i always just took trolling to be kind of, they're playing a different game than you are, their game is to make you no longer play your game... basically, anybody who messes with other people for fun is a trolling.
... "xXxPonyWarrior2002xXx" looks like something i'd make my username so others would be shamed by being fragged by someone with such a dumb username. I tend to use a lot of bracketing when i get in the mood to troll other players like that.
:) asking and telling are two different things. the polite thing is also to ask nicely.
it's my decision, not yours, where i point my eyeballs. if you want me to move them, you'll need to ask nicely. Their right not to be uncomfortable, does not trump my autonomy:)
:) well put, i would give you some points but already commented in this thread.
as Richard Seymour relayed in a ted talk about beauty, and i'm paraphrasing here,
a customer goes in to get his watch cleaned by the watch's maker, when the watchmaker opens up the watch the customer sees little words engraved on the cogs and gears. Puzzled the customer asks the watchmaker why on earth he would engrave the pieces that nobody will ever see. The watch maker responds "God sees it."
those who do, do because it's the right thing to do, they don't have the time to worry about what you may think of them.
criminalizing hate isn't right. Classifying it as "domestic terrorism" is even less ok.
One can make the argument that by having stiffer penalties for hate crimes one should theoretically disincentivize hate crimes in the future... but hate crimes are still crimes, with typically pretty long maximum sentences to begin with. Murder is what 25-life as it is? it's up to the discretion of the sentencing judge.
Also, you're assigning them motivation that they may or may not have.
for non-stalkerish trolling... anybody on the internet literally has exactly as much power as you give them. literally, literally literally, the wall plug/powerstrip/powerbutton is right there. You choose what you see, what you read and what you engage with.
We do not need to protect people from being offended online. people who deal with real adversity, don't need us wrapping them in swaddling to protect them from fake adversity.
verbal harassment is protected; what a slippery sloped world you suggest if it weren't. what would be next to lose that protection, verbal offense?
your right not to be offended does not trump my right to express myself, especially since you are not a captive audience in your scenario... you can walk away and no harm done.
if i were following you, or threatening you etc. it would be different.
as above poster stated... it's typically too deadly to be widespread. An outbreak usually kills less than a hundred people and occurs pretty sporadically.
reminds me of a TED talk by david deutsch in a remark about global warming... and a bit about the remarks regarding 9/11.
Deutsch said that it was already too late to avert a crisis, because the cost of rectifying our behavior to solve the crisis of global warming would be a crisis in and of itself... and by all accounts, Bin Laden's investment of millions of dollars to carry out the attack, has cost the world economy in the order of magnitude of billions. he had probably a 3 order of magnitude return on his investment.
We all know that Ebola isn't something to be scared of, but it is something to be wary of. The CDC saying the american public has nothing to fear at all, is true, but the public doesn't believe. The Ebola Czar being appointed and repeating that message might make the public take note and maybe believe there's nothing to fear. This might not do anything additional to stop the Ebola crisis, but that doesn't mean it won't do anything. widespread ebola panic, would be a crisis in and of itself.
A big part of this crisis in West Africa is the chilling effect it has had on the economies... in countries that can ill-afford it. local businesses don't get business, no tourism, people are worried about talking to their neighbors... and everybody is scared. I wouldn't be surprised if more people died of starvation than ebola because of this outbreak.
apparently executive pay is 7 figure at some non-profit hospitals, and some of them have billions in revenue. they don't need profit, but it's a nice perk.
:) please let me know if it somehow works differently in your country.
If only the judiciary couldn't be politicized, and if only the judiciary weren't terribly backward on technology, and if only the UK weren't trying to penalize their youths for being young.
do they really think they'll catch anything beside adolescent boys? when did we decide that we should penalize the young for being young?
yes, my phone number is a lot less visible than my username... to a specific set. Each of those represents a different level of obscurity. Threaten me by cell, worried, threaten me by email, less so, threaten me by User name... whatever, not a concern. threaten me by snail mail... very worried. that's serious dedication there, and you know more about me than i'm comfortable with.:)
Slashdot Mirror
i always just took trolling to be kind of, they're playing a different game than you are, their game is to make you no longer play your game... basically, anybody who messes with other people for fun is a trolling.
wait... "if macs didn't suck so much..." is the start of a trolling statement?
... "xXxPonyWarrior2002xXx" looks like something i'd make my username so others would be shamed by being fragged by someone with such a dumb username. I tend to use a lot of bracketing when i get in the mood to troll other players like that.
:) asking and telling are two different things. the polite thing is also to ask nicely.
it's my decision, not yours, where i point my eyeballs. if you want me to move them, you'll need to ask nicely. Their right not to be uncomfortable, does not trump my autonomy :)
yeah, we actually have laws for you know, death treats, assault threats... whatever the fuck "swatting" is... i really don't want to know by the way.
if there is any reason to suspect that the death treats are real. call the police. if you feel at all in danger... call the police.
if it's not serious enough to call the police... you know it's really not serious enough to lose sleep over.
i think the point most people make is that
'the difference between us (men and women) are less than the differences between us (you and me)'
don't try and paint me with that brush because
a) paint is sticky and uncomfortable
b) you'd be incorrect.
:) well put, i would give you some points but already commented in this thread.
as Richard Seymour relayed in a ted talk about beauty, and i'm paraphrasing here,
a customer goes in to get his watch cleaned by the watch's maker, when the watchmaker opens up the watch the customer sees little words engraved on the cogs and gears. Puzzled the customer asks the watchmaker why on earth he would engrave the pieces that nobody will ever see. The watch maker responds "God sees it."
those who do, do because it's the right thing to do, they don't have the time to worry about what you may think of them.
criminalizing hate isn't right. Classifying it as "domestic terrorism" is even less ok.
One can make the argument that by having stiffer penalties for hate crimes one should theoretically disincentivize hate crimes in the future... but hate crimes are still crimes, with typically pretty long maximum sentences to begin with. Murder is what 25-life as it is? it's up to the discretion of the sentencing judge.
Also, you're assigning them motivation that they may or may not have.
for non-stalkerish trolling... anybody on the internet literally has exactly as much power as you give them. literally, literally literally, the wall plug/powerstrip/powerbutton is right there. You choose what you see, what you read and what you engage with.
We do not need to protect people from being offended online. people who deal with real adversity, don't need us wrapping them in swaddling to protect them from fake adversity.
:) i think they're the only ones actually "victimized" by it.
Internet trolls... would be very very far down on this list of things that would rile me up.
:) unfortunately apparently you've got 4 sides.
pro, anti-, who cares?, and the shits and giggles side... the side that kinda just wants to poke the ants nest every so often.
verbal harassment is protected; what a slippery sloped world you suggest if it weren't. what would be next to lose that protection, verbal offense?
your right not to be offended does not trump my right to express myself, especially since you are not a captive audience in your scenario... you can walk away and no harm done.
if i were following you, or threatening you etc. it would be different.
as above poster stated... it's typically too deadly to be widespread. An outbreak usually kills less than a hundred people and occurs pretty sporadically.
just looked at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L...
the first listing they have is 1976. before this current outbreak you were averaging 44 deaths per year... globally?
meanwhile, wikipedia lists the average lightning strike fatalities for the US at 40-50 annually... at a 10-20% fatality rate.
you were literally more likely to be struck by lightning in the US than die of ebola before this current outbreak.
and apparently hippos kill 2800 people annually... so there's that.
So yeah, not a priority.
watch, it's going to be the gays, jews, blacks, asians, latinos or arabs... whichever group he hates most.
i don't know what GP's point was... but i need/want to know more about the monkey handedness. WHY ISN'T MORE BEING DONE?!?!?!
reminds me of a TED talk by david deutsch in a remark about global warming... and a bit about the remarks regarding 9/11.
Deutsch said that it was already too late to avert a crisis, because the cost of rectifying our behavior to solve the crisis of global warming would be a crisis in and of itself... and by all accounts, Bin Laden's investment of millions of dollars to carry out the attack, has cost the world economy in the order of magnitude of billions. he had probably a 3 order of magnitude return on his investment.
We all know that Ebola isn't something to be scared of, but it is something to be wary of. The CDC saying the american public has nothing to fear at all, is true, but the public doesn't believe. The Ebola Czar being appointed and repeating that message might make the public take note and maybe believe there's nothing to fear. This might not do anything additional to stop the Ebola crisis, but that doesn't mean it won't do anything. widespread ebola panic, would be a crisis in and of itself.
A big part of this crisis in West Africa is the chilling effect it has had on the economies... in countries that can ill-afford it. local businesses don't get business, no tourism, people are worried about talking to their neighbors... and everybody is scared. I wouldn't be surprised if more people died of starvation than ebola because of this outbreak.
apparently executive pay is 7 figure at some non-profit hospitals, and some of them have billions in revenue. they don't need profit, but it's a nice perk.
they are listed as non-profit. doesn't mean they aren't profit driven.
there's some whole controversy over how non-profit hospitals in the US are. something about administrative compensation or whatnot.
a horse with stripes is usually just a horse with stripes... unless you're standing in the middle of a zebra pen, or the Serengeti.
sure the doctors were aware that ebola was a risk... but surely not in dallas.
hippies
wouldn't PETA overlords be really really easy to overthrow?
attack dogs
as a self-identified member of the "people" group, i am offended that you would include the likes of BH in our number.
:) i'd be all for criminalizing being wrong. State nothing as fact unless you have 3 good sources on it being so :).
:) please let me know if it somehow works differently in your country.
If only the judiciary couldn't be politicized, and if only the judiciary weren't terribly backward on technology, and if only the UK weren't trying to penalize their youths for being young.
do they really think they'll catch anything beside adolescent boys? when did we decide that we should penalize the young for being young?
yes, my phone number is a lot less visible than my username... to a specific set. Each of those represents a different level of obscurity. Threaten me by cell, worried, threaten me by email, less so, threaten me by User name... whatever, not a concern. threaten me by snail mail... very worried. that's serious dedication there, and you know more about me than i'm comfortable with. :)