War Room Lounge v72: Nope

[waiguoren]

I think @waiguoren is part of a kind of vulgar revolution going on in the culture. No individuals or institutions are without blemishes, and we now have the means to put a spotlight on all blemishes. The appropriate response to that, of course, is to both respect knowledge and expertise and to place boundaries on that respect. But the response of the vulgar and stupid is dismiss all sources of knowledge that don't cater to their biases, which in turn, cuts them off from any real learning (note the weird connection between right-wing commentary and snake-oil sellers).

The notion of an "absolute scale" here is absurd. Surely you recognize that. You don't say that Khabib is the best grappler in MMA but he makes some mistakes so he sucks on some "absolute scale."

These responses are baseless and also seem melodramatic. Nothing I posted suggests I do not "respect knowledge and expertise". I did not "dismiss" a single source of knowledge, let along "all sources....that don't cater to my biases". This is way over the top, even for you, Mr. Jack. I wonder if it's your emotional side coming out again.

The point of my post was that I wanted to try to understand your basis for ranking news outlets. By at least one metric (featuring stories of little/no practical importance in prominent front-page locations), Washington Post is clearly lagging behind WSJ and FT. I subscribe to WSJ; everything on the current front page is more important than that n-word story that the Washington Post featured.

As for the relative/absolute scale thing: I didn't write that the Washington Post "sucks". Read more carefully. The point of journalism is supposed to be something like "offering consumers an accurate overview of the day's most important stories with ethics and accuracy." The WaPo's featuring of junk articles in some of its most prominent locations seems to violate the first part of that mission, and some of its competitors are doing a better job, right? Furthermore, there are situations in which all options are bad on an absolute scale even if there are relative differences. All the grocery stores in the hood can be awful even if CrapMart is better than TrashDepot.

Anyway, my goal was to understand your view better. You ought not be so combative. It impedes discourse.

Help us out here: can you name some outlets that you rate as having consistent higher quality than WaPo?

The Financial Times and The Wall Street Journal. I used to subscribe to The Economist but it did start to decline a bit. It's probably still better than Washington Post for topics other than US politics and DC Area news.

Do you take this cherry picked instance as an accurate representation of WaPo as a whole, or are you trying to oversell it as such?

No, Mr. Hig, I did not. Please do not see what you want to see. Seek truth.

The function of a news organization in a capitalist society is to make money.

In order to do that they need to report on stories of relevant interest. You may not like what other people find interesting, but it doesn't mean they're doing a bad job by reporting what people want to read or listen to.

By this line of reasoning, we can't fault Breitbart for featuring "illegal immigrant commits crime"-type stories out of proportion with other crimes so long as the details of the stories aren't wrong. @Jack V Savage has consistently rejecting your line of thinking in his attacks on Breitbart.

Well I think part of your problem with this framing is conflating WaPo website and the WaPo printed news, which I'm pretty sure you have never read in your life.

Interesting guess. On what do you base it?

 

[Fawlty]

Day two of the road to the disc golf world championship.

I didn't lose any of my discs. A guy who must have been 60 years old was throwing significantly further than me out there.

One of my throws from the "tee" caught the wind off the lake and went...behind me. This tells me that, some of the time, I can only throw a disc less than zero feet.

Pretty sure that I'm going to be in agony tomorrow, because halfway through the round my shoulder was burning a bit and I felt like I should maybe stop. Then it just completely stopped hurting altogether, as if my brain was telling me: "Okay fuckface, I warned you. Not gonna waste any more of our energy on warning you."

 

[JDragon]

But that still brings us back to the initial question of: Why? Does deep space travel and exploration really HAVE a worthwhile purpose for living beings when a simple probe can do the same thing with less resources and 0 risk?

Time dilation would mean that humans can travel to Andromeda and back in one human's lifespan, but there would be nobody to tell about it still alive unless they embarked on journeys of precisely similar type and had aligned to meet again.

Therefore, the probe would just not cut it.

 

[Islam Imamate]

Khabib is the best grappler in MMA

 

[Higus]

The Financial Times and The Wall Street Journal. I used to subscribe to The Economist but it did start to decline a bit. It's probably still better than Washington Post for topics other than US politics and DC Area news.

I see a theme that might hint towards a personal bias towards business focused news. The NY Post might be a better analogy to WaPo. In any case, I think you'd be hard pressed to find a list that didn't include WaPo in the top 10-20 papers in the country.

No, Mr. Hig, I did not. Please do not see what you want to see. Seek truth.

You did not take the cherry picked instance as a representation of WaPo as a whole, or you did not try to sell it as such?

 

[waiguoren]

I see a theme that might hint towards a personal bias towards business focused news.

I find the accuracy of reporting to be higher than the alternatives I've seen, and I might the featuring of trash stories to be minimal. I think those are the "biases" you're looking for. I think people of higher income tend to read these papers, and such people tend to have higher standards for the publications they pay for, which drives editors to focus more on accuracy and relevance/importance.

You did not take the cherry picked instance as a representation of WaPo as a whole, or you did not try to sell it as such?

Both, Mr. Hig. By the way, you are a swell fellow. However, I think you should self-analyze your use of the word "us" in this thread. Think hard about what it means.

 

[Fawlty]

From the file called "Things that I really should have known 20 years ago" :

Bath sheets. I didn't know that they were a thing, I just thought everything was a bath towel and some happened to be bigger. This is a game-changer, I should have been paying more attention.

 

[Higus]

Both, Mr. Hig.

If you don't consider the story as a representation of WaPo as a whole, then it might be helpful to not make it the focal point of your case against them.

By the way, you are a swell fellow. However, I think you should self-analyze your use of the word "us" in this thread. Think hard about what it means.

I think I'm a swell fellow, too.
The use of "us" in this context literally means everyone who reads it besides "you".

 

[waiguoren]

If you don't consider the story as a representation of WaPo as a whole, then it might be helpful to not make it the focal point of your case against them.

I disagree. Again, I was curious if Mr. Jack meant WaPo was "excellent" in a relative or an absolute sense. An excellent paper in an absolute sense should not be running stories of such low importance on its front page. Worse, we have multiple newspapers of similar scope that do not run such stories consistently, so at least by this metric WaPo is not even "excellent" in a relative sense.

I think I'm a swell fellow, too.
The use of "us" in this context literally means everyone who reads it besides "you".

Noted, Mr. Hig. Some of the other swell fellows in this thread seem to use the term differently.

 

[Sketch]

From the file called "Things that I really should have known 20 years ago" :

Bath sheets. I didn't know that they were a thing, I just thought everything was a bath towel and some happened to be bigger. This is a game-changer, I should have been paying more attention.

 

[Limbo Pete]

The WaPo is one of the top 5 papers in the country, in the running for the top spot. I don't think anyone would seriously argue with that, though I also don't think anyone would defend every single editorial decision they've ever made. IMO, you're being ridiculous.

Wai being ridiculous?
The hell you say!

 

[waiguoren]

Wai being ridiculous?
The hell you say!

Good troll. I missed you.

 

[Limbo Pete]

Good troll. I missed you.

 

[Limbo Pete]

@Fawlty
I'm growing more and more certain that @waiguoren is proof this forum is visited by an extraterrestrial every day

 

[Sketch]

@Fawlty
I'm growing more and more certain that @waiguoren is proof this forum is visited by an extraterrestrial every day

 

[Islam Imamate]

If we were visited by extraterrestrials I think given the fact that they haven't destroyed us or tried to overtly settle here would suggest that they would do so in as stealthy a manner as possible.

I think there's a non-negligible possibility that aliens exist in the sense that there is some form of life out there somewhere but that would include like microbial life in some galaxy far away which to me is a far cry from claiming that there are grays who like to pass by every once in a while. But those declassified videos of UFOs are pretty unnerving. My alternate pet theory is that they're people from the future who want to study us but also want to stay hidden which is why they're so elusive. Those who got caught on video are probably being punished for not following protocol once they get back to the future.

Personally I would put my money on ghosts and spirits being more likely to exist than advanced aliens who visit us.

 

[MMAisGod]

One of my friends that was a hardcore "Obama change we can believe in" tattoo on his ass type of dude is now a Republican. Why the change in the middle of the MAGA era of all eras? Because he makes significantly more money than he did around the 2012ish time and now talks about how Democrats would force him to pay much higher taxes and how they support lazy people. How he's worked so hard etc etc blah blah. Things that if I even dare mention a few years ago he'd argue all day with me. But now that he sees it may potentially impact his finances if we go too progressive so doesn't approve of Democrats anymore.

Anecdotal ftw lol. How quickly the tide turns when your own self-interests are at stake. I've been trolling him non-stop because he gave me hell for a decade. I'll have to keep my eye on you all to see if your positions switch as your financials improve. In 2023 when you finally get that promotion you were passed up on four times, I'll be here watching to see if you change. Yes you, all of you. You know who you are. You.

/rant

 

[Gregolian]

Anyone here ever seen this movie? Any good?

If we were visited by extraterrestrials I think given the fact that they haven't destroyed us or tried to overtly settle here would suggest that they would do so in as stealthy a manner as possible.

 

[waiguoren]

You know @waiguoren, if you'd drop this BS Love Guru persona you're peddling you might be able to garner some modicum of respect around here instead of being the war room lounge piñata. You're doing better in this debate than anyone seems to be giving you credit for. You can do better honey, I know you can.

Hello, Mr. Gape. Nice to interact with you again. I enjoy conversing with you.

I think perhaps you have not considered that my personality is not "BS". I am who I am. I love myself and do not desire change in that area.

Also, concerning myself with "garnering a modicum of respect" would be anathema to progress. Moreover, many of the people that some of the regulars in this thread hold in high regard are sloppy thinkers. If those regulars were suddenly to hold me in similar regard, I think something might be wrong.

I must focus on truth and morality: nothing more.

 

[Higus]

One of my friends that was a hardcore "Obama change we can believe in" tattoo on his ass type of dude is now a Republican. Why the change in the middle of the MAGA era of all eras? Because he makes significantly more money than he did around the 2012ish time and now talks about how Democrats would force him to pay much higher taxes and how they support lazy people. How he's worked so hard etc etc blah blah. Things that if I even dare mention a few years ago he'd argue all day with me. But now that he sees it may potentially impact his finances if we go too progressive so doesn't approve of Democrats anymore.

Anecdotal ftw lol. How quickly the tide turns when your own self-interests are at stake. I've been trolling him non-stop because he gave me hell for a decade. I'll have to keep my eye on you all to see if your positions switch as your financials improve. In 2023 when you finally get that promotion you were passed up on four times, I'll be here watching to see if you change. Yes you, all of you. You know who you are. You.

/rant

I would have to be making a shit-ton more money before I did a complete 180 on my political beliefs.