Is there a way to achieve those goals of the appeals during the initial investigation of the murder? I like the idea that people are willing to put some effort into knowing that he is guilty, but there must be a cheaper way to do it. Perhaps smaller processes can be vetted by a third party before the first judgement?
You conclude that the video was made by theists, because you can't imagine an atheist doing it. The question reflects on you.
Is it possible that an atheist could have made that video to express his views? You believe that it is impossible, so the quoted question is very legitimate.
We're talking about statistics on atheists electing to produce *only* good stuff.
You have yet to use statistics show that they elected to produce *only* good stuff. The fact that you focused on their jobs and what they believe shows that you don't quite understand what I said, even though my sentences were very short.
You are still thinking in terms of the workers wanting to keep their jobs. I'm talking about workers, who have emotionally accepted their fate, and are willing to look for new work. Instead of just walking off, they could try to make things bad for the employer by making it less competative. If the employer can survive by charging higher prices, then that's just a bonus.
What other ways do you know of to screw employers?
I know what it means to be in a union. I had a minimum wage job, and they still deducted dues from the minimum wage.
Regarding unions on sticking to anyone, I disagree, but I'll accept it for this discussion. That might be how they typically are used, but why can't we use a union to stick it to the man?
Also, if a group of employees are in charge of the union, then why can't they stick it to the man?
Also, unions cause hassles to the company. So why can't that be considered sticking it to the man?
If you are going to quit, then you are essentially taking a voluntary lay off. If you unionize, then you/somebody takes a mandetory layoff. It seems about the same to me. At least, with a union, you get to stick it to the man.
If companies can care only-about-profits then why can't unions and their workers?
I agree. The bottom line is that nobody should be working for such a company [unless there is something going on in that company that I don't understand].
Honestly, if a company can't treat its employees reasonably well, then it deserves unions, and I say this as a non-supporter of unions.
Part of the thing that bugged me was the low quality. The whole world was getting agrivated over that? Even a movie filmed with an iPhone could be better quality. I thought that somebody was playing a prank on me. That's why I kind of got surprised that people are making a big conspiracy over it, but it is possible.
I was expecting to see a conspiracy unfold, but nope.
I got the impression that it was just a bunch of hobbyist atheists trying to educate and insult at the same time. I'm not trying to incite an argument, but I'm just saying that we can't discount it.
The video is so low quality, that it's almost impossible to figure out what is going on.
The low budget nature of the video brings it down to the level of Joe Sixpack, which makes it easier to discuss other incentives for creating the video: that's my point. After all, Joe Sixpack has opinions as well, and he'd be inclined to share them on YouTube, right?
I see what you are saying now, but I wished that you would have spelled it out more clearly. I think that the other fellow was talking more in terms of actual percentages.
That being said, you have a point. I was surprised to see a character speaking with a clear US accent. I didn't understand the purpose of the movie, when I watched it. I just had to assume the worse.
Not collecting stamps is a hobby, when you set up web sites on why you shouldn't do it and why it is the best thing to not do, when you set up organizations, when you set up Kiva groups, and when you let it guide your political decisions.
Those who do believe in any god and that Mulims want to put a false god over them, will certainly choose another means of doing this--at least that's what I believe. You seem to be making a very positive statement.
What makes you think that atheists need a credo to do this? Do rich people need a credo to buy a yacht, or choose a particular policy?
Do you have any compelling evidence that demonstrats that atheists can't produce bad stuff? Do you have any compelling evidence that demonstrates that atheists can only produce good stuff?
That is not true. Sometimes the issues are so complex that mere mortals can't understand them. Linux is supposed to serve people, but not all users understand the concept of a kernel, or abstraction, or even what a blog is. It's hopefully the same thing.
Yes, I realize that it's different for me, since I have an ID, but some people in Canada might not. I have never of people in Canada complaining about not being able to vote.
Slashdot Mirror
Is there a way to achieve those goals of the appeals during the initial investigation of the murder? I like the idea that people are willing to put some effort into knowing that he is guilty, but there must be a cheaper way to do it. Perhaps smaller processes can be vetted by a third party before the first judgement?
Was your post brought to us by the letter a, the letter p, and the number 2, by any chance?
You conclude that the video was made by theists, because you can't imagine an atheist doing it. The question reflects on you.
Is it possible that an atheist could have made that video to express his views? You believe that it is impossible, so the quoted question is very legitimate.
We're talking about statistics on atheists electing to produce *only* good stuff.
You have yet to use statistics show that they elected to produce *only* good stuff. The fact that you focused on their jobs and what they believe shows that you don't quite understand what I said, even though my sentences were very short.
You are still thinking in terms of the workers wanting to keep their jobs. I'm talking about workers, who have emotionally accepted their fate, and are willing to look for new work. Instead of just walking off, they could try to make things bad for the employer by making it less competative. If the employer can survive by charging higher prices, then that's just a bonus.
What other ways do you know of to screw employers?
I know what it means to be in a union. I had a minimum wage job, and they still deducted dues from the minimum wage.
Regarding unions on sticking to anyone, I disagree, but I'll accept it for this discussion. That might be how they typically are used, but why can't we use a union to stick it to the man?
Also, if a group of employees are in charge of the union, then why can't they stick it to the man?
Also, unions cause hassles to the company. So why can't that be considered sticking it to the man?
:^D I don't think that my grandparents fought for unions.
Why can't we use unions to stick it to the man? What's wrong with that?
If you are going to quit, then you are essentially taking a voluntary lay off. If you unionize, then you/somebody takes a mandetory layoff. It seems about the same to me. At least, with a union, you get to stick it to the man.
If companies can care only-about-profits then why can't unions and their workers?
I'm not a supporter of unions, though.
I agree. The bottom line is that nobody should be working for such a company [unless there is something going on in that company that I don't understand].
Honestly, if a company can't treat its employees reasonably well, then it deserves unions, and I say this as a non-supporter of unions.
Ah, I see what you are saying. I agree, then.
Part of the thing that bugged me was the low quality. The whole world was getting agrivated over that? Even a movie filmed with an iPhone could be better quality. I thought that somebody was playing a prank on me. That's why I kind of got surprised that people are making a big conspiracy over it, but it is possible.
I was expecting to see a conspiracy unfold, but nope.
I'm accusing you of political correctness: you have to call it educating, when it isn't.
I got the impression that it was just a bunch of hobbyist atheists trying to educate and insult at the same time. I'm not trying to incite an argument, but I'm just saying that we can't discount it.
The video is so low quality, that it's almost impossible to figure out what is going on.
The low budget nature of the video brings it down to the level of Joe Sixpack, which makes it easier to discuss other incentives for creating the video: that's my point. After all, Joe Sixpack has opinions as well, and he'd be inclined to share them on YouTube, right?
What about atheists? Do they benefit from it?
So, you have no statistics?
What are doing is called creating political correctness.
I agree with you, but why don't they just hire a guy to recite insults in a straight forward manner, instead of using this weak drama?
I see what you are saying now, but I wished that you would have spelled it out more clearly. I think that the other fellow was talking more in terms of actual percentages.
That being said, you have a point. I was surprised to see a character speaking with a clear US accent. I didn't understand the purpose of the movie, when I watched it. I just had to assume the worse.
Not collecting stamps is a hobby, when you set up web sites on why you shouldn't do it and why it is the best thing to not do, when you set up organizations, when you set up Kiva groups, and when you let it guide your political decisions.
Those who do believe in any god and that Mulims want to put a false god over them, will certainly choose another means of doing this--at least that's what I believe. You seem to be making a very positive statement.
What makes you think that atheists need a credo to do this? Do rich people need a credo to buy a yacht, or choose a particular policy?
Do you have any compelling evidence that demonstrats that atheists can't produce bad stuff? Do you have any compelling evidence that demonstrates that atheists can only produce good stuff?
You touch on a lot of points, but what makes you think that atheists would never resort to creating that video?
Do you believe that no atheists would ever kill in the name of atheism?
I don't see any indiction of either being true or false. Can you provide a link to what wrote about the probability of one being true?
How do you know that it reflects on their beliefs as opposed to their lack of beliefs?
You don't think that this was funded by atheists?
That is not true. Sometimes the issues are so complex that mere mortals can't understand them. Linux is supposed to serve people, but not all users understand the concept of a kernel, or abstraction, or even what a blog is. It's hopefully the same thing.
Yes, I realize that it's different for me, since I have an ID, but some people in Canada might not. I have never of people in Canada complaining about not being able to vote.