|
Now that we have a new thread, 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 complete and thorough read before posting! NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.
Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source.If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread |
On April 26 2018 01:18 a_flayer wrote:
I hope that peace returns to Syria, North Korea signs a peace agreement with the South, and that Mueller gives Trump the same treatment as the FBI did Clinton ("he did some questionable things, but we're letting him off"). Trump getting a second term as a result of all that would be brilliant.
since what trump has done is quite different from what clinton did, a similar conclusion wouldn't make much sense.
on the others; nice things to hope for, but certainly not remotely realistic.
|
On April 26 2018 01:18 a_flayer wrote:
I hope that peace returns to Syria, North Korea signs a peace agreement with the South, and that Mueller gives Trump the same treatment as the FBI did Clinton ("he did some questionable things, but we're letting him off"). Trump getting a second term as a result of all that would be brilliant.
i mean, if trump somehow is like a shitty version of forrest gump, that would be a good thing for the world, but it seems current processes and people are likely to lead to those outcomes.
from what i've read, NK stopping nuclear tests isn't really a concession as much as "we're done testing our nukes we know they work, plus our underground testing site is all used up anyways".
|
On April 26 2018 02:04 ticklishmusic wrote:Show nested quote +On April 26 2018 01:18 a_flayer wrote:
I hope that peace returns to Syria, North Korea signs a peace agreement with the South, and that Mueller gives Trump the same treatment as the FBI did Clinton ("he did some questionable things, but we're letting him off"). Trump getting a second term as a result of all that would be brilliant. i mean, if trump somehow is like a shitty version of forrest gump, that would be a good thing for the world, but it seems current processes and people are likely to lead to those outcomes. from what i've read, NK stopping nuclear tests isn't really a concession as much as "we're done testing our nukes we know they work, plus our underground testing site is all used up anyways".
NK already accomplished their mission. A nuclear-capable power does not get forcibly absorbed. Their facility also collapsed. So they barely squeaked by. But long story short, Kim can no longer be treated like Gaddafi. Anything from here on out will be based on the assumption that NK is a legitimate country. They'll probably just end up being hugely financially supported and reformed for many years, rather than eliminated and absorbed into SK.
|
On April 26 2018 03:43 Mohdoo wrote:Show nested quote +On April 26 2018 02:04 ticklishmusic wrote:On April 26 2018 01:18 a_flayer wrote:
I hope that peace returns to Syria, North Korea signs a peace agreement with the South, and that Mueller gives Trump the same treatment as the FBI did Clinton ("he did some questionable things, but we're letting him off"). Trump getting a second term as a result of all that would be brilliant. i mean, if trump somehow is like a shitty version of forrest gump, that would be a good thing for the world, but it seems current processes and people are likely to lead to those outcomes. from what i've read, NK stopping nuclear tests isn't really a concession as much as "we're done testing our nukes we know they work, plus our underground testing site is all used up anyways". NK already accomplished their mission. A nuclear-capable power does not get forcibly absorbed. Their facility also collapsed. So they barely squeaked by. But long story short, Kim can no longer be treated like Gaddafi. Anything from here on out will be based on the assumption that NK is a legitimate country. They'll probably just end up being hugely financially supported and reformed for many years, rather than eliminated and absorbed into SK.
NK wasn't going to be forcibly absorbed before they had nukes either, so it's a bit odd to put it that way.
it's more like having extra layers of insurance than being their first line of guarantee.
|
On April 26 2018 00:59 iamthedave wrote:Show nested quote +On April 26 2018 00:51 zlefin wrote:On April 26 2018 00:46 FueledUpAndReadyToGo wrote:On April 25 2018 15:32 Lmui wrote:On April 25 2018 14:37 Mohdoo wrote:On April 25 2018 14:05 KwarK wrote:Trump on his non overnight stay in Moscow I was in Moscow. And a lot of the people knew - they were there, and they had an amazing time. And they're terrific people, you know I was getting along with them so great. I really loved my weekend, I called it my 'weekend in Moscow'. Where he "met oligarchs and other very high level government officials", as he said. Edit: why can't I find this source now The thread is pretty quiet nowadays. It feels a lot like there's a consensus on what's happening, and I just come here to nod and say, yep, that's happening. Well I think it's also because posting news just for the news itself can get you banned now. So there's just a lot less input of talking points to discuss. it should be noted that that rule applies to posts that are mostly just an article; but if you instead simply describe a bit of news in your own words in just a couple of lines without linking to an article it's fine. at any rate; there are indeed several factors that resulted in the thread being quiet. Now you mention that... Stealthblue actually was a big motivator in introducing talking points into the thread. It's why I thought it was a bad idea to ban people for doing that. Sure, he wasn't adding much himself, but I never took that as the point. In fact, when I first came to the thread I assumed he was staff, just posting random news bits he saw to keep the discussion going. I think of all the threadbans his was the most nonsensical, and the reason for it likewise. I don't recall him ever being rude or really getting into arguments with anybody, and I don't think anyone wanted him gone, either.
Seconded. His ban, while validating mods who wanted their rules to be followed just for the sake of following them, I feel has ultimately subtracted from the thread.
|
I personally liked when people posted the news links, it felt better getting articles from TL than let's say reddit.
|
On April 26 2018 04:20 zlefin wrote:Show nested quote +On April 26 2018 03:43 Mohdoo wrote:On April 26 2018 02:04 ticklishmusic wrote:On April 26 2018 01:18 a_flayer wrote:
I hope that peace returns to Syria, North Korea signs a peace agreement with the South, and that Mueller gives Trump the same treatment as the FBI did Clinton ("he did some questionable things, but we're letting him off"). Trump getting a second term as a result of all that would be brilliant. i mean, if trump somehow is like a shitty version of forrest gump, that would be a good thing for the world, but it seems current processes and people are likely to lead to those outcomes. from what i've read, NK stopping nuclear tests isn't really a concession as much as "we're done testing our nukes we know they work, plus our underground testing site is all used up anyways". NK already accomplished their mission. A nuclear-capable power does not get forcibly absorbed. Their facility also collapsed. So they barely squeaked by. But long story short, Kim can no longer be treated like Gaddafi. Anything from here on out will be based on the assumption that NK is a legitimate country. They'll probably just end up being hugely financially supported and reformed for many years, rather than eliminated and absorbed into SK. NK wasn't going to be forcibly absorbed before they had nukes either, so it's a bit odd to put it that way. it's more like having extra layers of insurance than being their first line of guarantee.
I guess what I mean by forcibly absorbed is some form of regime change to the point where SK/US don't really worry about NK at all. In effect, these enemies that get overthrown and whatnot are absorbed into what I consider the global US net.
On April 26 2018 04:48 ShoCkeyy wrote:
I personally liked when people posted the news links, it felt better getting articles from TL than let's say reddit.
Same. that's the one rule that I don't think actually made the thread any better.
|
On April 26 2018 04:52 Mohdoo wrote:Show nested quote +On April 26 2018 04:20 zlefin wrote:On April 26 2018 03:43 Mohdoo wrote:On April 26 2018 02:04 ticklishmusic wrote:On April 26 2018 01:18 a_flayer wrote:
I hope that peace returns to Syria, North Korea signs a peace agreement with the South, and that Mueller gives Trump the same treatment as the FBI did Clinton ("he did some questionable things, but we're letting him off"). Trump getting a second term as a result of all that would be brilliant. i mean, if trump somehow is like a shitty version of forrest gump, that would be a good thing for the world, but it seems current processes and people are likely to lead to those outcomes. from what i've read, NK stopping nuclear tests isn't really a concession as much as "we're done testing our nukes we know they work, plus our underground testing site is all used up anyways". NK already accomplished their mission. A nuclear-capable power does not get forcibly absorbed. Their facility also collapsed. So they barely squeaked by. But long story short, Kim can no longer be treated like Gaddafi. Anything from here on out will be based on the assumption that NK is a legitimate country. They'll probably just end up being hugely financially supported and reformed for many years, rather than eliminated and absorbed into SK. NK wasn't going to be forcibly absorbed before they had nukes either, so it's a bit odd to put it that way. it's more like having extra layers of insurance than being their first line of guarantee. I guess what I mean by forcibly absorbed is some form of regime change to the point where SK/US don't really worry about NK at all. In effect, these enemies that get overthrown and whatnot are absorbed into what I consider the global US net. Show nested quote +On April 26 2018 04:48 ShoCkeyy wrote:
I personally liked when people posted the news links, it felt better getting articles from TL than let's say reddit. Same. that's the one rule that I don't think actually made the thread any better.
yes; I get that you meant that. The nukes don't really change anything about that, that was why it was odd for you to put it that way.
|
On April 26 2018 05:06 zlefin wrote:Show nested quote +On April 26 2018 04:52 Mohdoo wrote:On April 26 2018 04:20 zlefin wrote:On April 26 2018 03:43 Mohdoo wrote:On April 26 2018 02:04 ticklishmusic wrote:On April 26 2018 01:18 a_flayer wrote:
I hope that peace returns to Syria, North Korea signs a peace agreement with the South, and that Mueller gives Trump the same treatment as the FBI did Clinton ("he did some questionable things, but we're letting him off"). Trump getting a second term as a result of all that would be brilliant. i mean, if trump somehow is like a shitty version of forrest gump, that would be a good thing for the world, but it seems current processes and people are likely to lead to those outcomes. from what i've read, NK stopping nuclear tests isn't really a concession as much as "we're done testing our nukes we know they work, plus our underground testing site is all used up anyways". NK already accomplished their mission. A nuclear-capable power does not get forcibly absorbed. Their facility also collapsed. So they barely squeaked by. But long story short, Kim can no longer be treated like Gaddafi. Anything from here on out will be based on the assumption that NK is a legitimate country. They'll probably just end up being hugely financially supported and reformed for many years, rather than eliminated and absorbed into SK. NK wasn't going to be forcibly absorbed before they had nukes either, so it's a bit odd to put it that way. it's more like having extra layers of insurance than being their first line of guarantee. I guess what I mean by forcibly absorbed is some form of regime change to the point where SK/US don't really worry about NK at all. In effect, these enemies that get overthrown and whatnot are absorbed into what I consider the global US net. On April 26 2018 04:48 ShoCkeyy wrote:
I personally liked when people posted the news links, it felt better getting articles from TL than let's say reddit. Same. that's the one rule that I don't think actually made the thread any better. yes; I get that you meant that. The nukes don't really change anything about that, that was why it was odd for you to put it that way.
You don't think nukes will change the negotiation dynamics between the US and NK?
|
On April 26 2018 05:12 Mohdoo wrote:Show nested quote +On April 26 2018 05:06 zlefin wrote:On April 26 2018 04:52 Mohdoo wrote:On April 26 2018 04:20 zlefin wrote:On April 26 2018 03:43 Mohdoo wrote:On April 26 2018 02:04 ticklishmusic wrote:On April 26 2018 01:18 a_flayer wrote:
I hope that peace returns to Syria, North Korea signs a peace agreement with the South, and that Mueller gives Trump the same treatment as the FBI did Clinton ("he did some questionable things, but we're letting him off"). Trump getting a second term as a result of all that would be brilliant. i mean, if trump somehow is like a shitty version of forrest gump, that would be a good thing for the world, but it seems current processes and people are likely to lead to those outcomes. from what i've read, NK stopping nuclear tests isn't really a concession as much as "we're done testing our nukes we know they work, plus our underground testing site is all used up anyways". NK already accomplished their mission. A nuclear-capable power does not get forcibly absorbed. Their facility also collapsed. So they barely squeaked by. But long story short, Kim can no longer be treated like Gaddafi. Anything from here on out will be based on the assumption that NK is a legitimate country. They'll probably just end up being hugely financially supported and reformed for many years, rather than eliminated and absorbed into SK. NK wasn't going to be forcibly absorbed before they had nukes either, so it's a bit odd to put it that way. it's more like having extra layers of insurance than being their first line of guarantee. I guess what I mean by forcibly absorbed is some form of regime change to the point where SK/US don't really worry about NK at all. In effect, these enemies that get overthrown and whatnot are absorbed into what I consider the global US net. On April 26 2018 04:48 ShoCkeyy wrote:
I personally liked when people posted the news links, it felt better getting articles from TL than let's say reddit. Same. that's the one rule that I don't think actually made the thread any better. yes; I get that you meant that. The nukes don't really change anything about that, that was why it was odd for you to put it that way. You don't think nukes will change the negotiation dynamics between the US and NK?
not much. It has a small effect on the negotiation dynamics; it has almost no effect on whether NK could be taken out (which is what you were talking about when I responded, when you made the inapt comparison to the situation with gaddafi).
how familiar are you with the overall situation and its history?
|
On April 26 2018 04:52 Mohdoo wrote:Show nested quote +On April 26 2018 04:48 ShoCkeyy wrote:
I personally liked when people posted the news links, it felt better getting articles from TL than let's say reddit. Same. that's the one rule that I don't think actually made the thread any better. Yeah. I understand the appeal of having people spend a minute writing a justification of why an article deserves the attention of people in this thread, and it makes sense in theory. Adding friction to the process of sharing articles reduces the number of articles people keeping up with the thread need to read, and keeps the more or less irrelevant ones out. In practice, it turns out even a little friction is enough to keep most of us from posting articles.
And, to not be guilty of being part of the problem, I ran across this a little earlier.
HUD Secretary Ben Carson to propose raising rent for low-income Americans receiving federal housing subsidies
by Tracy Jan April 25 at 3:23 PM Email the author
U.S. Housing and Urban Development Secretary Ben Carson on Wednesday proposed raising the amount that low-income families are expected to pay for rent — tripling it for the poorest households — as well as making it easier for property owners to demand work requirements for those receiving federal housing subsidies.
The move to overhaul how rental subsidies are calculated would affect 4.7 million families relying on federal housing assistance. The proposal legislation would require congressional approval.
“There is one inescapable imperative driving this reform effort,” Carson said in a call with reporters. “The current system isn't working very well. Doing nothing is not an option.”
Tenants generally pay 30 percent of their adjusted income toward rent or a public housing agency minimum rent -- which is capped at $50 a month for the poorest families. The administration’s proposal sets the family monthly rent contribution at 35 percent of gross income, or 35 percent of their earnings working 15 hours a week at the federal minimum wage. Under the proposal, the cap for the poorest families would rise to about $150 a month -- three times higher than the current minimum. About 712,000 households would see their rents rise to the new monthly minimum of $150, HUD officials said.
Housing advocates criticized the proposal as "cruel hypocrisy," coming on the heels of tax breaks to wealthy Americans and corporations.
“When we are in the middle of a housing crisis that’s having the most negative impact on the lowest-income people, we shouldn’t even be considering proposals to increase their rent burdens,” said Diane Yentel, president of the National Low Income Housing Coalition.
The bill would also allow public housing agencies and property owners to impose work requirements. Currently, only 15 housing authorities in about a dozen states require some sort of work or job training in return for benefits, HUD officials said. In Atlanta and Charlotte, at least one adult needs to work 30 hours a week for a household to receive housing benefits. Chicago requires able-bodied beneficiaries to work 20 hours a week.
HUD also seeks to eliminate deductions for medical and child-care costs when determining a tenant’s rent. www.washingtonpost.com
This really pisses me off. It's going to destroy extremely poor families, and the justification for it is, of course, budget issues which are only a problem after the GOP passed their tax cuts that give hundreds of billions of dollars to the already wealthy.
EDIT: Sorry, I misclicked and hit post instead of preview. I'm working on fixing this. I think it's fixed now.
|
On April 26 2018 00:59 iamthedave wrote:Show nested quote +On April 26 2018 00:51 zlefin wrote:On April 26 2018 00:46 FueledUpAndReadyToGo wrote:On April 25 2018 15:32 Lmui wrote:On April 25 2018 14:37 Mohdoo wrote:On April 25 2018 14:05 KwarK wrote:Trump on his non overnight stay in Moscow I was in Moscow. And a lot of the people knew - they were there, and they had an amazing time. And they're terrific people, you know I was getting along with them so great. I really loved my weekend, I called it my 'weekend in Moscow'. Where he "met oligarchs and other very high level government officials", as he said. Edit: why can't I find this source now The thread is pretty quiet nowadays. It feels a lot like there's a consensus on what's happening, and I just come here to nod and say, yep, that's happening. Well I think it's also because posting news just for the news itself can get you banned now. So there's just a lot less input of talking points to discuss. it should be noted that that rule applies to posts that are mostly just an article; but if you instead simply describe a bit of news in your own words in just a couple of lines without linking to an article it's fine. at any rate; there are indeed several factors that resulted in the thread being quiet. Now you mention that... Stealthblue actually was a big motivator in introducing talking points into the thread. It's why I thought it was a bad idea to ban people for doing that. Sure, he wasn't adding much himself, but I never took that as the point. In fact, when I first came to the thread I assumed he was staff, just posting random news bits he saw to keep the discussion going. I think of all the threadbans his was the most nonsensical, and the reason for it likewise. I don't recall him ever being rude or really getting into arguments with anybody, and I don't think anyone wanted him gone, either.
On April 26 2018 04:48 ShoCkeyy wrote:
I personally liked when people posted the news links, it felt better getting articles from TL than let's say reddit.
Seconded to both posts. While most of the noise in the thread, due to arguments with a select few, is gone, putting a clamp on the free posting of articles has meant a lot of the real discussion is gone too. I understand if they're experimenting with the rules to see what happens, but I don't think that rule change has produced a positive outcome. Things are a bit quieter here than I would like.
|
carson making a dumb move is not surprising in the slightest; since it was well known he has no business being housing secretary.
and as to the republicans pushing the nonsense: bad people do bad things, not much more to say than that.
|
I like Blue's posts when they were articles. His twitter selections often delved into shit posting bait. I think there is room for articles of the day that are from major news outlets, as long as they are not spammed. But I also strongly dislike posting that uses the articles in place of articulating a point, so I think the new rule does remove that problem.
On April 26 2018 06:46 Kyadytim wrote:Show nested quote +On April 26 2018 04:52 Mohdoo wrote:On April 26 2018 04:48 ShoCkeyy wrote:
I personally liked when people posted the news links, it felt better getting articles from TL than let's say reddit. Same. that's the one rule that I don't think actually made the thread any better. Yeah. I understand the appeal of having people spend a minute writing a justification of why an article deserves the attention of people in this thread, and it makes sense in theory. Adding friction to the process of sharing articles reduces the number of articles people keeping up with the thread need to read, and keeps the more or less irrelevant ones out. In practice, it turns out even a little friction is enough to keep most of us from posting articles. And, to not be guilty of being part of the problem, I ran across this a little earlier. Show nested quote +
HUD Secretary Ben Carson to propose raising rent for low-income Americans receiving federal housing subsidies
by Tracy Jan April 25 at 3:23 PM Email the author
U.S. Housing and Urban Development Secretary Ben Carson on Wednesday proposed raising the amount that low-income families are expected to pay for rent — tripling it for the poorest households — as well as making it easier for property owners to demand work requirements for those receiving federal housing subsidies.
The move to overhaul how rental subsidies are calculated would affect 4.7 million families relying on federal housing assistance. The proposal legislation would require congressional approval.
“There is one inescapable imperative driving this reform effort,” Carson said in a call with reporters. “The current system isn't working very well. Doing nothing is not an option.”
Tenants generally pay 30 percent of their adjusted income toward rent or a public housing agency minimum rent -- which is capped at $50 a month for the poorest families. The administration’s proposal sets the family monthly rent contribution at 35 percent of gross income, or 35 percent of their earnings working 15 hours a week at the federal minimum wage. Under the proposal, the cap for the poorest families would rise to about $150 a month -- three times higher than the current minimum. About 712,000 households would see their rents rise to the new monthly minimum of $150, HUD officials said.
Housing advocates criticized the proposal as "cruel hypocrisy," coming on the heels of tax breaks to wealthy Americans and corporations.
“When we are in the middle of a housing crisis that’s having the most negative impact on the lowest-income people, we shouldn’t even be considering proposals to increase their rent burdens,” said Diane Yentel, president of the National Low Income Housing Coalition.
The bill would also allow public housing agencies and property owners to impose work requirements. Currently, only 15 housing authorities in about a dozen states require some sort of work or job training in return for benefits, HUD officials said. In Atlanta and Charlotte, at least one adult needs to work 30 hours a week for a household to receive housing benefits. Chicago requires able-bodied beneficiaries to work 20 hours a week.
Show nested quote +HUD also seeks to eliminate deductions for medical and child-care costs when determining a tenant’s rent. www.washingtonpost.comThis really pisses me off. It's going to destroy extremely poor families, and the justification for it is, of course, budget issues which are only a problem after the GOP passed their tax cuts that give hundreds of billions of dollars to the already wealthy. EDIT: Sorry, I misclicked and hit post instead of preview. I'm working on fixing this. I think it's fixed now.
That is going to be a lot of elderly people, who are the vast majority of section 8 recipients. And most of them don't have families that can help support them. I guess we can put them all in more expensive nursing homes, which will just cost more money.
|
On April 26 2018 06:50 NewSunshine wrote:Show nested quote +On April 26 2018 00:59 iamthedave wrote:On April 26 2018 00:51 zlefin wrote:On April 26 2018 00:46 FueledUpAndReadyToGo wrote:On April 25 2018 15:32 Lmui wrote:On April 25 2018 14:37 Mohdoo wrote:On April 25 2018 14:05 KwarK wrote:Trump on his non overnight stay in Moscow I was in Moscow. And a lot of the people knew - they were there, and they had an amazing time. And they're terrific people, you know I was getting along with them so great. I really loved my weekend, I called it my 'weekend in Moscow'. Where he "met oligarchs and other very high level government officials", as he said. Edit: why can't I find this source now The thread is pretty quiet nowadays. It feels a lot like there's a consensus on what's happening, and I just come here to nod and say, yep, that's happening. Well I think it's also because posting news just for the news itself can get you banned now. So there's just a lot less input of talking points to discuss. it should be noted that that rule applies to posts that are mostly just an article; but if you instead simply describe a bit of news in your own words in just a couple of lines without linking to an article it's fine. at any rate; there are indeed several factors that resulted in the thread being quiet. Now you mention that... Stealthblue actually was a big motivator in introducing talking points into the thread. It's why I thought it was a bad idea to ban people for doing that. Sure, he wasn't adding much himself, but I never took that as the point. In fact, when I first came to the thread I assumed he was staff, just posting random news bits he saw to keep the discussion going. I think of all the threadbans his was the most nonsensical, and the reason for it likewise. I don't recall him ever being rude or really getting into arguments with anybody, and I don't think anyone wanted him gone, either. Show nested quote +On April 26 2018 04:48 ShoCkeyy wrote:
I personally liked when people posted the news links, it felt better getting articles from TL than let's say reddit. Seconded to both posts. While most of the noise in the thread, due to arguments with a select few, is gone, putting a clamp on the free posting of articles has meant a lot of the real discussion is gone too. I understand if they're experimenting with the rules to see what happens, but I don't think that rule change has produced a positive outcome. Things are a bit quieter here than I would like.
It's quieter because this thread is an echo chamber, not because StealthBlue isn't posting multiple articles a day. No one complained because he validated the all ready held belief system of 98% of the users here. If Danglars was spamming articles from Breitbart, Fox, Forbes, etc. all the time, I doubt the same sentiment would be shared. I'll post every now and then, but this thread and its posters aren't exactly entirely welcoming of a diverse range of view points.
|
On April 26 2018 07:01 Wegandi wrote:Show nested quote +On April 26 2018 06:50 NewSunshine wrote:On April 26 2018 00:59 iamthedave wrote:On April 26 2018 00:51 zlefin wrote:On April 26 2018 00:46 FueledUpAndReadyToGo wrote:On April 25 2018 15:32 Lmui wrote:On April 25 2018 14:37 Mohdoo wrote:On April 25 2018 14:05 KwarK wrote:Trump on his non overnight stay in Moscow I was in Moscow. And a lot of the people knew - they were there, and they had an amazing time. And they're terrific people, you know I was getting along with them so great. I really loved my weekend, I called it my 'weekend in Moscow'. Where he "met oligarchs and other very high level government officials", as he said. Edit: why can't I find this source now The thread is pretty quiet nowadays. It feels a lot like there's a consensus on what's happening, and I just come here to nod and say, yep, that's happening. Well I think it's also because posting news just for the news itself can get you banned now. So there's just a lot less input of talking points to discuss. it should be noted that that rule applies to posts that are mostly just an article; but if you instead simply describe a bit of news in your own words in just a couple of lines without linking to an article it's fine. at any rate; there are indeed several factors that resulted in the thread being quiet. Now you mention that... Stealthblue actually was a big motivator in introducing talking points into the thread. It's why I thought it was a bad idea to ban people for doing that. Sure, he wasn't adding much himself, but I never took that as the point. In fact, when I first came to the thread I assumed he was staff, just posting random news bits he saw to keep the discussion going. I think of all the threadbans his was the most nonsensical, and the reason for it likewise. I don't recall him ever being rude or really getting into arguments with anybody, and I don't think anyone wanted him gone, either. On April 26 2018 04:48 ShoCkeyy wrote:
I personally liked when people posted the news links, it felt better getting articles from TL than let's say reddit. Seconded to both posts. While most of the noise in the thread, due to arguments with a select few, is gone, putting a clamp on the free posting of articles has meant a lot of the real discussion is gone too. I understand if they're experimenting with the rules to see what happens, but I don't think that rule change has produced a positive outcome. Things are a bit quieter here than I would like. It's quieter because this thread is an echo chamber, not because StealthBlue isn't posting multiple articles a day. No one complained because he validated the all ready held belief system of 98% of the users here. If Danglars was spamming articles from Breitbart, Fox, Forbes, etc. all the time, I doubt the same sentiment would be shared. I'll post every now and then, but this thread and its posters aren't exactly entirely welcoming of a diverse range of view points.
No one shares Breitbart because they know how quickly that article would be eviscerated. The reporting quality of that website is National Enquirer tier. There are conservatives who traffic this thread that would have no problem dumpstering a Breitbart article, which is why no one ever posts their articles.
And frankly, I don't understand this complaint. Why do you need articles with "conservative views" to be shared in the thread to discuss things? Is there some minimum level of validation of world view necessary for you to participate? If you are try go avoid an echo chamber, shouldn't you be in here with us discussing left leaning views and expanding your point of view?
|
On April 26 2018 07:06 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On April 26 2018 07:01 Wegandi wrote:On April 26 2018 06:50 NewSunshine wrote:On April 26 2018 00:59 iamthedave wrote:On April 26 2018 00:51 zlefin wrote:On April 26 2018 00:46 FueledUpAndReadyToGo wrote:On April 25 2018 15:32 Lmui wrote:On April 25 2018 14:37 Mohdoo wrote:On April 25 2018 14:05 KwarK wrote:Trump on his non overnight stay in Moscow I was in Moscow. And a lot of the people knew - they were there, and they had an amazing time. And they're terrific people, you know I was getting along with them so great. I really loved my weekend, I called it my 'weekend in Moscow'. Where he "met oligarchs and other very high level government officials", as he said. Edit: why can't I find this source now The thread is pretty quiet nowadays. It feels a lot like there's a consensus on what's happening, and I just come here to nod and say, yep, that's happening. Well I think it's also because posting news just for the news itself can get you banned now. So there's just a lot less input of talking points to discuss. it should be noted that that rule applies to posts that are mostly just an article; but if you instead simply describe a bit of news in your own words in just a couple of lines without linking to an article it's fine. at any rate; there are indeed several factors that resulted in the thread being quiet. Now you mention that... Stealthblue actually was a big motivator in introducing talking points into the thread. It's why I thought it was a bad idea to ban people for doing that. Sure, he wasn't adding much himself, but I never took that as the point. In fact, when I first came to the thread I assumed he was staff, just posting random news bits he saw to keep the discussion going. I think of all the threadbans his was the most nonsensical, and the reason for it likewise. I don't recall him ever being rude or really getting into arguments with anybody, and I don't think anyone wanted him gone, either. On April 26 2018 04:48 ShoCkeyy wrote:
I personally liked when people posted the news links, it felt better getting articles from TL than let's say reddit. Seconded to both posts. While most of the noise in the thread, due to arguments with a select few, is gone, putting a clamp on the free posting of articles has meant a lot of the real discussion is gone too. I understand if they're experimenting with the rules to see what happens, but I don't think that rule change has produced a positive outcome. Things are a bit quieter here than I would like. It's quieter because this thread is an echo chamber, not because StealthBlue isn't posting multiple articles a day. No one complained because he validated the all ready held belief system of 98% of the users here. If Danglars was spamming articles from Breitbart, Fox, Forbes, etc. all the time, I doubt the same sentiment would be shared. I'll post every now and then, but this thread and its posters aren't exactly entirely welcoming of a diverse range of view points. No one shares Breitbart because they know how quickly that article would be eviscerated. The reporting quality of that website is National Enquirer tier. And frankly, I don't understand this complaint. Why do you need articles with "conservative views" to be shared in the thread to discuss things? Is there some minimum level of validation of world view necessary? If you are try go avoid an echo chamber, shouldn't you be in here with us discussing left leaning views and expanding your point of view?
I'm not conservative, so not sure the point of directing this to me. My point was that it's quieter because the accepted range of ideological viewpoints in this thread is quite small and isolated. It's not up to me to tolerate this, it's up to the posters in the thread to be more welcoming of views outside their own. There are few arguments in good faith that goes on in this thread, and it's not isolated to just one segment of people (xDaunt is not exactly immune from this criticism, and I've been known to be coarse more than once myself). By the way, if I want to engage with socialists and communists I can do that to my hearts content where I live (and I do, but that's neither here nor there).
Also, your first paragraph is part of the problem. Blue shares stuff from MotherJones, Salon, etc. Not exactly the epitome of quality journalism there. Plus, most of the things he posts isn't exactly news, but editorials. It's obvious the posters who share his ideological spectra aren't pushing to be rid of him (the opposite in fact), but as a probabilistic conjecture, I'd imagine quite a difference of opinion if the thread was getting 3+ editorials/articles a day from places like Breitbart. Or If I was posting stuff like The Independent (http://www.independent.org/), Mises Institute, Reason all the time.
|
I still don’t understand the complaint. Why does “conservative” media need to be shared in the thread? And what prevents it from being shared? How is this thread not welcoming of others viewpoints? Politics has never been for the faint of heart, even among the soft hearted left.
And blue got lit up by folks for posting Salon articles, by right and left leaning posters. When the articles were bad. So again, I don’t see the reason for the complaint.
|
On April 26 2018 07:18 Plansix wrote:
I still don’t understand the complaint. Why does “conservative” media need to be shared in the thread? And what prevents it from being shared? How is this thread not welcoming of others viewpoints? Politics has never been for the faint of heart, even among the soft hearted left.
And blue got lit up by folks for posting Salon articles, by right and left leaning posters. When the articles were bad. So again, I don’t see the reason for the complaint.
point of clarity: is it that you don't understand the basis or theory behind the complaint, or is that you understand it, but believe it to be unsound?
|
I am a lurker, but I liked this thread much better when xDaunt and GH were here. I learned quite a bit from both of them. I thought they wrote clearly and articulately, even when I disagreed with them -- especially GH, as xDaunt can be terse sometimes.
I never got much useful out of Danglars. I feel that 90% of his communication is word salad that means almost nothing. I don't think he was intentionally trying to obfuscate, but IMO his writing was generally impenetrable.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
