Think again. There were multiple police officers present at this shooting, and Virginia is an open carry state. Yet the shooter still got off 100 rounds before he was stopped. The idea that good guys with guns will stop bad guys with guns is farcical.
You know it is generally not a good debate strategy to just give up the actual point and then devolve your argument into vacuous platitudes. You should work on that.
There does seem to be more violent left-wing thugs than there are right-wing thugs
I don't know about that, since it is hard to quantify, but there are definitely a lot more right-wing thugs murdering people e.g. Portland, Quebec City, Charleston, etc.
Dude I have a PhD in computer science, not that it matters at all to this conversation. Open minded people can appreciate research looks different from theirs.
You are talking yourself in circles. How do we know if people are welcome somewhere? It is by definition a nebulous concept that has everything to do with how the person being judged FEELS. You cannot have a completely objective measure of it. It is still valid to do scientific studies of subjective matters, it is called social science.
You don't know who it was performed by. It just says, "this survey was designed by GitHub." That you assume it is a womens studies major (which by the way would not prevent it from being rigorous) reflects your bias.
Could be. But the fact that the FIRST assumption is that women are lying is the problem. To say, "maybe self-reported surveys are not great, we should try to find a different metric to measure this" is vastly different from what the OP said.
I don't know if it is that easy to not "out yourself" any more. Many open source projects require that you sign Contributor License Agreements, with your real name. I don't know if there are any statistics on this but most high profile projects also use real, full names in their mailing list discussions fairly exclusively. Even if it would be allowed to use a pseudonym, that would instantly make you an outsider compared the rest of the group and would probably come with its own set of biases.
You have some reading comprehension problems then.
This survey was designed by GitHub with valuable input from the research and open source communities. We especially thank: Anna Filippova (Carnegie Mellon University), Andrea Forte (Drexel University), Edward Galvez (Wikimedia Foundation), Rebecca Weiss (Mozilla), and Laura Dabbish (Carnegie Mellon University) for conversations, research questions, and prior art that informed the questionnaire design.
Anna Filippova is not the "lead researcher". Not to mention the fact that the second person in that list is a professor at Drexel in the College of Computing and Informatics and Laura Dabbish is a faculty member at CMU with a PhD in Computer Science.
Slashdot Mirror
Think again. There were multiple police officers present at this shooting, and Virginia is an open carry state. Yet the shooter still got off 100 rounds before he was stopped. The idea that good guys with guns will stop bad guys with guns is farcical.
You know it is generally not a good debate strategy to just give up the actual point and then devolve your argument into vacuous platitudes. You should work on that.
Ok now name me two more just to match what I could come up with off the top of my head. Then I will find you 10 more right-wing terrorists.
Looks like there are a similar number of Ds and Rs on there...
Words that don't appear in that article: criminal, lawsuit, Alinsky. How does it answer the question at all?
There does seem to be more violent left-wing thugs than there are right-wing thugs
I don't know about that, since it is hard to quantify, but there are definitely a lot more right-wing thugs murdering people e.g. Portland, Quebec City, Charleston, etc.
I'm confused. Is arson not illegal already? Is aggravated assault not a crime? Why do you need another law to fix these problems?
No but the article links to many reliable sources. That is the whole point of wikipedia.
Yeah and it doesn't bother me but it clearly makes you the jerk lol have a good day buddy.
Yes it is me that is the jerk. Not the person that called me a prick with no provocation. Take some time to reflect on that.
There is no such thing as an objective measure of how welcome someone is. "Feels welcome" is the closest you can get.
You and I both know what he was implying, or you don't understand subtext.
Who do YOU think is objectively (measurably) the best of demographic in the world? Who do you think is the worst?
What does this question even mean? There is no such thing as a "best" demographic. The concept makes no sense.
Dude I have a PhD in computer science, not that it matters at all to this conversation. Open minded people can appreciate research looks different from theirs.
You are talking yourself in circles. How do we know if people are welcome somewhere? It is by definition a nebulous concept that has everything to do with how the person being judged FEELS. You cannot have a completely objective measure of it. It is still valid to do scientific studies of subjective matters, it is called social science.
Okay, putting aside your biased and incorrect assumptions about womens studies, again you have no idea who did the study. So kindly STFU.
Casting Facts before Feminazis, is casting Pearls before Swine.
Yeah bro you are being totally fair and unbiased here. A veritable giant of logical deduction.
You don't know who it was performed by. It just says, "this survey was designed by GitHub." That you assume it is a womens studies major (which by the way would not prevent it from being rigorous) reflects your bias.
It's called subtext bro, maybe you have heard of it?
Could be. But the fact that the FIRST assumption is that women are lying is the problem. To say, "maybe self-reported surveys are not great, we should try to find a different metric to measure this" is vastly different from what the OP said.
Good luck signing a legal document with your first initial.
I don't know if it is that easy to not "out yourself" any more. Many open source projects require that you sign Contributor License Agreements, with your real name. I don't know if there are any statistics on this but most high profile projects also use real, full names in their mailing list discussions fairly exclusively. Even if it would be allowed to use a pseudonym, that would instantly make you an outsider compared the rest of the group and would probably come with its own set of biases.
The fact that you are calling women developers, as a group, liars is exactly the problem. This is a fact.
This survey was designed by GitHub with valuable input from the research and open source communities. We especially thank: Anna Filippova (Carnegie Mellon University), Andrea Forte (Drexel University), Edward Galvez (Wikimedia Foundation), Rebecca Weiss (Mozilla), and Laura Dabbish (Carnegie Mellon University) for conversations, research questions, and prior art that informed the questionnaire design.
Anna Filippova is not the "lead researcher". Not to mention the fact that the second person in that list is a professor at Drexel in the College of Computing and Informatics and Laura Dabbish is a faculty member at CMU with a PhD in Computer Science.
Look at who did the study before you write comments that make you look dumb.