything to get too upset about here.
It's good to have a rant about something that you care about. Nobody got beat up, nobody got butthurt, it's all good.
-
"All Lives Matter" is a racist dog whistle.
If someone says "Save The Rainforest" we know that they don't mean "fuck all other types of forest". We don't insist that they say "Save All Forests".
I was just thinking of this song today, and it made me think of your post. :lol1:
https://youtu.be/s95mEchLZEA
-
Don't worry, Walkie. No need to take a break. The difference between Al and the rest of us is that we will know when it's time to take one and say so.
I didn't read every word, but I don't think there is anything to get too upset about here.
It's good to have a rant about something that you care about. Nobody got beat up, nobody got butthurt, it's all good.
Thanks, guys :) but i wasn;t thinking of the buthurt , nor even the walls of text.
I was thinking of the way Al will pick through your text like a demented insectologist, looking under every stone, scrutinising every bug. labelling them all with infallible authority, and adding every one to his tardis-like knapsack . then, if he's pissed with you, or even a tad suspicious of you, he;ll start to macjine-gun you with ancient and modern quotes, and demand explanations .
worse. if you don't make likewise with his posts, and be sure totake note of every dot and comma and answer accordingly, he'll take offense at that.
Worse still, we spazzes are apt to naturally overco-operate there., aren;t we? We will , all-too-often, religiously answer every little point out of some sort of uniquely spazz notion of politeness . We don't need to be goaded by Al into bringing that sort of close attention to the point of insufferable, we can do that all by ourselves
Unless you duck out sharpish, somewhere near the bef\ginning , the convo will sprawl and sprawl and sprawl, and you;ll end up swimming in lists of nested quotations, and close to losing your mind.
And in the end, you'll probably throw in the towel out of sheer mental exhaustion.
Now, to be fair to Al, I;m pretty sure that I'm simply describing a spazz on steroids above. He's not the only guilty party here , just the best example. By and large, we spazzes don't l know when or how to let things go, do we? So it pays to be a teeny bit wary.
Anyway, so I was actually taking a break from the convo due to sheer fatigue, mostly generated by RL and the usual illness; but also partly generated by the spectre of great big sprawls of nested quotes :laugh: . And now i'm using up my limited energy on meta-discussion. ::) Oh! and responding to you on that other thread, Mo, Can't claim your issues should take priority over setting the wor;ld to rights cos they're so much more important can I? But seems to me that my input is more likely to have some sprt of a positive effect on the smaller issues than the big ones :laugh:
-
Well, Al is a spazz. Maybe not on steroids but it sure is something, these days.
-
Changing your username to All Lives Matter is a shit thing to do, Al.
You know what WOULD be a real shitty thing? Accusing someone of something they did not do? YOU ar not going to be that shitty are you Phienix. I would have expected a lot better from you. I am not hard to find online and if you are not sure if I am this username the the easiest thing to do is to ask rather than accuse.
So why are you being a shitty person? Curious.
The answer is Yes these are my words and I never posted them on I2 as AllLivesMatter. AllLivesMatter is not a nom de plume.
So why are you bullshitting about me?
-
Well, Al is a spazz. Maybe not on steroids but it sure is something, these days.
Bullshit assertions you would know are bullshit? Tinpot Tyrant. TYou played with the Admin Panel again didn't you Odeon. Why? You had too many beers? Got Butthurt and petty? Who knows and who care. The fact they you pretend to go along with what you know to be false is no lower than you have previously gone. Hell you will use my kids in arguments, sky is the limit in what you would do.
-
:lol1: this is like being in an XR meeting and everyone is trying to figure out who is secret police
-
Don't worry, Walkie. No need to take a break. The difference between Al and the rest of us is that we will know when it's time to take one and say so.
Can't figure out if that is meant as a backhanded insult. :LOL:
I think if the comment is from Odeon and about me, it is likely two things in about 100% of all cases: 1. it is a lie and 2. it is uncomplimentary. He can't himself. He is a butthurt idiot.
-
https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2020/06/17/boogaloo-steven-carrillo/?fbclid=IwAR2ztv4kq7722TwVdjrFx1w4L90VgdEpAMnmNcsmC7w6j_Nhhc5KP8tbwfk&utm_campaign=wp_main&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook
2 cops shot, one dead, near a peaceful BLM protest, by a white member of a right wing group to start a race war.
Yep, thats what trumpolini and his acolytes want. I'm sure al and his ilk would love that!
Why EXACTLY would I like a race war? Be very bloody specific.
Personally I would like to hope that after the Democrats supported and birthed slavery and the KKK in the US and the Republicans supported a fight to end Slavery 200 years ago that Americans could actually get along.
Still its YOUR fucking country. If YOU and YOUR countrymen can't collectively treat all people of all races equally after fighting a war to prevent slavery and repealing Jim Crow and other inequalities in your system. Then perhaps collectively America is a shitty country and you all collectively are shitty people.
Why are you a shitty person living in a shitty country?
How is that argument working out for you Ozy? Want to back up and try a different approach?
-
Changing your username to All Lives Matter is a shit thing to do, Al.
You know what WOULD be a real shitty thing? Accusing someone of something they did not do? YOU ar not going to be that shitty are you Phienix. I would have expected a lot better from you. I am not hard to find online and if you are not sure if I am this username the the easiest thing to do is to ask rather than accuse.
So why are you being a shitty person? Curious.
The answer is Yes these are my words and I never posted them on I2 as AllLivesMatter. AllLivesMatter is not a nom de plume.
So why are you bullshitting about me?
So you're not ALM but the content is still yours? I'm confused.
-
Well, Al is a spazz. Maybe not on steroids but it sure is something, these days.
Bullshit assertions you would know are bullshit? Tinpot Tyrant. TYou played with the Admin Panel again didn't you Odeon. Why? You had too many beers? Got Butthurt and petty? Who knows and who care. The fact they you pretend to go along with what you know to be false is no lower than you have previously gone. Hell you will use my kids in arguments, sky is the limit in what you would do.
It's good to see that you're as dishonest and as butthurt as ever. There are a few constants in this world. :laugh:
-
Changing your username to All Lives Matter is a shit thing to do, Al.
You know what WOULD be a real shitty thing? Accusing someone of something they did not do? YOU ar not going to be that shitty are you Phienix. I would have expected a lot better from you. I am not hard to find online and if you are not sure if I am this username the the easiest thing to do is to ask rather than accuse.
So why are you being a shitty person? Curious.
The answer is Yes these are my words and I never posted them on I2 as AllLivesMatter. AllLivesMatter is not a nom de plume.
So why are you bullshitting about me?
So you're not ALM but the content is still yours? I'm confused.
Oh, I'm pretty sure ALM=Al. Or they got separated at birth.
-
Well it looks like Al found his old password. Welcome back Al.
I can't promise that I will read every word of your posts, but I do hope that all bear-poking is taken in the good spirit in which it is intended.
-
Changing your username to All Lives Matter is a shit thing to do, Al.
You know what WOULD be a real shitty thing? Accusing someone of something they did not do? YOU ar not going to be that shitty are you Phienix. I would have expected a lot better from you. I am not hard to find online and if you are not sure if I am this username the the easiest thing to do is to ask rather than accuse.
So why are you being a shitty person? Curious.
The answer is Yes these are my words and I never posted them on I2 as AllLivesMatter. AllLivesMatter is not a nom de plume.
So why are you bullshitting about me?
So you're not ALM but the content is still yours? I'm confused.
Really quite easy and I blame Odeon.
I am gone 6-12 months. Someone goes to places I post under my real name. Different fora. They capture the content there and post as AllLivesMatter. Then some of my ACTUAL posts not posted while I was away gets "pollinated from Chipmunk Al into ALM. I have never posted as ALM. There is no sockpuppet alert. Never my IP I am sure. I have no username nor password for it.
Only Admins can do this later part. The only reason I can think to do this is to lend legitimacy to ALM because obviously the account was not engaging any critique like I never do.
Then someone like yourself (and you are not alone) and without asking me makes any damn assumption you want and the backbiting begins. Good job.
Do not listen to any Admin tell you they honestly believed ALM was me. I ALWAYS engaged and we know my 10 year+ history and obviously posting IP and so would have been different and emails and everything else.
Right Admins? Thought so. Oh and go fuck yourself Odeon, I blame you.
-
This makes too much sense - that Al posted this stuff on other forums and someone (Scrap?) found it and copied it here. That's why ALLLIVESMATTER never engaged in any personal dialog or made real direct responses to any arguments - because that would have required making up new posts and the person doing it knew their own writing style would be caught.
I believe Al.
-
This makes too much sense - that Al posted this stuff on other forums and someone (Scrap?) found it and copied it here. That's why ALLLIVESMATTER never engaged in any personal dialog or made real direct responses to any arguments - because that would have required making up new posts and the person doing it knew their own writing style would be caught.
I believe Al.
Someone has gone to a lot of trouble.
When I was mocking the supposedly fake Al about having forgotten his password, he responded with the following:
That'd be the one.
On the other side he wrote himself a reminder: "socks first, THEN shoes".
I remember one time a grown man tried bullying me in the workplace. I was in my thirties and he was not much younger.
It was odd. I did not react the first few times he quite vocally ran me down in front of his friends. I did not react because I thought I must have the wrong end of what was going on. I wasn’t. I actually listened to what he was saying. He was being a prick to me.
Next time he tried it again. They were laughing at me again. I let him go and when and stopped what I was doing. He eventually looked around and on making eye contact, I said,
“Hey Dave, could you hop outside with me a minute?”
Upon stepping out with me and out of earshot of his friends. I said,
“Okay, Dave, I have heard what you have said about me in front of your boyfriends there, and you have had your fun. I am not angry Dave but next time you ever try some stupid shit like that again, I will punch your f*****g head in…”
“Oh, no, no mate I….”
“Dave it's okay. You have had your fun but that shit stops now. If it continues I punch your f*****g head in and do it in front of your boyfriends. We clear?”
“Ok…”
“Good talk”
We did not shake hands or make any displays and I did not use any physical violence. I never sought him out nor shot him evil eyes. He never did try it on again either. He did try to make an effort with me a bit and it seemed genuine. I was not much interested.
I.just Want you to bear tht in mind
So in response to this mocking, the fake Al has gone back and dug up a somewhat threatening story from the real Al.
In the absence of evidence either way, I would be inclined to apply Occam's Razor in deciding which version of events is more likely to be true. That is, go with the story that requires the least assumptions.
-
A Quora post of mine to a question I believe about is violence always an answer to bullying or the like.
Al emulator. No give away there huh?
-
Like I said, if it wasn't you then someone has gone to a great deal of trouble.
If you did post this on quora, do you have a link?
-
Like I said, if it wasn't you then someone has gone to a great deal of trouble.
If you did post this on quora, do you have a link?
Possibly. It is on my personal account and I would rather not cross pollinate as much as ALM may. I think it is Odeon. Only he is butthurt enough and has it in for me enough to. Also there is an amount of Admin involvement with someof the early posts in ALM's name which were mine I made AS Chipmunk Al. So some big plays here and it goes right up to Admin.
Watch Odeon play ignorance.
-
Like I said, if it wasn't you then someone has gone to a great deal of trouble.
If you did post this on quora, do you have a link?
:cbc:
-
Like I said, if it wasn't you then someone has gone to a great deal of trouble.
If you did post this on quora, do you have a link?
https://disqus.com/by/Ross_Lumbus/
There we go. Man of the hour AllLivesMatter. So going to hide behind your nom de plume or going to admit who you are?
I am betting it is Odeon or one of his familiars. But it could easily be some other petty cowardly bullhurt troll? Perhaps Butterflies, Buttcoffee or some rainy faced ex-AFFer with a grudge. I am momentarily curious.
-
My money is on Scrap. I can't see Odeon going to this much trouble.
-
I miss Butterflies.
-
My money is on Scrap. I can't see Odeon going to this much trouble.
Nope. Scrap and i are on good terms. Probably Buttcoffee or Butterflies BUT someone with Admin access HAS put some of my actual earlier posts as Chipmunk Al into ALM. so this it fleshing out someone else's account with some of my posts.
Hey however you guys want to run I2. But whatever is done on my account is simply a sounding board to further incursions on other accounts right?
I wonder why people leave this place?
-
Odeon doesn't put a lot of effort into his posting. It's not that I think he is some paragon of virtue, it's more that I can't see him putting in the effort to create some ghost version of Al.
This does fit Scrap's style of stirring but I just cannot imagine what would be his motivation in this specific case.
To whoever the troll was: well played. You had me totally convinced. I am now leaning towards it being a very convincing and well-executed trolling exercise.
:congrats: :congrats: :congrats: :congrats: :congrats: :congrats: :congrats: :congrats:
-
Changing your username to All Lives Matter is a shit thing to do, Al.
You know what WOULD be a real shitty thing? Accusing someone of something they did not do? YOU ar not going to be that shitty are you Phienix. I would have expected a lot better from you. I am not hard to find online and if you are not sure if I am this username the the easiest thing to do is to ask rather than accuse.
So why are you being a shitty person? Curious.
The answer is Yes these are my words and I never posted them on I2 as AllLivesMatter. AllLivesMatter is not a nom de plume.
So why are you bullshitting about me?
So you're not ALM but the content is still yours? I'm confused.
He's gaslighting you and us. I knew he would do this.
-
https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2020/06/17/boogaloo-steven-carrillo/?fbclid=IwAR2ztv4kq7722TwVdjrFx1w4L90VgdEpAMnmNcsmC7w6j_Nhhc5KP8tbwfk&utm_campaign=wp_main&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook
2 cops shot, one dead, near a peaceful BLM protest, by a white member of a right wing group to start a race war.
Yep, thats what trumpolini and his acolytes want. I'm sure al and his ilk would love that!
Why EXACTLY would I like a race war? Be very bloody specific.
Personally I would like to hope that after the Democrats supported and birthed slavery and the KKK in the US and the Republicans supported a fight to end Slavery 200 years ago that Americans could actually get along.
Still its YOUR fucking country. If YOU and YOUR countrymen can't collectively treat all people of all races equally after fighting a war to prevent slavery and repealing Jim Crow and other inequalities in your system. Then perhaps collectively America is a shitty country and you all collectively are shitty people.
Why are you a shitty person living in a shitty country?
How is that argument working out for you Ozy? Want to back up and try a different approach?
Maybe you should try to stay sober, that would be a different approach.
-
https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2020/06/17/boogaloo-steven-carrillo/?fbclid=IwAR2ztv4kq7722TwVdjrFx1w4L90VgdEpAMnmNcsmC7w6j_Nhhc5KP8tbwfk&utm_campaign=wp_main&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook
2 cops shot, one dead, near a peaceful BLM protest, by a white member of a right wing group to start a race war.
Yep, thats what trumpolini and his acolytes want. I'm sure al and his ilk would love that!
Why EXACTLY would I like a race war? Be very bloody specific.
Personally I would like to hope that after the Democrats supported and birthed slavery and the KKK in the US and the Republicans supported a fight to end Slavery 200 years ago that Americans could actually get along.
Still its YOUR fucking country. If YOU and YOUR countrymen can't collectively treat all people of all races equally after fighting a war to prevent slavery and repealing Jim Crow and other inequalities in your system. Then perhaps collectively America is a shitty country and you all collectively are shitty people.
Why are you a shitty person living in a shitty country?
How is that argument working out for you Ozy? Want to back up and try a different approach?
Maybe you should try to stay sober, that would be a different approach.
Maybe are a degenerate liar that is unable to support the weight of their lies? Any chance of that?
-
I don't see why Scrap would do this, considering he's got no reason to. It's the same with everyone else listed. It's way too much effort. And me? I was quite happy to see Al gone. Less drama. Plus, I have a life.
The one person with the easiest access to Al's info and past posts here and elsewhere remains Al, and Occam's Razor does apply.
-
I don't see why Scrap would do this, considering he's got no reason to. It's the same with everyone else listed. It's way too much effort. And me? I was quite happy to see Al gone. Less drama. Plus, I have a life.
The one person with the easiest access to Al's info and past posts here and elsewhere remains Al, and Occam's Razor does apply.
I am okay with Scrap. So I doubt it was him. Butterflies and Midlife Aspie (is that his name, I forget) and Buttcoffee have done similar things in the past but not exactly the same.
Here is how stupid your conclusion is Odeon.
Al does not post posts he has posted under his real name on I2.
Al always engages when commented on for good or ill and will argue and spew wall of text of reply (apparently that is my MO)
Al has never posted outside his account on new or sockpuppet account
Al also does not post his real name
Whether you love or hate Al he has his own unique personality and has for 10 years.
Al does not believe in or has any store in ALM
ALM is a new account
ALM does not engage with other comments
ALM post all real name
ALM posts content from his forums under his real name
ALM believes in ALM
ALM is quoted as Al Emulator in MOSM private message.
Does this sound like it is me?
Not to you nor to me nor to anyone on here.......................except the hapless Ozy.
I think you are just too committed to something that you know to be untrue that you want an "out" to pretend you were fooled. Ozy actually believes it and you want to pretend you are as stupid as he is.
-
I don't see why Scrap would do this, considering he's got no reason to.
Scrap does a lot of stuff that no reasonable person would do. Don't try and reason your way into Scraps mind.
-
I don't see why Scrap would do this, considering he's got no reason to.
Scrap does a lot of stuff that no reasonable person would do. Don't try and reason your way into Scraps mind.
True. This is the best argument this far.
-
what is a reasonable person anyway?
a few months ago they were using that phrase a lot against Dominic Cummings to say 'a reasonable person could thing you have broken the rules' but I think I am reasonable and I don't think he broke the rules or even care what the rules are.
-
I really don't care who was posting as ALM. The fact that they were rambling diatribes was enough to convince me at the time that they were Al's work, and in fact they were Al's work.
If it was Al then the most reasonable explanation for posting as ALM would have been that he forgot his password. Well... he is back as Al so he didn't forget his password. There goes that hypothesis, straight out the window. So why else did he create a sock puppet account to post content that was so recognizably his own work?
That's why I'm leaning towards "sock puppet" now, despite it making no sense for anyone else to post Al's trademark long-winded bollocks.
-
I think I am reasonable
(https://media.tenor.com/images/eca505a3fd9090a52da9dc88918ab4ae/tenor.gif)
-
Hi. This is funny as hell, and no. Nothing to do with me :LOL:
-
I miss Butterflies.
Hi Schleed. Nice to see you, and it's lovely to hear that you've settled down with Emma. I'm genuinely thrilled for you :thumbup:
-
So ALM was Al...but it wasn't Al?
:rofl:
-
So ALM was Al...but it wasn't Al?
:rofl:
In the same way that if I posted your photos online I would not be you. Sorry to have to break that down for you.
-
Hi. This is funny as hell, and no. Nothing to do with me :LOL:
Welcome back.
-
Like I said, if it wasn't you then someone has gone to a great deal of trouble.
If you did post this on quora, do you have a link?
Link removed by Jack
There we go. Man of the hour AllLivesMatter. So going to hide behind your nom de plume or going to admit who you are?
I am betting it is Odeon or one of his familiars. But it could easily be some other petty cowardly bullhurt troll? Perhaps Butterflies, Buttcoffee or some rainy faced ex-AFFer with a grudge. I am momentarily curious.
Is that link something you would prefer Admins remove from the site?
-
Hi. This is funny as hell, and no. Nothing to do with me :LOL:
Welcome back.
Hi Jack :santa:
-
Like I said, if it wasn't you then someone has gone to a great deal of trouble.
If you did post this on quora, do you have a link?
Link removed by Jack
There we go. Man of the hour AllLivesMatter. So going to hide behind your nom de plume or going to admit who you are?
I am betting it is Odeon or one of his familiars. But it could easily be some other petty cowardly bullhurt troll? Perhaps Butterflies, Buttcoffee or some rainy faced ex-AFFer with a grudge. I am momentarily curious.
Is that link something you would prefer Admins remove from the site?
I do not bring my shit from outside the forum in here nor other's people shit from outside the forum in here. I don't dox. What other members do is there own business. I am not going to cry about it. I do not really give a shit about ALM themselves. Mildly curious but even that curiosity is falling
-
Hi. This is funny as hell, and no. Nothing to do with me :LOL:
Welcome back.
-
Hi. This is funny as hell, and no. Nothing to do with me :LOL:
Welcome back.
Hi Odeon :2thumbsup:
-
Changing your username to All Lives Matter is a shit thing to do, Al.
You know what WOULD be a real shitty thing? Accusing someone of something they did not do? YOU ar not going to be that shitty are you Phienix. I would have expected a lot better from you. I am not hard to find online and if you are not sure if I am this username the the easiest thing to do is to ask rather than accuse.
So why are you being a shitty person? Curious.
The answer is Yes these are my words and I never posted them on I2 as AllLivesMatter. AllLivesMatter is not a nom de plume.
So why are you bullshitting about me?
So you're not ALM but the content is still yours? I'm confused.
Really quite easy and I blame Odeon.
I am gone 6-12 months. Someone goes to places I post under my real name. Different fora. They capture the content there and post as AllLivesMatter. Then some of my ACTUAL posts not posted while I was away gets "pollinated from Chipmunk Al into ALM. I have never posted as ALM. There is no sockpuppet alert. Never my IP I am sure. I have no username nor password for it.
Only Admins can do this later part. The only reason I can think to do this is to lend legitimacy to ALM because obviously the account was not engaging any critique like I never do.
Then someone like yourself (and you are not alone) and without asking me makes any damn assumption you want and the backbiting begins. Good job.
Do not listen to any Admin tell you they honestly believed ALM was me. I ALWAYS engaged and we know my 10 year+ history and obviously posting IP and so would have been different and emails and everything else.
Right Admins? Thought so. Oh and go fuck yourself Odeon, I blame you.
I believe you. I thought someone had already known it was you, hence why I referred to you but I also said that what I read was really upsetting because it didn't fit with the person *I* knew you to be years ago. Although the content is still problematic.
Anyway, I don't keep track of who posts on what forums and I would have had no way to find you or track you down. Unless someone is in my life on the regular, I don't remember names. But I am sorry, fwiw.
-
I miss Butterflies.
Hi Schleed. Nice to see you, and it's lovely to hear that you've settled down with Emma. I'm genuinely thrilled for you :thumbup:
Okay, that's freaky that you suddenly came back like that :LOL:
Have you been lurking?
-
Hi. This is funny as hell, and no. Nothing to do with me :LOL:
Welcome back.
Hi Odeon :2thumbsup:
How have you been?
-
Hi. This is funny as hell, and no. Nothing to do with me :LOL:
Welcome back.
Hi Odeon :2thumbsup:
How have you been?
Mostly good, but bored as hell with the Covid lockdown. Haven't had a day or night out in 6 months :'(
Highlight of my life these days is a drive into the city centre for a socially distanced pizza :LOL:
-
I miss Butterflies.
Hi Schleed. Nice to see you, and it's lovely to hear that you've settled down with Emma. I'm genuinely thrilled for you :thumbup:
Okay, that's freaky that you suddenly came back like that :LOL:
Have you been lurking?
In a manner of speaking, yes.
A month or so ago, I turned up and saw the ALM account, and assumed Les had finally had the meltdown to end all meltdowns :headexplode:
Been checking in every so often since then, out of ghoulish interest, waiting to see what happened next :popcorn:
Now that the Les has claimed that he isn't ALM, and put my name forward as a possible suspect, I thought I should sign in and say no. Wasn't me :police:
-
I miss Butterflies.
Hi Schleed. Nice to see you, and it's lovely to hear that you've settled down with Emma. I'm genuinely thrilled for you :thumbup:
Okay, that's freaky that you suddenly came back like that :LOL:
Have you been lurking?
In a manner of speaking, yes.
A month or so ago, I turned up and saw the ALM account, and assumed Les had finally had the meltdown to end all meltdowns :headexplode:
Been checking in every so often since then, out of ghoulish interest, waiting to see what happened next :popcorn:
Now that the Les has claimed that he isn't ALM, and put my name forward as a possible suspect, I thought I should sign in and say no. Wasn't me :police:
Ah, okay. Glad you're back either way. Last time I even lurked here was 7 years ago! Also thank you, things have been going well with me and Emma since, although I am currently furloughed from work. :)
You still live in N. Ireland?
-
I miss Butterflies.
Hi Schleed. Nice to see you, and it's lovely to hear that you've settled down with Emma. I'm genuinely thrilled for you :thumbup:
Okay, that's freaky that you suddenly came back like that :LOL:
Have you been lurking?
In a manner of speaking, yes.
A month or so ago, I turned up and saw the ALM account, and assumed Les had finally had the meltdown to end all meltdowns :headexplode:
Been checking in every so often since then, out of ghoulish interest, waiting to see what happened next :popcorn:
Now that the Les has claimed that he isn't ALM, and put my name forward as a possible suspect, I thought I should sign in and say no. Wasn't me :police:
Ah, okay. Glad you're back either way. Last time I even lurked here was 7 years ago! Also thank you, things have been going well with me and Emma since, although I am currently furloughed from work. :)
You still live in N. Ireland?
Thankfully not. Have been living in Budapest for around the last 6 years.
Myself, aunt, uncle, cousin and his gf, best friend, and a handful of other friends and their partners all moved at the same time. We all live within a few streets of each other and have formed our own little Scots/Irish/Latvian community :laugh:
It's been awesome, and up until the Covid crap, I've loved every minute of it.
-
I moved to the UK right during the Brexit referendum - FML.
-
I moved to the UK right during the Brexit referendum - FML.
Oh dear. I'm just glad the locals haven't burned you at the stake :laugh:
Are you in a city, or doing the rural thing?
-
I moved to the UK right during the Brexit referendum - FML.
Oh dear. I'm just glad the locals haven't burned you at the stake :laugh:
Are you in a city, or doing the rural thing?
I'm not brown enough ::) :LOL:
In a large town in East Midlands, near Leicester/Nottingham. It's okay, but it's home to some of the worst kebabs in existence. Until the German donner place arrived, that is. I would be bored shitless if it were a rural place.
-
I moved to the UK right during the Brexit referendum - FML.
Oh dear. I'm just glad the locals haven't burned you at the stake :laugh:
Are you in a city, or doing the rural thing?
I'm not brown enough ::) :LOL:
In a large town in East Midlands, near Leicester/Nottingham. It's okay, but it's home to some of the worst kebabs in existence. Until the German donner place arrived, that is. I would be bored shitless if it were a rural place.
What I wouldn't give for some good British takeaway :autism:
A shish or chicken kebab would be heaven :vibrator:
A proper British Chinese takeaway. Lemon or pineapple chicken with fried rice :flowersex:
Hungarian Chinese food is shit :(
Chips and brown sauce :drool:
Chicken tikka and pilau rice :dick:
There are a few decent Indian restaurants, but nothing like back home :grrr:
An oval bite from Greggs :lovelove:
Pizza :missionary:
Hungarian pizza is just embarrassing :-[
There is one great pizza place, but the rest are terrible.
-
I had Greggs for lunch today.
-
A shish or chicken kebab would be heaven :vibrator:
Can't get proper ones where I live. They do it as cheap as possible because drunk people won't know the difference. :(
Kebabs are generally god-tier in Ireland. I've had a few good ones in Nottingham, though.
A proper British Chinese takeaway. Lemon or pineapple chicken with fried rice :flowersex:
Hungarian Chinese food is shit :(
I've tried EVERY chinese in this town and only one is actually good. The rest is rubber chicken galore :zombiefuck:
Chicken tikka and pilau rice :dick:
There are a few decent Indian restaurants, but nothing like back home :grrr:
Oof I want one right now, indian restaurants are one of the only few saving grace in this town.
An oval bite from Greggs :lovelove:
I could do with a chicken bake... :eyelash:
Another thing I love is gyros - there's a greek place in Nottingham and they make most kebabs look rubbish in comparison. :autism:
-
I miss Butterflies.
Hi Schleed. Nice to see you, and it's lovely to hear that you've settled down with Emma. I'm genuinely thrilled for you :thumbup:
Okay, that's freaky that you suddenly came back like that :LOL:
Have you been lurking?
In a manner of speaking, yes.
A month or so ago, I turned up and saw the ALM account, and assumed Les had finally had the meltdown to end all meltdowns :headexplode:
Been checking in every so often since then, out of ghoulish interest, waiting to see what happened next :popcorn:
Now that the Les has claimed that he isn't ALM, and put my name forward as a possible suspect, I thought I should sign in and say no. Wasn't me :police:
He loves to blame everybody else. Alcoholism does that.
-
Another thing I love is gyros - there's a greek place in Nottingham and they make most kebabs look rubbish in comparison. :autism:
Yes, gyros. They are everywhere here, and they're awful. They're cheap, nasty, and sold on every filthy corner. They're fuel for Hungarian chavs. I can't tell you how drunk I have to be to buy one :zombiefuck:
I'm sure they're lovely from a nice Greek takeaway back home though. Hungarian fast food is just shit :-[
-
I've been to Budapest twice, on the train from Slovenia both times. 19 years ago. Awesome city. Great food.
-
Another thing I love is gyros - there's a greek place in Nottingham and they make most kebabs look rubbish in comparison. :autism:
Yes, gyros. They are everywhere here, and they're awful. They're cheap, nasty, and sold on every filthy corner. They're fuel for Hungarian chavs. I can't tell you how drunk I have to be to buy one :zombiefuck:
I'm sure they're lovely from a nice Greek takeaway back home though. Hungarian fast food is just shit :-[
Greek places are not very commonplace in the UK, so I guess that's why. Emphasis on quality in order to stand out.
Hungary seems less appealing to me now.
-
In 2001 I remember going to cheap little eateries in Budapest where the food was awesome. Of course I was living in Slovenia so all food was comparatively awesome.
-
I've been to Budapest twice, on the train from Slovenia both times. 19 years ago. Awesome city. Great food.
Hungary seems less appealing to me now.
Great food here, if you eat in restaurants. And a good meal in a restaurant costs less than a decent takeaway back home. But I do miss my British takeaway :laugh:
-
Curious, what brought the move to Hungary? Seems like quite a random place to move to.
I'd love to move back to Ireland, but there are many personal factors to why I can't. Was planning to visit in April but thanks to covid, that's not looking likely until next year at least. :(
-
I've been to Budapest twice, on the train from Slovenia both times. 19 years ago. Awesome city. Great food.
Hungary seems less appealing to me now.
Great food here, if you eat in restaurants. And a good meal in a restaurant costs less than a decent takeaway back home. But I do miss my British takeaway :laugh:
British food is generally not that great. There are a smallish number of places that do excellent fish and chips. There are lots of decent Indian restaurants. And a good full English breakfast is great.
Things might have improved since 1998 though, and Britain has become more multicultural.
England is the only place where I've seen people make buttered toast and then spread their Chinese takeaway on top of it.
-
I'd love to move back to Ireland, but there are many personal factors to why I can't. Was planning to visit in April but thanks to covid, that's not looking likely until next year at least. :(
Why can't you move home?
Curious, what brought the move to Hungary? Seems like quite a random place to move to.
Nobody liked living in N.Ireland. Shit atmosphere. When it became time to leave, we all agreed that we'd like something different. We all had different ideas. I quite fancied New York. Uncle liked the South of France, Cousin liked Paris.
My aunts best friend from school lives in Budapest, and we all just agreed that Budapest was beautiful, and we just ended up choosing it.
Of course it helped that it was in the EU, which meant nobody had to worry about residency permits.
-
I need to visit Ireland. I'm sure it's very nice.
-
I need to visit Ireland. I'm sure it's very nice.
Ireland is lovely. Northern Ireland is a shithole.
-
England is the only place where I've seen people make buttered toast and then spread their Chinese takeaway on top of it.
Oh yuck :zombiefuck:
Over here they dip their pizzas in sauce(tomato, or brown,) and mix red wine with cola :zombiefuck:
-
Why can't you move home?
There are many, but here's some of the main reasons:
- Emma has various physical disabilities like EDS and as a result, is heavily dependent on the NHS - Ireland's HSE is bad in comparison and I don't feel confident that they would give her the same services or level of care. Neither of us realised the full extent of this until I moved over, because she was nowhere as physically bad back then outside the knee operations she needed.
- Bad blood with family which makes staying with them/near them nearly impossible. I can barely tolerate my mother for a week due to her narcissistic tendencies and my dad is another story onto itself.
- Have amassed a lot of stuff due to hobbies etc, which would make it very difficult and prohibitively expensive for me to move everything. Moving my stuff over from Ireland was a pain in the bollocks and that was just my room, imagine moving an entire house worth. :zombiefuck:
-
I miss Butterflies.
Hi Schleed. Nice to see you, and it's lovely to hear that you've settled down with Emma. I'm genuinely thrilled for you :thumbup:
Okay, that's freaky that you suddenly came back like that :LOL:
Have you been lurking?
In a manner of speaking, yes.
A month or so ago, I turned up and saw the ALM account, and assumed Les had finally had the meltdown to end all meltdowns :headexplode:
Been checking in every so often since then, out of ghoulish interest, waiting to see what happened next :popcorn:
Now that the Les has claimed that he isn't ALM, and put my name forward as a possible suspect, I thought I should sign in and say no. Wasn't me :police:
He loves to blame everybody else. Alcoholism does that.
What alcoholism precisely, Ozy?
I do drink a four pack of borbon and cola premixes on a Friday. I understand wine is your drink.
Unless you have something to evidence otherwise, wtf are you on about. Specifics man. Stop being an immoral lying little weasel
-
Why can't you move home?
There are many, but here's some of the main reasons:
- Emma has various physical disabilities like EDS and as a result, is heavily dependent on the NHS - Ireland's HSE is bad in comparison and I don't feel confident that they would give her the same services or level of care. Neither of us realised the full extent of this until I moved over, because she was nowhere as physically bad back then outside the knee operations she needed.
- Bad blood with family which makes staying with them/near them nearly impossible. I can barely tolerate my mother for a week due to her narcissistic tendencies and my dad is another story onto itself.
- Have amassed a lot of stuff due to hobbies etc, which would make it very difficult and prohibitively expensive for me to move everything. Moving my stuff over from Ireland was a pain in the bollocks and that was just my room, imagine moving an entire house's worth. :zombiefuck:
Sorry to hear that. Maybe things might change one day?
-
Why can't you move home?
There are many, but here's some of the main reasons:
- Emma has various physical disabilities like EDS and as a result, is heavily dependent on the NHS - Ireland's HSE is bad in comparison and I don't feel confident that they would give her the same services or level of care. Neither of us realised the full extent of this until I moved over, because she was nowhere as physically bad back then outside the knee operations she needed.
- Bad blood with family which makes staying with them/near them nearly impossible. I can barely tolerate my mother for a week due to her narcissistic tendencies and my dad is another story onto itself.
- Have amassed a lot of stuff due to hobbies etc, which would make it very difficult and prohibitively expensive for me to move everything. Moving my stuff over from Ireland was a pain in the bollocks and that was just my room, imagine moving an entire house's worth. :zombiefuck:
Sorry to hear that. Maybe things might change one day?
Perhaps one day, but times are uncertain at the moment.
-
It should be noted that it's part of the expat experience to complain about stuff.
Like if you live somewhere like Jakarta or Bangkok there is no way that you can't complain about the traffic. Or the air pollution.
It's important to keep things in perspective, like you are obviously doing Butterflies. Keep it at a level of "I love this and this, but these other things annoy me".
A lot of expats get into the habit of expressing opinions that might be described as cultural superiority complexes at best. I'm sure that you've encountered them.
-
I do drink a four pack of borbon and cola premixes on a Friday. I understand wine is your drink.
Al pours those bourbon and cola premixes on his coco pops in the morning.
-
I always found "expat" to be a weird term. As far as I'm concerned, they're migrants. There seems to be a political bent to it eg. white migrants are more often considered "expats" but non-white migrants are more often considered "immigrants".
I wouldn't consider myself an expat despite now living in the UK.
-
It should be noted that it's part of the expat experience to complain about stuff.
Like if you live somewhere like Jakarta or Bangkok there is no way that you can't complain about the traffic. Or the air pollution.
It's important to keep things in perspective, like you are obviously doing Butterflies. Keep it at a level of "I love this and this, but these other things annoy me".
A lot of expats get into the habit of expressing opinions that might be described as cultural superiority complexes at best. I'm sure that you've encountered them.
No, no. I'm not complaining. I love this place. It's the first time in my life I've lived somewhere that's made me happy.
I just miss a few things from back home, and most of them are takeaway foods :laugh:
Actually, food is just about the only thing I miss.
-
It should be noted that it's part of the expat experience to complain about stuff.
Like if you live somewhere like Jakarta or Bangkok there is no way that you can't complain about the traffic. Or the air pollution.
It's important to keep things in perspective, like you are obviously doing Butterflies. Keep it at a level of "I love this and this, but these other things annoy me".
A lot of expats get into the habit of expressing opinions that might be described as cultural superiority complexes at best. I'm sure that you've encountered them.
No, no. I'm not complaining. I love this place. It's the first time in my life I've lived somewhere that's made me happy.
I just miss a few things from back home, and most of them are takeaway foods :laugh:
Actually, food is just about the only thing I miss.
I totally get it. You are mentioning a minor thing that annoys you, or something that you miss about home.
I'm sure you've encountered a few obnoxious expats? I certainly have, pretty much everywhere that I've been an expat. Hopefully I haven't been one of them too often.
-
I always found "expat" to be a weird term. As far as I'm concerned, they're migrants. There seems to be a political bent to it eg. white migrants are more often considered "expats" but non-white migrants are more often considered "immigrants".
I wouldn't consider myself an expat despite now living in the UK.
Yes, it's an overused term.
I think of expats as people who move to another country for a specific assignment. In my case it was mostly on IT projects and about half of my fellow expats were usually non-white (East Asian or Indian), but that didn't stop them from being considered expats.
Normally the right to stay in that country is tied to a work permit linked to a specific employer and role.
I would think of IT workers from India who are in Australia on short term contracts and conditional work permits as expats, 100%.
Retirees who retire to a country with cheaper cost of living and warmer weather are a bit of a grey area (no pun intended), and they are often referred to as expats or as expat retirees.
The real wanky expression is tourists who refer to themselves as "travelers".
-
It should be noted that it's part of the expat experience to complain about stuff.
Like if you live somewhere like Jakarta or Bangkok there is no way that you can't complain about the traffic. Or the air pollution.
It's important to keep things in perspective, like you are obviously doing Butterflies. Keep it at a level of "I love this and this, but these other things annoy me".
A lot of expats get into the habit of expressing opinions that might be described as cultural superiority complexes at best. I'm sure that you've encountered them.
No, no. I'm not complaining. I love this place. It's the first time in my life I've lived somewhere that's made me happy.
I just miss a few things from back home, and most of them are takeaway foods :laugh:
Actually, food is just about the only thing I miss.
I totally get it. You are mentioning a minor thing that annoys you, or something that you miss about home.
I'm sure you've encountered a few obnoxious expats? I certainly have, pretty much everywhere that I've been an expat. Hopefully I haven't been one of them too often.
Surprisingly, no. I really don't meet expats, at least not British ones. There are places they hang out. I don't go to those places, and it seems I'm just not part of that world. I'm happy enough with that.
I'm much more likely to run into a British stag party, and they are obnoxious :laugh:
The friends I've met here are all locals, and some European students.
There are quite a few Russian and Chinese people where I live, but they live behind big walls, and only leave their houses when in cars. I've never bumped into them in the street, and we've never exchanged more than a wave, or a "szia".
-
Like I said, if it wasn't you then someone has gone to a great deal of trouble.
If you did post this on quora, do you have a link?
Link removed by Jack
There we go. Man of the hour AllLivesMatter. So going to hide behind your nom de plume or going to admit who you are?
I am betting it is Odeon or one of his familiars. But it could easily be some other petty cowardly bullhurt troll? Perhaps Butterflies, Buttcoffee or some rainy faced ex-AFFer with a grudge. I am momentarily curious.
Is that link something you would prefer Admins remove from the site?
I do not bring my shit from outside the forum in here nor other's people shit from outside the forum in here. I don't dox. What other members do is there own business. I am not going to cry about it. I do not really give a shit about ALM themselves. Mildly curious but even that curiosity is falling
Didn't expect any crying, but considering past similar instances am a bit surprised it hasn't been removed.
-
Surprisingly, no. I really don't meet expats, at least not British ones. There are places they hang out. I don't go to those places, and it seems I'm just not part of that world. I'm happy enough with that.
I'm much more likely to run into a British stag party, and they are obnoxious :laugh:
The friends I've met here are all locals, and some European students.
There are quite a few Russian and Chinese people where I live, but they live behind big walls, and only leave their houses when in cars. I've never bumped into them in the street, and we've never exchanged more than a wave, or a "szia".
Ah, that's excellent, and a much better way to keep a positive outlook on life in Hungary.
Expat life in Central Europe tends to revolve around excessive alcohol consumption and depressing and repetitive conversations. It's good that you've avoided that.
-
I find the fact that we got so epically trolled... amusing.
There are still several possible explanations. I still think there is an outside chance that it was Al losing the plot and he is now back to reclaim his "Al-ness". But the more I think about it, the less likely it seems.
Which brings us to someone with a LOT of time on their hands trolling us. And they did it well.
Maybe time to have a laugh about it and move on?
-
It was more convincing than most trolls we get around here, that's for sure. :laugh:
-
I find the fact that we got so epically trolled... amusing.
There are still several possible explanations. I still think there is an outside chance that it was Al losing the plot and he is now back to reclaim his "Al-ness". But the more I think about it, the less likely it seems.
Which brings us to someone with a LOT of time on their hands trolling us. And they did it well.
Maybe time to have a laugh about it and move on?
Yes it was hilarious all around and BECAUSE I have been a poster here for over a decade and have always been the same sort of poster none of you would have been fooled by the fact that the troll was gheying in the karma panel, not being combative, not responding at you with walls of text, was running from confrontations, had started a new account, took on a persona that had nothing to do with anything I ever held any store in and so forth, none of you would have second guessed that and sought confirmation right?
I mean given ALL that it still tricked you? Really? If any of you had a sudden personality shift you would have all gone along with that like a dock of sheep following poor leader opinions?
I wonder.
The ALM troll has posted since I have been here and no doubt will continue after I left. At least perhaps you will not be a gullible at their efforts and can stop falling over yourselves to pat them on the back for being so clever when ALL of the above was pretty bloody obvious that Blind Freedy could have seen it.
-
Like I said, if it wasn't you then someone has gone to a great deal of trouble.
If you did post this on quora, do you have a link?
Link removed by Jack
There we go. Man of the hour AllLivesMatter. So going to hide behind your nom de plume or going to admit who you are?
I am betting it is Odeon or one of his familiars. But it could easily be some other petty cowardly bullhurt troll? Perhaps Butterflies, Buttcoffee or some rainy faced ex-AFFer with a grudge. I am momentarily curious.
Is that link something you would prefer Admins remove from the site?
I do not bring my shit from outside the forum in here nor other's people shit from outside the forum in here. I don't dox. What other members do is there own business. I am not going to cry about it. I do not really give a shit about ALM themselves. Mildly curious but even that curiosity is falling
Didn't expect any crying, but considering past similar instances am a bit surprised it hasn't been removed.
Happy to remove it if Al wants it removed. He doesn't seem to care, though.
-
Chipmunk Al hasn't used the karma system since November 28, 2019 when he yayed rock hound. He hasn't gheyed rock hound but ALLLIVESMATTER has, on 20th June, 2020.
So rock hound's anger is misdirected.
-
I think Ozy's thinking was that ALM=Al.
It doesn't look like it, though. Unless Al completely lost his marbles, which doesn't seem to be the case, somebody properly trolled this board.
-
I find the fact that we got so epically trolled... amusing.
There are still several possible explanations. I still think there is an outside chance that it was Al losing the plot and he is now back to reclaim his "Al-ness". But the more I think about it, the less likely it seems.
Which brings us to someone with a LOT of time on their hands trolling us. And they did it well.
Maybe time to have a laugh about it and move on?
Yes it was hilarious all around and BECAUSE I have been a poster here for over a decade and have always been the same sort of poster none of you would have been fooled by the fact that the troll was gheying in the karma panel, not being combative, not responding at you with walls of text, was running from confrontations, had started a new account, took on a persona that had nothing to do with anything I ever held any store in and so forth, none of you would have second guessed that and sought confirmation right?
I mean given ALL that it still tricked you? Really? If any of you had a sudden personality shift you would have all gone along with that like a dock of sheep following poor leader opinions?
I wonder.
The ALM troll has posted since I have been here and no doubt will continue after I left. At least perhaps you will not be a gullible at their efforts and can stop falling over yourselves to pat them on the back for being so clever when ALL of the above was pretty bloody obvious that Blind Freedy could have seen it.
Just wanna quote myself from another thread in case you miss it Al:
Wow! I've been too busy IRL for past couple of days to keep up with I 2, and look what blows up in my abscence! Welcome back, Al ( I mean that). And sorry for belated response.
^What Odeon said. I was thoroughly taken in, along with everybody else, and am really sorry.
IIRC, we started off thinking it might be a spectacularly good Al impression, but then gravitated toward to the conclusion it must be actually yourself, AL . Given that those ALM posts were actually your handiwork, it's usurprising that we correctly identified them as yours is it? You can't fault us in that much. So it naturally followed that the account was yours...errr, wrong as it turns out.
I don't think we've run across such across complex and dedicated prank before. In a way it's funny, but can see how shitty it was for you to be the targetof it.
Hope we can all laugh this off, but that's up to you.
(have removed the Odeon quote, seeing as it was posted in Elder's)
-
Like I said, if it wasn't you then someone has gone to a great deal of trouble.
If you did post this on quora, do you have a link?
Link removed by Jack
There we go. Man of the hour AllLivesMatter. So going to hide behind your nom de plume or going to admit who you are?
I am betting it is Odeon or one of his familiars. But it could easily be some other petty cowardly bullhurt troll? Perhaps Butterflies, Buttcoffee or some rainy faced ex-AFFer with a grudge. I am momentarily curious.
Is that link something you would prefer Admins remove from the site?
I do not bring my shit from outside the forum in here nor other's people shit from outside the forum in here. I don't dox. What other members do is there own business. I am not going to cry about it. I do not really give a shit about ALM themselves. Mildly curious but even that curiosity is falling
Didn't expect any crying, but considering past similar instances am a bit surprised it hasn't been removed.
Happy to remove it if Al wants it removed. He doesn't seem to care, though.
I see. Didn't realize the no doxing rule was by request. Maybe it could be done as a courtesy.
-
Happy to remove it if Al wants it removed. He doesn't seem to care, though.
I see. Didn't realize the no doxing rule was by request. Maybe it could be done as a courtesy.
Jack has a point. It should be removed, IMO
-
I went to do it and ALM had already done it. :cbc:
-
I find the fact that we got so epically trolled... amusing.
There are still several possible explanations. I still think there is an outside chance that it was Al losing the plot and he is now back to reclaim his "Al-ness". But the more I think about it, the less likely it seems.
Which brings us to someone with a LOT of time on their hands trolling us. And they did it well.
Maybe time to have a laugh about it and move on?
Yes it was hilarious all around and BECAUSE I have been a poster here for over a decade and have always been the same sort of poster none of you would have been fooled by the fact that the troll was gheying in the karma panel, not being combative, not responding at you with walls of text, was running from confrontations, had started a new account, took on a persona that had nothing to do with anything I ever held any store in and so forth, none of you would have second guessed that and sought confirmation right?
I mean given ALL that it still tricked you? Really? If any of you had a sudden personality shift you would have all gone along with that like a dock of sheep following poor leader opinions?
I wonder.
The ALM troll has posted since I have been here and no doubt will continue after I left. At least perhaps you will not be a gullible at their efforts and can stop falling over yourselves to pat them on the back for being so clever when ALL of the above was pretty bloody obvious that Blind Freedy could have seen it.
Chipmunk Al is an imposter who wants to take away all the building blocks of culture so the only commonality is who rules over you. Codifying morality and making efforts to be moral and feel protected. I understand the attraction to all of these things but I do not think it silly or bad.
At least I am constitent and believe what he says, just his ideas are crazy.
Cognitive Dissonance of his brain is mind-boggling. Who cares what he think?
Each of you seditious cowards needs to be gone after starting with Odeon and MOSW.
-
Pssst white people suck :zoinks:
-
(https://i.imgur.com/GqEdpgI.png)
(https://i.imgur.com/7qttfnm.gif)
-
(https://i.imgur.com/GqEdpgI.png)
(https://i.imgur.com/7qttfnm.gif)
Why are you such a victim and pretend you are oppressed? Nothing empowering in that.
I REALLY hope that it is simply a lazy want to write sensationalist crap rather than a real belief. Cringeworthy.
-
I smell something greasy going on. Why were you and scrap practically PMing, at the same time? We already know you're using a VPN.
:LOL:
-
*awaits some butthurt response after a desperate attempt to look at my profile for ammo*
-
I smell something greasy going on. Why were you and scrap practically PMing, at the same time? We already know you're using a VPN.
:LOL:
You are not only immoral but peddle your immorality proudly as a basis of moral good. It is disgusting.
It's disgusting and so are you.
-
I smell something greasy going on. Why were you and scrap practically PMing, at the same time? We already know you're using a VPN.
:LOL:
You are not only immoral but peddle your immorality proudly as a basis of moral good. It is disgusting.
It's disgusting and so are you.
Says the king of grease.
Look at this silly oul' cunt trying to "troll" guys! :zoinks:
-
Pssst white people suck :zoinks:
They really do. :zoinks:
-
I smell something greasy going on. Why were you and scrap practically PMing, at the same time? We already know you're using a VPN.
:LOL:
Oooh, we have our very own conspiracy theory :popcorn:
but, seriously i noticed exact same thing. Quite a bit of to-ing and fro-ing by the look of it. Here are a few snapshots (with the, uh, even-more-boring parts cut out)
ALL LIVES MATTER
20:14:17 Sending a message.
Vermin Supreme
20:00:18 Viewing a list of recent topics.
Walkie
20:16:55 Viewing Who's Online.
ALL LIVES MATTER
20:16:53 Viewing the topic When do you think they will start the next pandemic?.
Walkie
20:36:47 Viewing Who's Online.
ALL LIVES MATTER
20:33:59 Sending a message.
Guest 20:33:52 Viewing the topic stephanie tanner from full house.
Vermin Supreme
20:32:51 Sending a message.
Walkie
20:38:34 Viewing Who's Online.
ALL LIVES MATTER
20:38:17 Viewing the topic I quit.
Vermin Supreme
20:32:51 Sending a message.
Walkie
20:41:14 Viewing Who's Online.
Vermin Supreme
20:41:11 Sending a message.
ALL LIVES MATTER
20:38:17 Viewing the topic I quit.
ALL LIVES MATTER
20:43:40 Sending a message.
Guest 20:43:20 Viewing the topic Pathetic .
Vermin Supreme
20:43:14 Sending a message.
Icequeen
ALL LIVES MATTER
20:43:40 Sending a message.
Guest 20:43:20 Viewing the topic Pathetic .
Vermin Supreme
20:43:14 Sending a message.
Guest 20:38:47 Viewing the topic Does Pea deserve a voice here, Yay or nay.
:boot: :wolfie: :wolfie: :wolfie: :wolfie: :wolfie: :wolfie: :wolfie: :wolfie: :wolfie: :wolfie: :wolfie: :wolfie: :wolfie: :wolfie: :wolfie: :wolfie:
I think this just about proves , er , uhm :apondering: ...that not much gets past a buncha bored spazzes :green:
-
I know, right? It looks very suspect. Likely they know each other or that ALM IS scrap. Wouldn't be surprised if the latter, the cunt is a slimey weasel.
-
Also have made quite a few successful sockpuppets on WP in my trolling days, PMing your sockpuppets is a common technique to quickly transfer basic information like text, links etc. between two computers using different IP addresses, all while making it look a little more authentic to the untrained eye. This could anything like basic notes on various members to keep up the facade, to "ammo" to use against people. Completely pointless due to the likes of Google docs these days, but it's what I often did.
-
I know, right? It looks very suspect. Likely they know each other or that ALM IS scrap. Wouldn't be surprised if the latter, the cunt is a slimey weasel.
We were exchanging insults you fucking tallow roly-poly!!! :hahaha:
-
Who is your prime suspect Pappy?
I initially suspected you because it was such a skilled trolling and researching effort. It looked like something that few of us would have the patience or the skill to do.
Based on ALM's more recent posts and style, I'm leaning towards that recent angry CAPS LOCK troll who said he was going to try to get the place closed down.
-
I know, right? It looks very suspect. Likely they know each other or that ALM IS scrap. Wouldn't be surprised if the latter, the cunt is a slimey weasel.
We were exchanging insults you fucking tallow roly-poly!!! :hahaha:
Hey, look who suddenly appeared!
Go be a bunch of cunt drippings elsewhere, greasyboy. :LOL:
-
Who is your prime suspect Pappy?
It's hard to say. It has to be someone who's been a member for a few years and figured out who Al was. My guess is someone who's been part of the drama here for 5+ years.
I initially suspected you because it was such a skilled trolling and researching effort. It looked like something that few of us would have the patience or the skill to do.
I don't have the patience for this kind of trolling either. My style is more like instant gratification. I poke someone and they react.
Based on ALM's more recent posts and style, I'm leaning towards that recent angry CAPS LOCK troll who said he was going to try to get the place closed down.
No, I suspect that was Duke Nukem and this isn't his style. This is more like Buttcoffee.
-
If I ever get to the stage in my life where I have to anonymously troll a forum via VPN can someone please finish me off with a shovel and bury me in the garden. It will be a mercy.
How empty are some peoples lives?
-
If I ever get to the stage in my life where I have to anonymously troll a forum via VPN can someone please finish me off with a shovel and bury me in the garden. It will be a mercy.
How empty are some peoples lives?
:plus: Just send me your address and tell me where you keep the shovel. :angel:
I'd prefer to be finished by a pistol shot through the head myself. You don't happen to have one do you?
-
If I ever get to the stage in my life where I have to anonymously troll a forum via VPN can someone please finish me off with a shovel and bury me in the garden. It will be a mercy.
How empty are some peoples lives?
Scrap's life is pretty empty, yes.
-
FWIW, I don't think it was Scrap. I don't see why he would do it.
-
The PMing is suspect, and the post style is eerily similar. If your goal is to piss people off, it doesn't seem like a lot of effort in practice.
-
I dunno. I hope we'll find out.
-
If I ever get to the stage in my life where I have to anonymously troll a forum via VPN can someone please finish me off with a shovel and bury me in the garden. It will be a mercy.
How empty are some peoples lives?
:plus: Just send me your address and tell me where you keep the shovel. :angel:
I'd prefer to be finished by a pistol shot through the head myself. You don't happen to have one do you?
I rather hoped I'd be stoned to death. Can you imagine how much ganja you'd need to smoke to be stoned to death?
-
exactly. its basically not possible.
-
It's very difficult to get stoned to death on weed. But certainly possible to use so much that you make no sense whatsoever.
-
It's very difficult to get stoned to death on weed. But certainly possible to use so much that you make no sense whatsoever.
I manage to do it substance free. :zoinks:
-
It's very difficult to get stoned to death on weed. But certainly possible to use so much that you make no sense whatsoever.
I manage to do it substance free. :zoinks:
:lol1:
-
DEFUND THE VACCINE COMPANIES.
-
Anti-vaxxer idiots want to return to a world without vaccines.
Well, you've got a taste of what the world is like with all the wonders of modern medicine but without ONE vaccine.
How you liking it so far?
-
its really fun i dont have to go anywhere i can just stay at home and use the internet which was what i did all day anyway, but now its socially acceptable.
-
only weed and vitamin d can cure coivid. fuck ur pharma.
-
bill gates is so evil he tried to take you away from the light
:junkie: :junkie: :junkie: :junkie: :junkie: :junkie: :junkie: :junkie:
-
i dont care how many kids he has im convinced he's still a virgin
-
https://banned.video/channel/5b885d33e6646a0015a6fa2d
-
www.infowars.com
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zOLPUUFd-9w
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m3zSDdm-SHI
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4wQoHdWT844
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8HZLyDpSCzc