You are raging back at a posting that was merely an opinion (and not a forceful one at that). I said earlier also that it was "their money". Just because I think there is something better to spend it on does not mean I want to STOP them from spending their money. I don't even want to see this charity stopped, either. I'm not even trying to lay a guilt trip, either: I have no idea what these "doners" spend thier other money on, and it is not my business either. I know it is their money.
So, you don't like "Enterprise" because of the skin color of the actors?
So much for "not by the color of their skin but by the content of their character", even if the characters in this case are cardboard.
Your point might be valid in this situation if I felt strongly about it (which I do not), and really wanted them to shut down the "Star Trek" charity. Instead, even though I think there are better charities, I hope their strange effort works.
As for guilt, it is their money. They can do what they want with it.
"At this post at the TrekBBS forum one of the campaign organisers reveals that the donor is not Richard Branson (as was speculated by some) "
We will have to see about that, when Season 4 starts and there is a big red "V" on the hull of the ship. The despised theme song at last is replaced with "Tubular Bells" (pronounced Chewbular Bells by Branson).
"If they had, they'd realise there's better things to do with their money, no matter how much "better" this last season was"
I like "Star Trek" and all, but when I see a huge effort to create a charity to keep it going, I do wonder if this money would be better spent alleviating the human misery in Sudanese refugee camps instead of making sure we get one more TV season of actors with forehead bumps.
"They used to shoot yer name into space in binary using laser light pulses for a fee. They (I wonder why?) have long sence been out of business."
I think they went out of business once the ink dried on the treaty that concluded the first Man-Kzin War. The Kzinti were tired of being burned by the human's "communication" lasers.
Damn those shifty, lazy martians stealing our jobs by working at slave-labor wages. Their icky green skin and the smell of the "Xvspoo" crap they eat and bring in their lunch-bags.
"I hope this attracts a Vorlon planet killer in response"
When the Vogons and Vorlons arrive at the same time, there's going to be an interesting fight over which force gets to illuminate this planet-sized spam cannon we live on.
However, I have faith. If there is one thing that Earth excels at on a galactic scale, it is our lawyers. We will be able to put off destruction with barages of C&D letters aimed at the Vo***ons who defame us by calling us a malware planet.
Cmdr, Cowboy? Considering beaming Slashdot into space for us next? Lord knows what sort of commotion it is going to cause among the real Borg when they find out that Bill Gates is one of them.
"Being critical of the misguided economic thinking of this administration doesn't make the AARP a bunch of commie pinko leftwing unamerican bad guys"
I said that they were giving in to reactionaries. Where's the connection to me say they were pinkos ?!?!?! None. Nice straw-man argument.
"If the neo-cons actually care about the goals and purposes "
"The AARP, after all, is a group that exists for the purpose of advancing the interests of old people"
That is what they claim, yes....
"If the neo-cons actually care about the goals and purposes of Social Security "
Referring to conspiracy theories that do not connect with reality does not help either. Besides, these ideas of small (NOT radical) privitization were early advocated by Gore and Clinton.
Here is a frightening account of iSearch's damage to someone's computer: click here. "Spyware" is too innocuous a term for this. It's not a spy: it is a file assassin.
"I dont want any software i cant remove 100%...that tracks what websites i visit, or files i download... transmit data over a network without my permission.... "
I get the impression you don't like Microsoft Internet Explorer very much, do you?
"I'm against regulating pay television services, but doesn't it make sense that both sides of a issue should be presented on stations that have been granted the right to broadcast using public airwaves? "
I think that both of them should be free from censorship of political content. This includes government forcing you to say what they want under threat of being gagged entirely.
Do you want a change to the First Amendment where it says that freedom of the press can be abridged "if you are saying something the government does not think is fair"?
"How can you honestly claim that the Fairness Doctrine amounted to censorship? "
Because it involved the government controlling what people could say or not say.
"With the Fairness Doctrine, all opinions get expressed or no opinions get expressed"
No. It only has to do with what the government thinks is fair. And thank you for reiterating how it is censorship: you just said that with the Doctrine, you have to air what the government wants or no opinions get expressed. A gag order!
"It seems pretty obvious to be that the Fairness Doctrine prevents censorship
Like careless matches prevent forest fires. This is something that even you admitted gave an "you do this or else" ultimatum which included gagging political content. How can you say this is not censorship?
"It is really a dishonest and disgusting argument to say that the act of not allowing censorship is an act equivalent to censorship."
Which is why I honestly point out exactly how this censorship doctrine censors. With help from you.
You are indeed lying if you claim that the Fairness Doctrine does not censor. It is a bad lie if you say that it prevents censorship.
Let's say you run a blog. Would you like someone to come along and say that you HAD to post someone else's entries alongside yours or GIVE UP THE BLOG? You are arguing that doing this kind of mandate is not censorship.
Slashdot Mirror
You are raging back at a posting that was merely an opinion (and not a forceful one at that). I said earlier also that it was "their money". Just because I think there is something better to spend it on does not mean I want to STOP them from spending their money. I don't even want to see this charity stopped, either. I'm not even trying to lay a guilt trip, either: I have no idea what these "doners" spend thier other money on, and it is not my business either. I know it is their money.
So, you don't like "Enterprise" because of the skin color of the actors? So much for "not by the color of their skin but by the content of their character", even if the characters in this case are cardboard.
Your point might be valid in this situation if I felt strongly about it (which I do not), and really wanted them to shut down the "Star Trek" charity. Instead, even though I think there are better charities, I hope their strange effort works. As for guilt, it is their money. They can do what they want with it.
We will have to see about that, when Season 4 starts and there is a big red "V" on the hull of the ship. The despised theme song at last is replaced with "Tubular Bells" (pronounced Chewbular Bells by Branson).
I like "Star Trek" and all, but when I see a huge effort to create a charity to keep it going, I do wonder if this money would be better spent alleviating the human misery in Sudanese refugee camps instead of making sure we get one more TV season of actors with forehead bumps.
See title.
I think they went out of business once the ink dried on the treaty that concluded the first Man-Kzin War. The Kzinti were tired of being burned by the human's "communication" lasers.
Damn those shifty, lazy martians stealing our jobs by working at slave-labor wages. Their icky green skin and the smell of the "Xvspoo" crap they eat and bring in their lunch-bags.
We could call it Space Projected Active Marketing. It is kind of long to say this, so we might have to come up with an abbreviation or acronym.
When the Vogons and Vorlons arrive at the same time, there's going to be an interesting fight over which force gets to illuminate this planet-sized spam cannon we live on. However, I have faith. If there is one thing that Earth excels at on a galactic scale, it is our lawyers. We will be able to put off destruction with barages of C&D letters aimed at the Vo***ons who defame us by calling us a malware planet.
Cmdr, Cowboy? Considering beaming Slashdot into space for us next? Lord knows what sort of commotion it is going to cause among the real Borg when they find out that Bill Gates is one of them.
I said that they were giving in to reactionaries. Where's the connection to me say they were pinkos ?!?!?! None. Nice straw-man argument.
"If the neo-cons actually care about the goals and purposes "
"The AARP, after all, is a group that exists for the purpose of advancing the interests of old people"
That is what they claim, yes....
"If the neo-cons actually care about the goals and purposes of Social Security "
Referring to conspiracy theories that do not connect with reality does not help either. Besides, these ideas of small (NOT radical) privitization were early advocated by Gore and Clinton.
No. The AARP is guilty of giving into reactionaries and opposing improving Social Security.
click here, an account of where iSearch forced pr0n links on a family computer used by kids.
Some people call that "telemarketing".
Here is a frightening account of iSearch's damage to someone's computer: click here. "Spyware" is too innocuous a term for this. It's not a spy: it is a file assassin.
I think he really meant tortoise conduct. My system has really been running slow since I installed the thing.
Google search for idownload and spyware : 23,100 hits.
Google search for isearch and spyware: 82,400 hits.
Google search for isearch and malware: 17,000
Google search for isearch and shit: 14,900 hits.
Looks like someone shot this dead horse out the barn door, and it is too late to look it in its mouth.
Which sounds a little different now after "The Two Towers"
Tell me where I can download ShitAware and Shitbot-Search-And-Destroy? or ShitBlocker? I'll be the first there to download it.
I get the impression you don't like Microsoft Internet Explorer very much, do you?
Myself? Never arrive here I do in seeking of diversity. However, in search of repetition doth I arrive.
So? If that is what you want to say, there is your right. Freedom of the press cannot be abridged.
I think that both of them should be free from censorship of political content. This includes government forcing you to say what they want under threat of being gagged entirely.
Do you want a change to the First Amendment where it says that freedom of the press can be abridged "if you are saying something the government does not think is fair"?
Because it involved the government controlling what people could say or not say.
"With the Fairness Doctrine, all opinions get expressed or no opinions get expressed"
No. It only has to do with what the government thinks is fair. And thank you for reiterating how it is censorship: you just said that with the Doctrine, you have to air what the government wants or no opinions get expressed. A gag order!
"It seems pretty obvious to be that the Fairness Doctrine prevents censorship
Like careless matches prevent forest fires. This is something that even you admitted gave an "you do this or else" ultimatum which included gagging political content. How can you say this is not censorship?
"It is really a dishonest and disgusting argument to say that the act of not allowing censorship is an act equivalent to censorship."
Which is why I honestly point out exactly how this censorship doctrine censors. With help from you.
You are indeed lying if you claim that the Fairness Doctrine does not censor. It is a bad lie if you say that it prevents censorship.
Let's say you run a blog. Would you like someone to come along and say that you HAD to post someone else's entries alongside yours or GIVE UP THE BLOG? You are arguing that doing this kind of mandate is not censorship.