Golf is the sport of professionals because it requires skill, patience, precision and intelligence to play at even a mediocre level. I don't think the correlation is just coincidence.
I may download Harry Potter from someone who legally purchased a copy.
Would it be immoral for a library to lend a book out to more than one person at a time if it were possible? On the contrary, libraries would better serve their purpose.
If there's money to be made from Harry Potter, then J. K. Rowling should get it, but there shouldn't be any right that money can be made from Harry Potter.
Selling Harry Potter without giving Rowling her cut is immoral, but free copying of Harry Potter, not so much. What's the moral difference between reading a torrented ebook of Harry Potter and checking it out of the library?
Those who think seriously about carbon policy agree with you. I suspect offsets are preferred precisely because they give some folks an opportunity to leach off the system. This article confirms what many feared, that they also wouldn't work.
It is silly, but that's what it is. I'm not sure why there's a conflation, whether the misogynists labelled themselves as MRA or whether their opponents did.
The shifting of the meaning of labels is natural, and also a common and effective political tactic.
You can see this coming from the other side, too. Some posters up thread conflate the celebration of diversity at the Hugo awards with the "Yes means Yes" crowd.
I don't understand the mindset that can't accept the fact that science fiction encompasses more people, more ideas and a wider audience than first presumed. It's antithetical to the precepts of the genre.
As an old white guy who grew up on Heinlein and Silverberg and Asimov and Niven and Pohl, it's been proved for decades that non-Anglo and female and gay authors offer something valuable and aren't just a side show. I don't know why anyone who calls themselves a science fiction fan would not want to celebrate that.
Christian apologist is just someone who explains Christianity and why it's right and good. The term has a long history and is not usually considered derogatory. C. S. Lewis was a Christian apologist.
MRA means Men's Rights Activist. There is a wide range of MRA folks. Some fight for equality in child custody cases or domestic violence cases (there are a lot of men who get beat up by women). Some are just misguided weirdos who think women should hold the door open for men or something, and there's a bunch of horrible misogynists.
Therefore women shouldn't win Hugos? I don't get it. You sound overwrought and should maybe focus anger on those parts of the PC movement which deserver it.
Slashdot Mirror
You just have to not do that.
"I don't believe that there should be a basic living stipend, unless everyone, even those who work, receive it."
I think that's the basic idea.
Decades is a long time, eh? What is the use of a century of peace if we destroy civilization at the end of it?
America was also face to face with the army that had won the largest war in history. An army from a country too big to nuke at the time.
The fact that we are sure makes me sad.
Golf is the sport of professionals because it requires skill, patience, precision and intelligence to play at even a mediocre level. I don't think the correlation is just coincidence.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
I may download Harry Potter from someone who legally purchased a copy.
Would it be immoral for a library to lend a book out to more than one person at a time if it were possible? On the contrary, libraries would better serve their purpose.
It's not a traffic circle without a million dollar island complete with shrubbery.
If there's money to be made from Harry Potter, then J. K. Rowling should get it, but there shouldn't be any right that money can be made from Harry Potter.
Selling Harry Potter without giving Rowling her cut is immoral, but free copying of Harry Potter, not so much. What's the moral difference between reading a torrented ebook of Harry Potter and checking it out of the library?
I used to think the same as you, but then I learned assembly.
Those who think seriously about carbon policy agree with you. I suspect offsets are preferred precisely because they give some folks an opportunity to leach off the system. This article confirms what many feared, that they also wouldn't work.
Do these people control the Hugos? What am I missing here?
Kickstarter was a scam from the beginning. It shouldn't take Star Citizen to realize that, though I notice it's still taking millions.
So you're saying that once it became clear she is a horrible person, the SJW crowd dropped her.
That's not really ironic. Presumably GP thinks the pain and misery caused would be worth it.
And cheating is probably the second oldest tradition.
Don't you think it's a bit childish to demand sexual fidelity from someone?
Please explain why the existence of a lesbian Thai troll necessitates a movement to win the Hugo back from progressive sci-fi culture.
It is silly, but that's what it is. I'm not sure why there's a conflation, whether the misogynists labelled themselves as MRA or whether their opponents did.
The shifting of the meaning of labels is natural, and also a common and effective political tactic.
You can see this coming from the other side, too. Some posters up thread conflate the celebration of diversity at the Hugo awards with the "Yes means Yes" crowd.
I don't understand the mindset that can't accept the fact that science fiction encompasses more people, more ideas and a wider audience than first presumed. It's antithetical to the precepts of the genre.
As an old white guy who grew up on Heinlein and Silverberg and Asimov and Niven and Pohl, it's been proved for decades that non-Anglo and female and gay authors offer something valuable and aren't just a side show. I don't know why anyone who calls themselves a science fiction fan would not want to celebrate that.
The total number of homicides has declined somewhat. The homicide rate has dropped sharply, due to population increase I'd guess.
It may be nasty, but they're asking for it.
Christian apologist is just someone who explains Christianity and why it's right and good. The term has a long history and is not usually considered derogatory. C. S. Lewis was a Christian apologist.
MRA means Men's Rights Activist. There is a wide range of MRA folks. Some fight for equality in child custody cases or domestic violence cases (there are a lot of men who get beat up by women). Some are just misguided weirdos who think women should hold the door open for men or something, and there's a bunch of horrible misogynists.
"Yes means yes" is asinine.
Therefore women shouldn't win Hugos? I don't get it. You sound overwrought and should maybe focus anger on those parts of the PC movement which deserver it.