• We are currently experiencing technical difficulties. We sincerely apologize for the inconvenience.

Official War Room Awards 2017

tonni said:
I almost want to explain to you the difference between who's and whose but this is so good
Click to expand...

I know the difference. This is what's so fun about collectively trolling people like you. You take yourselves so seriously you can't take a step back and stop to realize you're being trolled. I could have said that the appropriate word was "Whoms'tve" and you dudes would have reacted the exact same way. Because you're a bunch of uptight goofs who take yourselfs too seriously. (Wait for it, are you being trolled again? Did I do that on purpose?)
 
Anung Un Rama said:
Amazing that you can lose your shit on a me like that when your major contribution to the WR has been emojis and your played out grammar gimmick. You probably reported me, too.
Click to expand...
Dude this is not going well for you , take a break, I suggest a nice long new years day walk .
 
lfd0311 said:
I know the difference. This is what's so fun about collectively trolling people like you. You take yourselves so seriously you can't take a step back and stop to realize you're being trolled. I could have said that the appropriate word was "Whoms'tve" and you dudes would have reacted the exact same way. Because you're a bunch of uptight goofs who take yourselfs too seriously. (Wait for it, are you being trolled again? Did I do that on purpose?)
Click to expand...
<puh-lease75>nice try man. you really "trolled" us by having us make fun of you.

let me guess, sometimes you piss your pants in public just to "troll" people?
 
tonni said:
<puh-lease75>nice try man. you really "trolled" us by having us make fun of you.

let me guess, sometimes you piss your pants in public just to "troll" people?
Click to expand...

Nice try by posting a link that showed I was wrong then acting like I was right while you jumped all over it?
 
Anung Un Rama said:
Does Jack throw his hot dogs on your face like that, or do you have to pay extra?
Click to expand...
tenor.gif
 
Lead said:
There are many ideas/solutions and I don't completely disagree with that one, especially if it is privatized. I just stay on the side of caution with an issue that could have pretty big consequences if we get it wrong.
Click to expand...


There's two approaches that I see. Creating more integrity among news outlets and educating the public well enough to know when they're being manipulated. I picked the route I felt more realistic. What other tactics would aid that strategy? Is relying on everyone being able to tell fact from fiction on every subject realistic?
 
Jack V Savage said:
Meh. My point was about media coverage. The story that has actual policy implications is going to get more coverage from the real media than another "random college students are obnoxious" story. What anyone individual finds to be more interesting isn't something I'm concerned with, though it is interesting that Cubo didn't find the Evergreen story interesting enough to be worth digging for the facts, and reading differing perspectives (for example: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/16/opinion/media-alt-right-evergreen-college.html?_r=0).
Click to expand...
Jack, I don't think the raw facts tell the story on this one very well. It's right that there is nothing inherently racially discriminatory with these kinds of demonstrations. But Weinstein says: “There is a huge difference between a group or coalition deciding to voluntarily absent themselves from a shared space in order to highlight their vital and under-appreciated roles . . . and a group or coalition encouraging another group to go away,” (https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-campus-mob-came-for-meand-you-professor-could-be-next-1496187482) and I can't disagree with him. I don't accept the "switching locations" excuse. That's not really what happened, even though it's not factually incorrect to say that.

And we can see afterward that his concern was justified, as students began bullying him and administrators/professors (most of whom caved). There's probably no decision the administrators could have made that would have prevented this from getting ugly, as a number of students, who turned out to be very racist, were looking to cause trouble, evidenced by their huge overreaction to a perfectly reasonable position by Weinstein. He sniffed it out, and he was right.

And of course there is no doubt at all that the "alt right" pounced on this like a bunch of jackals, and the people sympathetic to them here, who claim to be liberal, are happy to pretend that's not true.
 
Cubo de Sangre said:
There's two approaches that I see. Creating more integrity among news outlets and educating the public well enough to know when they're being manipulated. I picked the route I felt more realistic. What other tactics would aid that strategy? Is relying on everyone being able to tell fact from fiction on every subject realistic?
Click to expand...

I can't remember where I heard it from but it was a line about how now that the literacy rate has skyrocketed, the new standard will be how people can properly filter information/ news properly. It's clear the age for that has just begun and yea, educating masses does seem like a harder task than regulating news but also seems to have less downside other than it just not working.
 
I know nominations are closed but @Arkain2K better win best TS. It’s not even close, no one else should even be on the ballot
 
Lead said:
I can't remember where I heard it from but it was a line about how now that the literacy rate has skyrocketed, the new standard will be how people can properly filter information/ news properly. It's clear the age for that has just begun and yea, educating masses does seem like a harder task than regulating news but also seems to have less downside other than it just not working.
Click to expand...


Literacy rate is of far lesser impediment to the communication of truth than the proliferation of dubious messages in the forthcoming age of video and other tech. I think what's true and what's false isn't obvious. We're not all gonna research things. At some point we're all taking must of our knowledge on faith. I think the real answer is separating the wheat from the chaff by incorporating something similar to what I suggested. Or we just let fools be fools and a sucker is born every minute.

Not sure where the downside is that isn't put up with in other aspects of regulation and business licensing. If it's more trouble than it's worth to you then that's cool. Just figured since you saw it as a problem I'd explore it with you.


Limbo Pete said:
<{vega}>
Click to expand...


You were bemoaning the thread activity and I pointed out it's your thread. If anyone, you're the guy who's triggered.
 
Anung continuing to show what kind of a man he is in this thread. I don't even have to say anything to make my point but "look at his posts."

Fawlty said:
Jack, I don't think the raw facts tell the story on this one very well. It's right that there is nothing inherently racially discriminatory with these kinds of demonstrations. But Weinstein says: “There is a huge difference between a group or coalition deciding to voluntarily absent themselves from a shared space in order to highlight their vital and under-appreciated roles . . . and a group or coalition encouraging another group to go away,” (https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-campus-mob-came-for-meand-you-professor-could-be-next-1496187482) and I can't disagree with him. I don't accept the "switching locations" excuse. That's not really what happened, even though it's not factually incorrect to say that.

And we can see afterward that his concern was justified, as students began bullying him and administrators/professors (most of whom caved). There's probably no decision the administrators could have made that would have prevented this from getting ugly, as a number of students, who turned out to be very racist, were looking to cause trouble, evidenced by their huge overreaction to a perfectly reasonable position by Weinstein. He sniffed it out, and he was right.

And of course there is no doubt at all that the "alt right" pounced on this like a bunch of jackals, and the people sympathetic to them here, who claim to be liberal, are happy to pretend that's not true.
Click to expand...

Weinstein's point is fair, though perhaps not relevant if other accounts are accurate (specifically that white students were encouraged to attend off-campus events during the day but not to stay away from campus the whole day). I haven't followed all aspects of the story (and only recently bothered with any of it), and there's a fog of war thing going on, but here are three takeaways for me that you can look at and criticize if necessary:

1. It's not a story of national importance, and people who think that the MSM should have covered it more are not showing good news judgement. It's intensely interesting to some people for either propaganda purposes or because they have a deep interest in identity politics on campus generally, but that's why I'm not surprised about or critical of specialty media (pro-Republican or racialist outlets) giving it a lot of coverage.
2. The issue that initially set off the firestorm is more complex than many posters here are willing to acknowledge. Related to that, there's a lot of strawman knocking down going on and some blatant misrepresentation of the situation (and related to that, tribalism is driving a lot of people's understanding of what happened).
3. The protesters behaved inappropriately and Weinstein was screwed over, though it looks like he got compensated for it. Related to this, the administration's response was poor, but the asshattery had grass roots (as it almost always does).

Another thing I can add that relates to all of it is that there is an atmosphere of hysteria in some corners of the (non-mainstream) media that makes it virtually impossible get things right in this kind of story (another reason I stay away from them).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,280,192
Messages
58,265,126
Members
175,986
Latest member
Dakota DeSousa

Share this page

Back
Top