background story plsRaspberriel wrote:
okay can we just nuke every youtube comment section right now please and thank you
forum
ITT 2: We post shit that is neither funny nor interesting
posted
Total Posts
57,720
inspired by people circlejerking about how much they hate Colbert because he called out their bullshit, and saying stuff likeKisses wrote:
background story plsRaspberriel wrote:
okay can we just nuke every youtube comment section right now please and thank you
65 likes for blatantly anti-Semitic crap. The kicker is, he isn't even Jewish!
This cunt wasn't kidding either -- she also said she couldn't possibly be a nazi because she has brown skin
But overall, it just seems like in general, they're where everything annoying about the internet converges into one giant cesspool
On some videos, it's ultra-defensive tumblr fandoms and/or forced memes (aka anything even remotely related to GiIvaSunner and/or JoJo)
On other videos (as in every political video ever), it's conspiracy theorists/alt-righters (it's never liberals or even moderate conservatives) circlejerking themselves and taking up the entire "top comments" section
And, of course, the spammers and scammers blocking replies to their comments so no one can call them out for the pieces of trash that they are
Even on videos about more "cultured" subjects there's always one person that fucks it up
That being said, I still don't like it when a sizable channel disables their comments, especially if they're peddling bullshit about a controversial topic (looking at every video that shits on gamers for no reason), but after seeing the way 95% of YT commenters are, can you really blame them?
you've never seen liberals circlejerking? The whole US selection has been one big liberal circlejerk. Don't say that liberals don't circlejerk. They do it too, they also do it on youtube a lot. Of course it would extend to the internet as well, they've been at it so much people say this is what lost them their election-cycle.
You're reading the comment section of the wrong youtube videos, of course you're going to run into cancer. Only read the comments for quality videos such as these. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QP-X84AB034
General rule, just don't read any long reply chains and you're safe.
General rule, just don't read any long reply chains and you're safe.
I personally haven't seen it happen on any trending politics video. I've seen it elsewhere on the Internet, though.Railey2 wrote:
you've never seen liberals circlejerking? The whole US selection has been one big liberal circlejerk. Don't say that liberals don't circlejerk. They do it too, they also do it on youtube a lot. Of course it would extend to the internet as well, they've been at it so much people say this is what lost them their election-cycle.
Case in point: you would think there would be comments agreeing with what people like Colbert or John Oliver say, but nope, the sheer majority is people calling them Hillary shills and MSM cucks and saying "This is why Trump won" (though that latter part is partly true). The video I pulled the above screenshot from only had one "top" comment agreeing with Colbert -- the rest were Pizzagate circlejerks.
There are some gaming channels where everyone seems to be cool in the comments, I'll say that much.EneT wrote:
You're reading the comment section of the wrong youtube videos, of course you're going to run into cancer. Only read the comments for quality videos such as these. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QP-X84AB034
General rule, just don't read any long reply chains and you're safe.
zzz his monotone way of talking makes me feel like sleeping
Just reading some youtube comments. I think it's bad that they indoctrinate the American youth to believe in freedom as this sort of wonder medicine that can fix all of their problems. USA is the best because freeeedom!! I aint not elect this politician he don't care bout muh freeeedom!!
what in the hell
"It is the liberals who want to create the controlling, freedomless, post-apocalyptic distopia. They just dress it up in social justice terminology."
???!
it seems like conservatives distrust everything with the label "government" on it, no matter what it's about, and libertarians aren't silly enough to believe that a market would just regulate itself and be fine if you add more freeeeeedom. This is what I've gathered from reading youtube comments tonight. What a waste of time, I'm so done with this shit
this was the video if anyone is interested: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=11Wb1QCSuMg
some other gems:
"The left is so pathetic. They hate freedom, hate white rich people, hate America, and always think they know it all."
"The moment a "Rev" puts his faith in government over GOD, he No longer is worthy of that title." (completely irrelevant to anything discussed in the video?!)
"yeah! freedom is stupid, now let's hand over control to isis and putin, they'll protect us with violence"
what the fuck
how can people so fundamentally misunderstand what the left is about? Are these people really representing modern day conservatives in the US?
what in the hell
"It is the liberals who want to create the controlling, freedomless, post-apocalyptic distopia. They just dress it up in social justice terminology."
???!
it seems like conservatives distrust everything with the label "government" on it, no matter what it's about, and libertarians aren't silly enough to believe that a market would just regulate itself and be fine if you add more freeeeeedom. This is what I've gathered from reading youtube comments tonight. What a waste of time, I'm so done with this shit
this was the video if anyone is interested: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=11Wb1QCSuMg
some other gems:
"The left is so pathetic. They hate freedom, hate white rich people, hate America, and always think they know it all."
"The moment a "Rev" puts his faith in government over GOD, he No longer is worthy of that title." (completely irrelevant to anything discussed in the video?!)
"yeah! freedom is stupid, now let's hand over control to isis and putin, they'll protect us with violence"
what the fuck
how can people so fundamentally misunderstand what the left is about? Are these people really representing modern day conservatives in the US?
DeletedUser_6709840
For the record, I based my initial thoughts on three videos: Oliver's Brexit video and Colbert's post-election and Pizzagate videos. That's all it took.
omg she said "for the record" CTR shill confirmed
These people have been around for years now. The Internet just makes them stick out more.
lmaoRailey2 wrote:
what the fuck
how can people so fundamentally misunderstand what the left is about? Are these people really representing modern day conservatives in the US?
These people have been around for years now. The Internet just makes them stick out more.
also maniaRoseusJaeger wrote:
yuri on ice, bruh. Thats what has made me so happyJellyblob56 wrote:
what on earth could possibly make you that happy in this day and age
You really can't stand different opinions can you.Rasberriel wrote:
okay can we just nuke every youtube comment section right now please and thank you
how can people so fundamentally misunderstand what the left is about? Are these people really representing modern day conservatives in the US?Seems like you don't understand what the dichotomy of the left and right is about. The left is about big government controlling everything.
libertarians aren't silly enough to believe that a market would just regulate itself and be fine if you add more freeeeeedom. This is what I've gathered from reading youtube comments tonight. What a waste of time, I'm so done with this shitMost libertarians believe in free market ideals.
Neither can /r/the_donald, apparently.B1rd wrote:
You really can't stand different opinions can you.Rasberriel wrote:
okay can we just nuke every youtube comment section right now please and thank you
Also, if by "different opinions" you mean "non-ironic attacks on the Jews" and "applying an incredibly arbitrary interpretation to a circle of friends' conversations" or even something as petty as "[Franchise X] is the best/trash" then yes, I guess that's true. But regarding the more serious ones, I'd rather not go down the whole "racist/sexist/etc." rabbit hole, since it just leads to arguments about tolerance of intolerance and where exactly the intolerance even starts (in religions like Islam or in far-right movements).
Apologies if I don't make any sense, it's 3 in the morning and I'm still up for whatever reason...
noB1rd wrote:
how can people so fundamentally misunderstand what the left is about? Are these people really representing modern day conservatives in the US?Seems like you don't understand what the dichotomy of the left and right is about. The left is about big government controlling everything.
Hey, for once a youtube comment said something that makes sense ;^ )Raspberriel wrote:
65 likes for blatantly anti-Semitic crap. The kicker is, he isn't even Jewish!
This cunt wasn't kidding either -- she also said she couldn't possibly be a nazi because she has brown skin
But overall, it just seems like in general, they're where everything annoying about the internet converges into one giant cesspool
On some videos, it's ultra-defensive tumblr fandoms and/or forced memes (aka anything even remotely related to GiIvaSunner and/or JoJo)
On other videos (as in every political video ever), it's conspiracy theorists/alt-righters (it's never liberals or even moderate conservatives) circlejerking themselves and taking up the entire "top comments" section
And, of course, the spammers and scammers blocking replies to their comments so no one can call them out for the pieces of trash that they are
Even on videos about more "cultured" subjects there's always one person that fucks it up
That being said, I still don't like it when a sizable channel disables their comments, especially if they're peddling bullshit about a controversial topic (looking at every video that shits on gamers for no reason), but after seeing the way 95% of YT commenters are, can you really blame them?
just did a shit in a bin bag in my room beacuse im too socially awkward to go out to the toilet and potentially make eye contact with my flat mates. luckily i always have the fap toilet roll on hand
Just go to the designated shit street
i live in england not indiaZain Sugieres wrote:
Just go to the designated shit street
???lol wrote:
i live in New India not IndiaZain Sugieres wrote:
Just go to the designated shit street
yea there are no designated shit streets in first world countries, unless ur talking about where i find dead hookers my neighbor chokeslammed
can u not talk about forum members like thatClose wrote:
yea there are no designated shit streets in first world countries, unless ur talking about where i find dead hookers my neighbor chokeslammed
OI OI YA FUCKIN GAYYYY ILL CHOKESLAM U OFF TRUMP TOWERlol wrote:
can u not talk about forum members like thatClose wrote:
yea there are no designated shit streets in first world countries, unless ur talking about where i find dead hookers my neighbor chokeslammed
i think some regulars of this particular post are going to be angry
tmw you find out Raspberriel has "anything Jordan posts" written in her "ongoing list of triggers" xdJordan wrote:
Hey, for once a youtube comment said something that makes sense ;^ )Raspberriel wrote:
65 likes for blatantly anti-Semitic crap. The kicker is, he isn't even Jewish!
This cunt wasn't kidding either -- she also said she couldn't possibly be a nazi because she has brown skin
But overall, it just seems like in general, they're where everything annoying about the internet converges into one giant cesspool
On some videos, it's ultra-defensive tumblr fandoms and/or forced memes (aka anything even remotely related to GiIvaSunner and/or JoJo)
On other videos (as in every political video ever), it's conspiracy theorists/alt-righters (it's never liberals or even moderate conservatives) circlejerking themselves and taking up the entire "top comments" section
And, of course, the spammers and scammers blocking replies to their comments so no one can call them out for the pieces of trash that they are
Even on videos about more "cultured" subjects there's always one person that fucks it up
That being said, I still don't like it when a sizable channel disables their comments, especially if they're peddling bullshit about a controversial topic (looking at every video that shits on gamers for no reason), but after seeing the way 95% of YT commenters are, can you really blame them?
Railey2 wrote:
no
Accusing people of 'unironic attacks on Jews' holds about as much weight as accusing someone of 'unironic attacks on Nazis'. But basically you just got triggered by Youtube comments, typically libtard lolRaspberriel wrote:
Also, if by "different opinions" you mean "non-ironic attacks on the Jews" and "applying an incredibly arbitrary interpretation to a circle of friends' conversations" or even something as petty as "[Franchise X] is the best/trash" then yes, I guess that's true. But regarding the more serious ones, I'd rather not go down the whole "racist/sexist/etc." rabbit hole, since it just leads to arguments about tolerance of intolerance and where exactly the intolerance even starts (in religions like Islam or in far-right movements).
Apologies if I don't make any sense, it's 3 in the morning and I'm still up for whatever reason...
yeah, I'm pretty sure he'd be the only person in this thread that could unironically say that Hitler did nothing wrongKisses wrote:
tmw you find out Raspberriel has "anything Jordan posts" written in her "ongoing list of triggers" xd
what in the everloving fuck does this meanB1rd wrote:
Accusing people of 'unironic attacks on Jews' holds about as much weight as accusing someone of 'unironic attacks on Nazis'. But basically you just got triggered by Youtube comments, typically libtard lol
she was 100% serious
excuuuuuuuse me for pointing out that anti-Semites are anti-Semitic, go back to riding Molyneux's dick some more
Good Morning Raspberriel 
Set some more scores and become top 500
Set some more scores and become top 500
*triggering intensifies*Raspberriel wrote:
what in the everloving fuck does this mean
she was 100% serious
excuuuuuuuse me for pointing out that anti-Semites are anti-Semitic, go back to riding Molyneux's dick some more
who is 'she'?
Reminder that calling someone 'anti-semetic' is in fact not an argument. You're just relying on the negative connotations of a word to imply someone is bad and nasty without actually offering an explanation of why they are.
@B1rd:
exactly, I wasn't making an argument, nor did I claim that I was making an argument. I just told you that you were wrong about what approximately half of the population really wants (no, the left does not want an authoritarian state that is strictly in control over most aspects of life, for the most part).
This is why political discourse is impossible in the US. The sides can't even bother to listen each other, so they're just strawmanning each other to oblivion. The same thing you do when you accuse the left of wanting to build an authoritarian regime.
"big government controlling everything", lol. What a joke. Who would want something like that?
As long as you're dishonest like that, there is no point in having an actual argument.
exactly, I wasn't making an argument, nor did I claim that I was making an argument. I just told you that you were wrong about what approximately half of the population really wants (no, the left does not want an authoritarian state that is strictly in control over most aspects of life, for the most part).
This is why political discourse is impossible in the US. The sides can't even bother to listen each other, so they're just strawmanning each other to oblivion. The same thing you do when you accuse the left of wanting to build an authoritarian regime.
"big government controlling everything", lol. What a joke. Who would want something like that?
As long as you're dishonest like that, there is no point in having an actual argument.
Got to see a huge fucking Manatee up-close, make an intro while not giving a single fuck and then proceed to bump itself face-first into the tanks wall.
A good laugh was had.
A good laugh was had.
ITT: Being an anti-semite isn't a bad thing
Though I guess it's pretty obvious b1rd is a nazi already
Though I guess it's pretty obvious b1rd is a nazi already
Telling me I am wrong without providing any sort of argument is a completely useless and pointless thing to do. Obviously. And so is calling me 'dishonest' just because I don't agree with you.Railey2 wrote:
@B1rd:
exactly, I wasn't making an argument, nor did I claim that I was making an argument. I just told you that you were wrong about what approximately half of the population really wants (no, the left does not want an authoritarian state that is strictly in control over most aspects of life, for the most part).
This is why political discourse is impossible in the US. The sides can't even bother to listen each other, so they're just strawmanning each other to oblivion. The same thing you do when you accuse the left of wanting to build an authoritarian regime.
"big government controlling everything", lol. What a joke. Who would want something like that?
As long as you're dishonest like that, there is no point in having an actual argument.
I said that you don't understand the dichotomy of the left and right because apparently you don't. No one actually says they want a big government controlling everything, but that is a the result of leftists policies.
The left wants
-higher taxes
-more regulation
-more welfare
-more control on speech
-more control on education/healthcare
the right wants
-lower taxes
-less regulation
-less welfare
-less control on speech
-less government control
Whatever you say, it's demonstrably true that the left wants a bigger government with more control over everything.
I did now.Rasberriel wrote:
Did you not read the original comment or...?
Are you actually gonna come up with a coherent response or...?
That's cruel. Sea creatures bumping into tank walls means the tank is much too small for it. ):Faust wrote:
Got to see a huge fucking Manatee up-close, make an intro while not giving a single fuck and then proceed to bump itself face-first into the tanks wall.
A good laugh was had.
I don't endorse marine animal parks.
It's technically a tank, but it's also FUCKING HUGE, you could put a thousand manatees in there or something. There are also fishes going around.
I don't have pictures with me, but here:
It came up steadily half-asleep or something, drifted through left to right and bumped the wall. Honestly, it was cute.
Saw a Red Panda too. Took this one myself.
I don't have pictures with me, but here:
It came up steadily half-asleep or something, drifted through left to right and bumped the wall. Honestly, it was cute.
Saw a Red Panda too. Took this one myself.
It's one of those things where I think much of the left wing wants more equality and tries to be "liberal," but don't exactly realize what they are preaching. They don't realize they are indirectly supporting more regulation and government control. With all these social movements, like black lives matter, they act as if they are doing the world a favor and standing up for equal rights for everyone when they are pretty much making it worse in most aspects of society. And if you try to tell them the truth, they find some scapegoat to take the blame for their haywire thought process.
I will agree with B1rd that at this current point in time, left wing politics are pretty much saying more control over society (even if they don't exactly want it or realize it) to ironically make the nation more "liberal." They are trying to add laws to monitor speech, healthcare, gun control, etc. Although I don't exactly have a better solution currently for these situations, it is what it is.
I will agree with B1rd that at this current point in time, left wing politics are pretty much saying more control over society (even if they don't exactly want it or realize it) to ironically make the nation more "liberal." They are trying to add laws to monitor speech, healthcare, gun control, etc. Although I don't exactly have a better solution currently for these situations, it is what it is.
not over everything. Free speech is a core value for the left as well.B1rd wrote:
Telling me I am wrong without providing any sort of argument is a completely useless and pointless thing to do. Obviously. And so is calling me 'dishonest' just because I don't agree with you.Railey2 wrote:
@B1rd:
exactly, I wasn't making an argument, nor did I claim that I was making an argument. I just told you that you were wrong about what approximately half of the population really wants (no, the left does not want an authoritarian state that is strictly in control over most aspects of life, for the most part).
This is why political discourse is impossible in the US. The sides can't even bother to listen each other, so they're just strawmanning each other to oblivion. The same thing you do when you accuse the left of wanting to build an authoritarian regime.
"big government controlling everything", lol. What a joke. Who would want something like that?
As long as you're dishonest like that, there is no point in having an actual argument.
I said that you don't understand the dichotomy of the left and right because apparently you don't. No one actually says they want a big government controlling everything, but that is a the result of leftists policies.
The left wants
-higher taxes
-more regulation
-more welfare
-more control on speech
-more control on education/healthcare
the right wants
-lower taxes
-less regulation
-less welfare
-less control on speech
-less government control
Whatever you say, it's demonstrably true that the left wants a bigger government with more control over everything.
I want to make some arguments for governmental control then.
This is why governmental control is needed. The notion that a free market regulates itself is simply wrong. This has been demonstrated multiple times, often with horrible consequences. When you give people too much freedom, they will find a way to exploit that to fuck others over for their own benefit. People are too scummy to be allowed to be completely free, all the time. An instance like the government is needed to keep things under control, within reasonable boundaries.
This doesn't mean the government controls everything. Personal choices that don't affect others, aka most choices about your personal life, aren't affected. Saying that the government wants to control everything is insane. Governmental control realistically won't interfere with most parts of your life.
You only hear of it if you are in a position of power, such as an employer. That's when the government checks up on you, to see that you don't fuck people over.
Similarly, the government also doesn't want you to fuck yourself over. You can't just go "oooh I just won't get sick, so I don't need healthcare, haha! My children also won't need healthcare cause they won't be sick!" And then you break your leg and can't pay your bills because you don't have insurance.
People need to be protected from their own choices too, sometimes. It's the compassionate thing to do. It's like a benevolent parent that tells you to not be an idiot.
What irks me is that people pretend freedom is a good thing. It's not. Freedom can be a horrible thing, because it gives people the opportunity to hurt others or themselves. There needs to be a balance between freedom and control, if you want anything to work.
Again, this doesn't mean that everything is controlled.
Having a state controlled curriculum that is up to date goes without saying, otherwise you run danger of having creationist bullshit being taught in public schools.
I think it's a real problem that people spout bullshit over the value of freedom without second thought. Freedom isn't good by itself, it never was. And it surely can't fix super complex, multi-layered problems.
To conclude this post: I think that holistic arguments like this one are pretty useless in general. It's a lot more useful to look at single regulations/laws, and see what they want to control, for what purpose they want to control it, if they can be expected to fulfill this purpose, and lastly if the purpose is good.
Everything else seems like a waste of time. When you break down an argument like I just described, I don't think that the left and the right would disagree as often as they might think. There is a lot of potential for common ground.
If you can't see how accusing an entire demographic (that has already been accused of mounds of other shit for centuries) of being "pedophile apologists" is bad, then there's really no point in continuing this. And I haven't even touched on the fact that even the assumptions she used to make that claim are flawed. But yeah, whatever, keep defending YouTube comments.B1rd wrote:
I did now.Rasberriel wrote:
Did you not read the original comment or...?
Are you actually gonna come up with a coherent response or...?
On a side note, the media coverage of PewDiePie's recent videos is absolutely absurd. It's like journalists have lost the ability to comprehend sarcasm or something. TIME Magazine called it a "temper tantrum" -- anyone who watched the videos knows that's patently false. But then again, they've been doing this crap for years now about anything on the Internet...
Imagine my surprise.
I'm sure they understand sarcasm. It's about getting views and money. 2016 is the rise of clickbaitRaspberriel wrote:
On a side note, the media coverage of PewDiePie's recent videos is absolutely absurd. It's like journalists have lost the ability to comprehend sarcasm or something. TIME Magazine called it a "temper tantrum" -- anyone who watched the videos knows that's patently false. But then again, they've been doing this crap for years now about anything on the Internet...
I love pewdiepie xd
Okay, as long as they don't keep any Sharks, Dolphins, Orcas or any other fast, nomadic, open-water sea creature then it's fine.Faust wrote:
It's technically a tank, but it's also FUCKING HUGE, you could put a thousand manatees in there or something. There are also fishes going around.
I don't have pictures with me, but here:
It came up steadily half-asleep or something, drifted through left to right and bumped the wall. Honestly, it was cute.
Saw a Red Panda too. Took this one myself.
Also, Raspberriel your avatar looks fat, I don't like it.
Manatees are adorb.
I had no money or else I'd buy the giant manatee plushie. Fuuuuuuuuck.
I had no money or else I'd buy the giant manatee plushie. Fuuuuuuuuck.
Yeah, the face shape is weird, but it pretty much describes how I've felt in several situations the past few daysEneT wrote:
Also, Raspberriel your avatar looks fat, I don't like it.
Also, that red panda is adorable
Who are u collab'd with raspberriel ?
Collabs are for losers
Said the loserEneT wrote:
Collabs are for losers
Having the longest running collab makes you the biggest loser of all.
I don't think anyone that basically lives in this thread can call other ppl losers lo
I'm just dedicated to one person is all, unlike some of these hoes.
you just did exactly what he hates in the video, basically quoted word for word what he said and missed out the part where he said they understand its sarcasm, its just just clickbaitRaspberriel wrote:
On a side note, the media coverage of PewDiePie's recent videos is absolutely absurd. It's like journalists have lost the ability to comprehend sarcasm or something. TIME Magazine called it a "temper tantrum" -- anyone who watched the videos knows that's patently false. But then again, they've been doing this crap for years now about anything on the Internet...
So they know perfectly well what's going on, but they make shit up anyway. Okay yeah, no wonder people don't trust news media anymore. There's a poll where only big business and Congress are less trusted than the media. Nice.lol wrote:
you just did exactly what he hates in the video, basically quoted word for word what he said and missed out the part where he said they understand its sarcasm, its just just clickbaitRaspberriel wrote:
On a side note, the media coverage of PewDiePie's recent videos is absolutely absurd. It's like journalists have lost the ability to comprehend sarcasm or something. TIME Magazine called it a "temper tantrum" -- anyone who watched the videos knows that's patently false. But then again, they've been doing this crap for years now about anything on the Internet...
Personally, I blame this for kicking it off.
another example for my claim that freedom isn't always good: Journalism that is solely after money instead of promoting honest argument to confront serious topics, quickly turns into something akin to buzzfeed, fox news, or this. There are easier ways to make money on the free market, after all. If there is nobody to hold journalists to a standard, the quality of overall media will plummet sooner or later.Raspberriel wrote:
So they know perfectly well what's going on, but they make shit up anyway. Okay yeah, no wonder people don't trust news media anymore. There's a poll where only big business and Congress are less trusted than the media. Nice.
Personally, I blame this for kicking it off.
Who could hold journalists to a standard? The government. For example by implementing laws that state that you aren't allowed to misrepresent political arguments on purpose to influence your readership in a certain way, etc.
Good luck on that. Whether or not you actually believe what you write, you are just as allowed to say to the public that you believe in what you write and they can't really do shit to you, as long as you are consistent with what you write. Especially in something so subjective, there is no golden rule for saying something is objectively misrepresenting political arguments. And if a law did manage to pass to allow the condemnation of "misrepresented data," then people can just be throwing that at anything that they didn't agree with.Railey2 wrote:
For example by implementing laws that state that you aren't allowed to misrepresent political arguments on purpose to influence your readership in a certain way, etc.
the point is, it should not up to the people. It should be up to a third party organization that hopefully consists of unbiased, qualified people, who can tell the difference between fair coverage and blatant dishonesty.winber1 wrote:
Good luck on that. Whether or not you actually believe what you write, you are just as allowed to say to the public that you believe in what you write and they can't really do shit to you, as long as you are consistent with what you write. Especially in something so subjective, there is no golden rule for saying something is objectively misrepresenting political arguments. And if a law did manage to pass to allow the condemnation of "misrepresented data," then people can just be throwing that at anything that they didn't agree with.Railey2 wrote:
For example by implementing laws that state that you aren't allowed to misrepresent political arguments on purpose to influence your readership in a certain way, etc.
There are many instances where news stations straight out lied about the facts. Take for example climate change, or creationism. As soon as you call yourself a news agency, or seek to fulfill the same function under a different name, you should under no circumstance be allowed to lie about clear facts.
Now this sounds pretty radical, so let's put it a different way:
There are two extremes.
1) People just say whatever they want. We have creationism being taught in public schools, news stations just report whatever they like, some of them still try being honest but most just pander to their audience and feed them with the information they want to hear. Nobody is being held to a standard, facts don't matter, it's just everyone living in his own echo chamber.
2) A government that has all the tools to censor opinions on national TV and elsewhere, if they deem them unfitting. Even though the tools were meant to enforce something that may look like this, it is easy to see how such power could be abused pretty quickly.
I believe that the the US is approaching the former in a frightening speed. People already talk about our days being a supposed "post-fact-era", and I believe there is a lot of truth in that, simply because nobody is holding the media to a standard.
Standards are important in journalism, they are immensely important, but currently there are no ramifications if you simply break every golden rule known to journalism. There needs to be an authority that can take the role of a governing instance, otherwise every country will slowly but surely approach the post-fact-era, just like the US is doing now.
And I bet you that this authority will not be the public. The public cares more about its own biases and indoctrinated beliefs than about facts and honest journalism, unless you make them care.
However, we can't have the second extreme either. Free speech is important, but so is the truth. There needs to be some sort of balance. I wouldn't know how exactly that balance can be achieved, I just know that it is very important to not arrive at either extreme.
Funny how before you were talking about how the left doesn't want the government controlling things, and now you're already talking about censoring the media. And also claiming that your opinions on climate change and creationism/evolution are facts so opposing viewpoints should be censored.
as i said, balance is key. The left is definitely in favour of more governmental control, but nobody wants a dystopian future where everything is censored and controlled.
And no, my views on creationism and climate change denial aren't opinions. It's a fact that climate change is real and that the world is older than 6k years. Those are facts. It's important to get this distinction right. Teachers that teach their students wrong things about the world shouldn't be teachers. News anchors that blatantly lie shouldn't report on the news.
And no, my views on creationism and climate change denial aren't opinions. It's a fact that climate change is real and that the world is older than 6k years. Those are facts. It's important to get this distinction right. Teachers that teach their students wrong things about the world shouldn't be teachers. News anchors that blatantly lie shouldn't report on the news.
There are differences in journalism.B1rd wrote:
Funny how before you were talking about how the left doesn't want the government controlling things, and now you're already talking about censoring the media. And also claiming that your opinions on climate change and creationism/evolution are facts so opposing viewpoints should be censored.
You can publish so called "comments" which are clearly marked as the opinion of one person.
Then you can publish a "report" which would strictly stick to information and potentially include some discussion of personal opinions which is clearly transmitted as such.
Calling a comment a report is bad journalism and should be avoided by any means. Many parts of media don't tell you anymore what kind of article you're reading so you might very well get only opinions from one side of the spectrum and no informational articles at all.
Just because you think someone is true doesn't make it a fact. And just because a bunch of scientists think something is true doesn't make it true either. They have been wrong before and will be wrong again. There is no 'balance' on this issue. You have free speech or you don't. You dictate what other people are allowed to say or teach, or you don't.Railey2 wrote:
as i said, balance is key. The left is definitely in favour of more governmental control, but nobody wants a dystopian future where everything is censored and controlled.
And no, my views on creationism and climate change denial aren't opinions. It's a fact that climate change is real and that the world is older than 6k years. Those are facts. It's important to get this distinction right. Teachers that teach their students wrong things about the world shouldn't be teachers. News anchors that blatantly lie shouldn't report on the news.
Raspberry send me your results from playing this by itself:
Luckily the world isn't so black and white as you make it out to be b1rd.
b1rd needs to justify his hate speech somehowsilmarilen wrote:
Luckily the world isn't so black and white as you make it out to be b1rd.
869k, 96.47%Yuudachi-kun wrote:
Raspberry send me your results from playing this by itself:
yet I have 911k on Sayonara Planet Wars >_>
My best on that is 95.8 and I got 94.8 today. Still suck ass at eyes off of you so no 9th dan for me.Raspberriel wrote:
869k, 96.47%Yuudachi-kun wrote:
Raspberry send me your results from playing this by itself:
yet I have 911k on Sayonara Planet Wars >_>
well d'uh free speech is already restricted in many places and nobody would even think of suggesting something else. He's acting as if only the liberal party has an interest in respecting free speech, but actually.. every single party known to me does.Jellyblob56 wrote:
But it is one of right or wrong. Do or don't. True and false.silmarilen wrote:
Luckily the world isn't so black and white as you make it out to be b1rd.
Then there are theories
If you have cancer and you go to the hospital, the leading surgeon can't just go: "Hey man guess what you don't have cancer after all now go home to your kids and don't worry about it anymore!"
That's illegal. He is not allowed to lie to you because that would have horrible consequences. It's a restriction of free speech.
Freedom of speech isn't always something positive, but people get indoctrinated to a point where they just go against everyone who claims otherwise, without second thought. I bet B1rd internalized the equation freedom = good so much, he will just discard my comment without reading it a second time.
(on a side note, a "theory" is often an immensely well supported fact, in scientific lingo. Like the theory of gravity, or the theory of evolution)
You don't have a 100% guarantee for anything in life. If your standards for what constitutes a fact are so high that you think it is valid to ignore decades of well-founded research, then facts might as well not exist in your world.B1rd wrote:
Just because you think someone is true doesn't make it a fact. And just because a bunch of scientists think something is true doesn't make it true either. They have been wrong before and will be wrong again. There is no 'balance' on this issue. You have free speech or you don't. You dictate what other people are allowed to say or teach, or you don't.
That's what people mean by "post-fact-era". When you say "hey, only because scientists talk about it doesn't mean it's true", as if that's a valid excuse for believing something that is completely unsupported instead of acting as if the vastly more likely option is true, then every rational discussion becomes completely useless.
News anchors have an obligation to the public, just like doctors or teachers do. It is their duty to inform the public. News HAVE to be factual, otherwise they aren't news.
If someone is casting a talkshow, that's a different issue, but news channels? Just look at fox news, or even CNN recently. The public forgot what makes facts facts, and more importantly, they forgot to care about facts. I accredit this partially to the criminal neglect of the media outlets. This is what we get when we don't have an authority putting its foot down to hold people to a set standard. You'll get a country with lots of dishonest, biased and simply stupid people. I can't stress this enough: Holding the media to a standard is immensely important. Restricting free speech is important.
Much like sentient, theory is one of those words that are commonly used in the wrong way. You're getting the meaning of theory mixed up with hypothesis jellybean; all theories have experimental results to back them up. Conspiracy theories aren't theories, they're hypotheses that people think up out of their ass.
Lots of conspiracy theories have more truth to them than you'd like to believe.
DeletedUser_6709840
That doesn't mean anything unless you have cold, hard evidence for the claims. That's why conspiracy theories often stay are just that, a theory. It may be possible and may some convincing arguments but that doesn't make it fact.B1rd wrote:
Lots of conspiracy theories have more truth to them than you'd like to believe.
http://oregonstate.edu/instruction/bb31 ... ories.htmlRoseusJaeger wrote:
That doesn't mean anything unless you have cold, hard evidence for the claims. That's why conspiracy theories often stay are just that, a theory. It may be possible and may some convincing arguments but that doesn't make it fact.B1rd wrote:
Lots of conspiracy theories have more truth to them than you'd like to believe.
What "theory" means in ordinary speech:
The term "theory" means a very different thing when used in everyday conversation and in science. In our day to day speech, we often use "theory" to mean a guess or unsubstantiated idea about how something works (as in "I have a theory that gremlins are hiding my car keys").
In science, we would call such a guess a hypothesis, not a theory. A hypothesis is a proposed explanation for an observation. In this case, I am proposing that the explanation for why I can't find my car keys is that gremlins are hiding them.*
The distinction between the words "Theory" and "Hypothesis" is very important because in science "Theory" does not mean "guess". I repeat, "Theory" does not mean "guess".
So, what does the word "theory" mean in science?
According to the National Academies of Sciences, "some scientific explanations are so well established that no new evidence is likely to alter them. The explanation becomes a scientific theory. In everyday language a theory means a hunch or speculation. Not so in science. In science, the word theory refers to a comprehensive explanation of an important feature of nature supported by facts gathered over time. Theories also allow scientists to make predictions about as yet unobserved phenomena".
I think its very often the case that someone indeed just pulled a conspiracy theory out of his ass.Jellyblob56 wrote:
Of course but I think what he's trying to say is that conspiracy theories aren't just pulled out of someone ass. They stem from something.
nyeh
porn is bad if you watch it everyday
i bet you only have sex in the missionary position : DMadvillain wrote:
porn is bad if you watch it every day
don't forget to wear your sinner-robe or else god won't know that you repent for your lewd actions.
too much porn can turn you into a degenerate
Madvillain laying down the obvious. Moderation is key.
Also Malena Morgan is pretty hot. C:
Also Malena Morgan is pretty hot. C:
what if there is porn deprivation?
my prostate will explode
too much osu turns you into a degenerate too, but playing once a day for half an hour isn't exactly a level of addiction that prevents you from making meaningful contributions to society and having a generally productive lifeMadvillain wrote:
too much porn can turn you into a degenerate
Railey2 wrote:
i play osu for 30mins perday and i am big rank and i am not degenerate do what i do or u are degenerate
Good: Size is just right to fit into the last remaining spaces my cupboard
Bad: I must stop buying figurines
FUCK.
well, obviously osu isn't comparable to porn.
i don't play much osu anyway so i can't really relate.
i don't play much osu anyway so i can't really relate.
doing something for half an hour every day that has no effect on your productivity in any other area does not make you a degenerate, that's the point I was making.Madvillain wrote:
well, obviously osu isn't comparable to porn.
i don't play much osu anyway so i can't really relate.
I really, really want that nowFaust wrote:
Good: Size is just right to fit into the last remaining spaces my cupboard
Bad: I must stop buying figurines
FUCK.
Too much porn can make you beta as fuck and contributes greatly to social and psychological problems, that's the point I was trying to make. I doubt the time span per day matters, and that osu can have the same effects.
hey rurree was better!!111 xddDMadvillain wrote:
Too much porn can make you beta as fuck and contributes greatly to social and psychological problems, that's the point I was trying to make. I doubt the time span per day matters, and that osu can have the same effects.
I think you're delusional and hold a view that is completely unsupported by anything science and social studies brought forward, but to each his own. It's also a harmful view because it perpetuates a social stigma that makes people feel guilty for no reason.Madvillain wrote:
Too much porn can make you beta as fuck, that's the point I was trying to make. I doubt the time span per day matters.
Addiction is a different matter and there definitely are lots of negative effects to addictions, but as long as there is no interference with important stuff or crippling compulsion, watching porn is simply a matter of how people want to spend their leisure time. You're making it seem worse than it is.
Why does Rreee keep making obvious as fuck / dumb points.
?????
?????
Because apparently they're not obvious enough around here lolFaust wrote:
Why does Rreee keep making obvious as fuck / dumb points.
?????
Half the regulars here just want to shove the other with semantics it's weird no one gets tired.
In other news: My salary in $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
EDIT: Good Smile is releasing Pop Team Epic nendos, go and see !!
In other news: My salary in $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
EDIT: Good Smile is releasing Pop Team Epic nendos, go and see !!
I'm not delusional because it happens in real life. Try reading Terry Crews' Manhood: How to Be a Better Man or Just Live with One (where he talked about pornographic addiction, stating that it had a negative impact on his marriage and personal life) I also don't think there are any studies that disprove this fact at all?
Besides, I'm not talking about casual watching, because obviously there's no problem with that. I don't think I'm making it seem worse than it is because it is that bad. How is pornographic addiction a good thing? It rewires a person's brain negatively and separates the addict from reality. It can interfere with important stuff if you're ADDICTED to the point of no return. Since when did I say that porn as a whole is bad anyway when I watch it myself?
@Faust - Probably because I was being half-assed when saying it, of course it's obvious.
Besides, I'm not talking about casual watching, because obviously there's no problem with that. I don't think I'm making it seem worse than it is because it is that bad. How is pornographic addiction a good thing? It rewires a person's brain negatively and separates the addict from reality. It can interfere with important stuff if you're ADDICTED to the point of no return. Since when did I say that porn as a whole is bad anyway when I watch it myself?
@Faust - Probably because I was being half-assed when saying it, of course it's obvious.
Faust wrote:
Why does Rreee keep making obvious as fuck / dumb points.
?????
addiction is bad, nobody is disputing that
but watching once a day doesn't make you an addict. Addiction in medical pathology means that you're going after it even though it's clearly to your own detriment, there needs to be some sort of impairment. It's dysfunctional behavior.
If you are simply doing something regularly, that doesn't mean that you're addicted. If you watch porn daily, that doesn't mean you're addicted to watching porn. Far from it.
but watching once a day doesn't make you an addict. Addiction in medical pathology means that you're going after it even though it's clearly to your own detriment, there needs to be some sort of impairment. It's dysfunctional behavior.
If you are simply doing something regularly, that doesn't mean that you're addicted. If you watch porn daily, that doesn't mean you're addicted to watching porn. Far from it.