War Room Lounge V43: STEM is Overrated

[Lead]

Here's another poster who said people couldn't be convinced to hate Biden:



Let's see what he has to say now:

This happened with my brother in law. In 2016, he was saying he would’ve liked to see a Biden-Kasich election with the assumption he’d vote for Biden. Last week, he was complaining that Biden was going to ruin dems chances and he needs to step aside for the other candidates.

 

[Fawlty]

I don't like playing post-chop fu, so I've restored your post to one coherent mass. Hopefully it won't be too complex for you (or, God forbid, me, to follow)

People are flawed and have biases that they try to account for. That's a far step from what we are talking about.

I don't know what example you are referring to. It also seems weird you are both saying you call shots and get treated unfairly at the same time. Do you think it's possible if you had a past history of doing something, that accumulated to a harsher consequence at the time you received it compared to someone else who hasn't done it before? Like you said, you've been around here for a long time where rules and policies have come and gone. The current WR staff has made a strong effort to try to apply consistency with rules/enforcement and make sure posters know beforehand when policies change, .

This also doesn't subscribe to you handing out infractions or bans. You are actually stating the opposite here which is, if no harm is seen from the poster it was directed at, then a punishment may be minor to nothing. Not the same thing.

RR isn't a moderator so I don't see how that example applies here. If you have an instance of murder that hasn't been resolved at this point, you are free to let us know.

You do no not make calls in who gets infractions or banned. No non-staff member does and all moderators are held accountable for the calls they make in conformity with the rules.

You're pretending not to understand what I said so that you can pretend it's a contradiction, but it's not. While I don't appreciate you playing dumb, I'll straighten it out for you regardless, because you do a somewhat acceptable job here. Like I said, people have to try pretty hard to get a rebuke for fucking with me. Hell, you yourself watch and enjoy people stalking the shit out of me. You should do better there, but you choose not to do anything because (as I've pointed out many times before), you like the drama and you enjoy when people are fucked with. This is why I've told you that you're a better fit for the OT despite the front of objectivity that you try to put on in here.

But yeah, I'm mostly fair game here and that's because I'm not generally liked by the mods, which you can tell I'm pretty much okay with, as long as they don't shirk their responsibilities. However, on occasion when things have come up that cross a line that can't be ignored, I've been asked for my input about what should be done about it, and of course I advise taking it easier on people than would otherwise be appropriate or justified. This is not some irreconcilable twisted multidimensional reality, it's quite straightforward.

And I note that if it was true that bias for or against posters was truly low, then there's no fucking way in hell that you guys would have stood by as a mod came in here and harassed the shit out of so many people. Shame on you, Kid. So yeah, "that example applies here." Hope you learned from it, but I doubt you will.

And whether or not it's all the same to you, I'll continue doing good work on this side of the wall of silence.

 

[Sketch]

Why do they keep letting Anderson Silva fight?

 

[JonesBones]

Here's another poster who said people couldn't be convinced to hate Biden:



Let's see what he has to say now:

You're pretty creepy. Anyway, that was after Biden went on his white guilt trip. There was a similar thread recently on how somebody stopped supporting Bernie for the same identity politics shit.

 

[Jack V Savage]

You're pretty creepy. Anyway, that was after Biden went on his white guilt trip. There was a similar thread recently on how somebody stopped supporting Bernie for the same identity politics shit.

But he didn't go on any real white-guilt trip. Just that some corners of the media want you to hate him so they made it happen. It's ridiculously easy to manipulate many people's minds.

 

[Sketch]

 

[Lead]

IYou're pretending not to understand what I said so that you can pretend it's a contradiction, but it's not. While I don't appreciate you playing dumb, I'll straighten it out for you regardless, because you do a somewhat acceptable job here. Like I said, people have to try pretty hard to get a rebuke for fucking with me. Hell, you yourself watch and enjoy people stalking the shit out of me. You should do better there, but you choose not to do anything because (as I've pointed out many times before), you like the drama and you enjoy when people are fucked with. This is why I've told you that you're a better fit for the OT despite the front of objectivity that you try to put on in here.

This again....

But yeah, I'm mostly fair game here and that's because I'm not generally liked by the mods, which you can tell I'm pretty much okay with, as long as they don't shirk their responsibilities. However, on occasion when things have come up that cross a line that can't be ignored, I've been asked for my input about what should be done about it, and of course I advise taking it easier on people than would otherwise be appropriate or justified. This is not some irreconcilable twisted multidimensional reality, it's quite straightforward.

From the previous post, it sounds like something happened to you, you said it wasn't a big deal, and then the poster didn't get punished as harshly. That's how what I'm getting out of your posts. If someone asks posters aware or involved about the situation, that also isn't making a call.

And I note that if it was true that bias for or against posters was truly low, then there's no fucking way in hell that you guys would have stood by as a mod came in here and harassed the shit out of so many people. Shame on you, Kid. So yeah, "that example applies here." Hope you learned from it, but I doubt you will.

What is the unresolved issue again? From what I see, everything is resolved and you are trying to use it as an example of what's currently happening/ a problem. It doesn't work that way.

If you are stating you've given your opinion to staff before when they've asked, that's nice. If you are saying you made a call that resulted in a poster getting infractions or a ban, or that you could do so in the future, you are wrong. That's all I'm trying to clear up here. We probably are on the same page with that despite this extra spill over above.

 

[Lead]

@HockeyBjj
You owe the WR a plat after getting me in this squabble.

 

[all caps]

We probably are on the same page with that despite this extra spill over above.

 

[Fawlty]

This again....


From the previous post, it sounds like something happened to you, you said it wasn't a big deal, and then the poster didn't get punished as harshly. That's how what I'm getting out of your posts. If someone asks posters aware or involved about the situation, that also isn't making a call.


What is the unresolved issue again? From what I see, everything is resolved and you are trying to use it as an example of what's currently happening/ a problem. It doesn't work that way.

If you are stating you've given your opinion to staff before when they've asked, that's nice. If you are saying you made a call that resulted in a poster getting infractions or a ban, or that you could do so in the future, you are wrong. That's all I'm trying to clear up here. We probably are on the same page with that despite this extra spill over above.

I think we're losing sight of hockey's complaint that there is undue influence, rather than the much more literal interpretation.

I think the main takeaway no matter what is that, in the words of Animal Mother at the Vietnamese whorehouse, "all fucking mods must fucking hang."

And I'm going to keep banning people.

 

[Trotsky]

Greenwald was spot on when he described voting for the lesser of 2 evils as best way to ensure that you get ignored (something like that, forgot which article it was about).

Biden is not all that different from Trump. Two Biden terms is probably = to 1 Trump term.
But the point I made was that the Democrats undercut Sanders and if they do it again they're fucked. At that point Sanders would have to run 3rd party or essentially say fuck you to his supporters and to the issues he's cared about. Now, if there are no shenanigans, then fair play.

Good lord, dude.

I hope that you respect Chomksy more than Greenwald. Here's Chomsky's semi-famous appraisal of lesser evilist voting (I disagree with it to a large degree, but it's more comprehensive and less reductive than Greenwald's). https://chomsky.info/an-eight-point-brief-for-lev-lesser-evil-voting/

Also, I have no idea what kind of wacky other-dimensional math you'd have to use to say "2 Biden terms = 1 Trump term." Two Biden terms will result in a mixed bag of slightly better domestic outcomes and slightly worse domestic outcomes relative to where the country was before, with definitively more positive outcomes than negative outcomes and with the end result being that government presently and in the future is in a significantly better place than it was before. The courts would be filled with highly competent centrist liberals that would advance things like workers rights, voting rights, civil rights against government intrusion and recovery rights against corporate tyranny. Environmental agencies would be headed by professionals trained in and disposed toward defending the environment. Consumer agencies would e headed by professionals trained in and disposed toward defending consumers.

A Trump term would represent a wild swing in the other direction toward incompetence, corruption, policy making and executive appointments purely for the purpose of fucking over consumers/citizens/etc. for the benefit of corporations and rich people, and the proliferation of incompetent and corrupt hacks into the judiciary that will pang for generations and continue to leverage the government toward permanent minority rule.

They are not remotely comparable. And this is coming from a guy who really doesn't like Biden and who thinks he's the worst possible outcome of the Democratic field: his history on consumer protections, race relations, and his continued coziness with private capital is extremely concerning to me, as is his ideological commitment to the golden mean. Also, I think you severely underestimate the power/influence of a president's party/supporters on their policy. There is absolutely no chance that Biden would be as conservative as president in 2020 as he was as a senator in 2006.

 

[HockeyBjj]

@HockeyBjj
You owe the WR a plat after getting me in this squabble.

I'm almost sorry, but not really, because my intention was purely to give the bee hive a little kick and then sit on the sidelines and see if anything entertaining came out. Which it did.

I still love you. I hope you can still love me despite not being your preferred color.

 

[Anung Un Rama]

Good lord, dude.

I hope that you respect Chomksy more than Greenwald. Here's Chomsky's semi-famous appraisal of lesser evilist voting (I disagree with it to a large degree, but it's more comprehensive and less reductive than Greenwald's). https://chomsky.info/an-eight-point-brief-for-lev-lesser-evil-voting/

Also, I have no idea what kind of wacky other-dimensional math you'd have to use to say "2 Biden terms = 1 Trump term." Two Biden terms will result in a mixed bag of slightly better domestic outcomes and slightly worse domestic outcomes relative to where the country was before, with definitively more positive outcomes than negative outcomes and with the end result being that government presently and in the future is in a significantly better place than it was before. The courts would be filled with highly competent centrist liberals that would advance things like workers rights, voting rights, civil rights against government intrusion and recovery rights against corporate tyranny. Environmental agencies would be headed by professionals trained in and disposed toward defending the environment. Consumer agencies would e headed by professionals trained in and disposed toward defending consumers.

A Trump term would represent a wild swing in the other direction toward incompetence, corruption, policy making and executive appointments purely for the purpose of fucking over consumers/citizens/etc. for the benefit of corporations and rich people, and the proliferation of incompetent and corrupt hacks into the judiciary that will pang for generations and continue to leverage the government toward permanent minority rule.

They are not remotely comparable. And this is coming from a guy who really doesn't like Biden and who thinks he's the worst possible outcome of the Democratic field: his history on consumer protections, race relations, and his continued coziness with private capital is extremely concerning to me, as is his ideological commitment to the golden mean. Also, I think you severely underestimate the power/influence of a president's party/supporters on their policy. There is absolutely no chance that Biden would be as conservative as president in 2020 as he was as a senator in 2006.

I do respect Chomsky more than Greenwald, but I disagree with Noam in this situation.

Two Biden terms would simply move the country further away from where we need to be, it would just do slightly slower than a Trump term. Maybe its 3:1, idk, but Biden is a corporate puppet and he won't get my vote just because.

 

[Higus]

It's like we're all lost in the woods and we find some water and kill some rabbits to eat, and the Berniebots are like, "I want Pepsi and bacon" and then shit in the water supply and on the rabbits. Then they accuse you of hiding the Pepsi and bacon.

Fuck I laughed way too hard at that

 

[Sketch]

Fuck I laughed way too hard at that

Potty humour is your forte?

 

[Higus]

Potty humour is your forte?

Not my favorite, but a solid #2

 

[Fedorable]

It's not just me being stubborn. Look at this for an illustration (source):

This figure shows how the mean position for congress over time has shifted over time. Democrats have remained ideologically consistent and more moderate compared to Republicans over the same period of time.


Looking at the graph above, if we assume that the "correct" answer is in the direct center of the 2 parties, it means that the democrats will continue to lose ground despite being more consistently moderate for decades. Compromise doesn't work when one party negotiates in bad faith. If you want to meet in the middle then you should be asking conservatives to do the heavy lifting. If you sincerely insist its the liberals responsibility, especially if you are a consistent conservative/trolly, it's going to be met with incredulity. They poisoned the well, they need to clean it up.

I didn't read your post, but I just wasn't aware at just how mean the GOP are.

 

[Sketch]

Not my favorite, but a solid #2

I walked straight into that and I still have no reply to your graph.

 

[Fedorable]

This again....


From the previous post, it sounds like something happened to you, you said it wasn't a big deal, and then the poster didn't get punished as harshly. That's how what I'm getting out of your posts. If someone asks posters aware or involved about the situation, that also isn't making a call.


What is the unresolved issue again? From what I see, everything is resolved and you are trying to use it as an example of what's currently happening/ a problem. It doesn't work that way.

If you are stating you've given your opinion to staff before when they've asked, that's nice. If you are saying you made a call that resulted in a poster getting infractions or a ban, or that you could do so in the future, you are wrong. That's all I'm trying to clear up here. We probably are on the same page with that despite this extra spill over above.

ever been to pittsburgh?

 

[senri]

I'm almost sorry, but not really, because my intention was purely to give the bee hive a little kick and then sit on the sidelines and see if anything entertaining came out. Which it did.

I still love you. I hope you can still love me despite not being your preferred color.

This is the poetry that we need. Wonderful eloquent gaping of Mr. Hockey. You should absorb his essence Mr. @Lead