| Forum Index > Closed |
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please. In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. | ||
|
Gorsameth
Netherlands21908 Posts
On September 27 2016 08:03 LegalLord wrote: Though it's pretty stupid that trigger warnings are a thing, at all. I'm going to pretend its being sarcastic for my own personal sanity. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
If Jill wasn't a terrible politician and stood for something beyond her own ego, I would agree. But once again, she can't get elected to even the most minor of political positions. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On September 27 2016 08:04 Gorsameth wrote: I'm going to pretend its being sarcastic for my own personal sanity. Only combat vets experienced trauma. Everyone else is a baby. Excuse me I need to go complain about spoilers in a movie website I willing clicked on. Big jerks, they should warn me about their content. + Show Spoiler + Snape kills Harry Potter. | ||
|
DarkPlasmaBall
United States44911 Posts
Prediction for tonight: Trump will get under Hillary's skin by trolling/ making inappropriate comments/ calling her names and Hillary won't be able to keep her composure and stick to plans and policies. To win tonight, Trump needs to: 1. Drag Hillary down to his immature, petty, name-calling level and fluster her; and/or 2. Name drop some of Hillary's previous policies that were bad for certain groups of Americans; and/or 3. Actually make arguments of substance without resorting to childish name-calling (unlikely); and/or 4. Release spotless tax returns (unlikely) To win tonight, Hillary needs to: 1. Stay on point with her plans and policies and real substance; and (not or) 2. Not be distracted by ad hominem; and 3. Laugh and call Trump "a silly motherfucker". | ||
|
zlefin
United States7689 Posts
On September 27 2016 07:42 Howie_Dewitt wrote: I feel very odd reading the points about diversity and immigration in this thread. I live in a city, and diversity is amplified in cities (I think). My 3 best friends are all different races, my school is 35% white (still the largest group), and I am literally the only person on my school's math team starting roster that isn't an immigrant (it's interesting being the only one who spoke English as a first language in a circle of friends). However, diversity has always helped me to grow as a person, especially with regard to different points of view and stepping in the shoes of others. I guess I must have really different values, especially since I am so much younger than everyone and grew up in a different culture. iirc the research and polling data and summaries; people who complain about immigration/diversity tend to come from very non-diverse locations, and are generally not from cities. | ||
|
FiWiFaKi
Canada9859 Posts
On September 27 2016 08:03 LegalLord wrote: Though it's pretty stupid that trigger warnings are a thing, at all. Yep lol, even the term "trigger warning" is laughable. I really didn't know it was an actual thing, just something that online trolls would say, and that triggered meme. | ||
|
CorsairHero
Canada9491 Posts
On September 27 2016 08:06 Plansix wrote: If Jill wasn't a terrible politician and stood for something beyond her own ego, I would agree. But once again, she can't get elected to even the most minor of political positions. Why wasn't she arrested if there was an outstanding warrant anyways? | ||
|
Nevuk
United States16280 Posts
On September 27 2016 08:03 LegalLord wrote: Though it's pretty stupid that trigger warnings are a thing, at all. They're certainly being overused, but there is a legitimate purpose for them. They should mainly be used as a mental health thing for people who get genuine panic attacks due to having PTSD or severe anxiety disorders. You might not understand why that's a problem unless you've had to deal with someone literally screaming at you for four hours straight about utter fucking nonsense. Fits like that can be pretty hard to predict, and no one wants to deal with them so they just post the warnings everywhere - it's worse in colleges because that's the age most people develop mental disorders and it usually takes a while to get on effective treatment for it. | ||
|
Dan HH
Romania9131 Posts
On September 27 2016 08:08 Plansix wrote: Only combat vets experienced trauma. Everyone else is a baby. Excuse me I need to go complain about spoilers in a movie website I willing clicked on. Big jerks, they should warn me about their content. + Show Spoiler + Snape kills Harry Potter. I think the problem comes from the perception that the people being the loudest about the necessity of trigger warnings seem to be the stereotypical twitter upper class green haired professional offendees rather than actual victims of violent and/or sexual attacks. I think that if the latter group were the face of this movement it would be much easier to garner support and empathy for it, the way things currently are people aren't sure this is something that actual victims even want. | ||
|
farvacola
United States18834 Posts
| ||
|
Gorsameth
Netherlands21908 Posts
On September 27 2016 08:11 DarkPlasmaBall wrote: 2 hours until the internet implodes. Prediction for tonight: Trump will get under Hillary's skin by trolling/ making inappropriate comments/ calling her names and Hillary won't be able to keep her composure and stick to plans and policies. To win tonight, Trump needs to: 1. Drag Hillary down to his immature, petty, name-calling level and fluster her; and/or 2. Name drop some of Hillary's previous policies that were bad for certain groups of Americans; and/or 3. Actually make arguments of substance without resorting to childish name-calling (unlikely); and/or 4. Release spotless tax returns (unlikely) To win tonight, Hillary needs to: 1. Stay on point with her plans and policies and real substance; and (not or) 2. Not be distracted by ad hominem; and 3. Laugh and call Trump "a silly motherfucker". Considering her performance at the Benghazi hearings I don't see how you can expect Trump to get under her skin. If she screws up it will be on her own accord. | ||
|
Antyee
Hungary1011 Posts
On September 27 2016 08:14 Nevuk wrote: They're certainly being overused, but there is a legitimate purpose for them. They should mainly be used as a mental health thing for people who get genuine panic attacks due to having PTSD or severe anxiety disorders. You might not understand why that's a problem unless you've had to deal with someone literally screaming at you for four hours straight about utter fucking nonsense. Fits like that can be pretty hard to predict, and no one wants to deal with them so they just post the warnings everywhere - it's worse in colleges because that's the age most people develop mental disorders and it usually takes a while to get on effective treatment for it. Several studies show that they may be counterproductive. https://psmag.com/hazards-ahead-the-problem-with-trigger-warnings-according-to-the-research-4f220f7e6c7e#.eneiejvgt | ||
|
FiWiFaKi
Canada9859 Posts
On September 27 2016 08:12 zlefin wrote: iirc the research and polling data and summaries; people who complain about immigration/diversity tend to come from very non-diverse locations, and are generally not from cities. That is true to an extent, but there's plenty of people from diverse locations who have the same views, myself included. Doesn't mean their views should be subdued, throughout my arguments I was not afraid to list the positives of a multicultural society, and not sure if you've seen it in your schools, but like people generally stick together. There's a lot of clubs in the University I went to about a certain nationality for example, showing that people like to be with like. You're right that science/math majors probably choose their groups with less care for cultural differences, because they speak the same language (metaphorically). And another example that people love talking about Trump... Once people get older, they don't change their opinions as much, or they don't want to. You're in high school or university, you're at a point in life where worldviews are very malleable, you go through so much change in the way you see the world, but there comes a point where people don't necessarily want to see other perspectives. You've seen enough that you don't need or want people to try and convince you otherwise. I've always found that when you're young, you're like blank slate, absorbing information and slowly shaping your worldviews... Eventually this molds you and rigidly defines the person you're going to be. Anyway, both positives and negatives, I agree that one of the biggest benefits is you become more sympathetic to other people around the world. | ||
|
SoSexy
Italy3725 Posts
| ||
|
FiWiFaKi
Canada9859 Posts
On September 27 2016 08:25 SoSexy wrote: I'll watch the debate stoned and see if it was a good idea. Any good stream? They will pop up very quickly once it comes closer, TL will have you covered, don't worry. | ||
|
SoSexy
Italy3725 Posts
| ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On September 27 2016 08:24 Antyee wrote: Several studies show that they may be counterproductive. https://psmag.com/hazards-ahead-the-problem-with-trigger-warnings-according-to-the-research-4f220f7e6c7e#.eneiejvgt Most people who suffer trauma are not trying to avoid the issue. They just want a heads up to they can make the decision like an informed adult. They don't want to be blind sided, which is the reason for the warning. | ||
|
Lord Tolkien
United States12083 Posts
I'd like to hear this from those that own a gun, as I do not. While I agree that the Democrats tend to push some absolutely nonsensical gun control measures (I live in Maryland, where there are rather nonsensical laws on the books. like it being illegal to sell, purchase or manufacture high capacity magazines in Maryland...but not to own), and I too would be skeptical about Democrats who've never owned a gun spearheading gun control measures, I've also seen the largest expansion in gun rights (with the open and concealed carry movements) in the past few decades. The UT Austin protesters for instance have a point: why is it illegal for one to carry a dildo in a university classroom but not a concealed handgun? Meanwhile, there are state laws being passed lowering the firearms training required to acquire a concealed carry license, which, well, seems highly dangerous. It's a complex issue, I understand, but what would be your general thoughts on a balanced piece of comprehensive reform? | ||
|
FiWiFaKi
Canada9859 Posts
 It's a complex and emotional issue, I really think it's best if we keep it there... The mood is finally getting nice and mellow here, ready for the greatest reality TV there is in less than two hours.http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/general/313472-if-youre-seeing-this-topic-then-another-mass-shooting-happened-and-people-disagree-on-what-to-do (Mods, the joke has gone on long enough, I would think it's best to change the name of that thread, it makes TL look silly, that thread is in the community sidebar 75% of the time under the most viewed community subheading) | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On September 27 2016 08:29 Lord Tolkien wrote: Let's start with a question on guns. Which American posters own a personal gun in this thread, and if you do, what do you believe could be a good regulatory framework for balancing gun ownership and the Second Amendment with safety concerns in public or private institutions? I'd like to hear this from those that own a gun, as I do not. While I agree that the Democrats tend to push some absolutely nonsensical gun control measures (I live in Maryland, where there are rather nonsensical laws on the books. like it being illegal to sell, purchase or manufacture high capacity magazines in Maryland...but not to own), and I too would be skeptical about Democrats who've never owned a gun spearheading gun control measures, I've also seen the largest expansion in gun rights (with the open and concealed carry movements) in the past few decades. The UT Austin protesters for instance have a point: why is it illegal for one to carry a dildo in a university classroom but not a concealed handgun? Meanwhile, there are state laws being passed lowering the firearms training required to acquire a concealed carry license, which, well, seems highly dangerous. It's a complex issue, I understand, but what would be your general thoughts on a balanced piece of comprehensive reform? My family owns them and I grew up with guns. I do not own one currently. I have considered getting one in recent years. 2016 has made it seem like a super great idea. I have no problem with people owning guns, but the current laws on gun sales and the transfer of fire arms are weak. And the prohibition imposed by congress on gun violence research and federal data bases are unacceptable. | ||
| ||
|
|
Wardi Open
CranKy Ducklings
Safe House 2
Sparkling Tuna Cup
Safe House 2
Tenacious Turtle Tussle
The PondCast
|
|
|
EPT
