Thank you for this - great list, easy to digest.This jarred though:
"gay game mechanics" (my emphasis)
Using the word "gay" as a synonym for "bad" isn't nice. I know it's common, but that doesn't excuse it, and you probably wouldn't use the descriptor for another minority group in the same way. Please consider not using the word gay this way. Thanks!
Hi - my partner works in problem gambling and (according to her) there's reasonably strong evidence for a biological (read:chemical) component to gambling addiction. I think the wikipedia article even touches on it. Yep, it does.
This is one of those stories where non-Americans sit back and watch, gobsmacked, as American/.ers rant on about gun-ownership, utterly unaware of what barking lunatics they all sound like.
You guys have a massive cultural blind-spot when it comes to this stuff. It's incredible.
I'm not sure why you think your explanation is obvious. Here's another obvious explanation: "the paintings are there to symbolise the animal spirits they worshipped. The hand prints and stencils are there to show their animal gods how many worshipping children they have in this tribe."
Both explanations project our own viewpoints onto these people - there's nothing obvious about either. The only thing that's "obvious" here is that it seems, assuming the men have longer ring fingers thing held true back then, that the paintings were done by women.
You've missed my point - I was trying to point out that there are plenty of things that I do in my life that I'd rather my boss or mum didn't know about. It's just not appropriate. They're not vile things, or threatening things, they're just things that I wouldn't do in front of them. My point was that if you restrict your life to only doing things that your mum or boss would approve of, like this guy is suggesting, then you're really doing yourself a disservice - you're constantly living with the weight of someone else's expectation of how you ought to live your life hanging over you. Ain't now way to live.
Calm down fella! I think it's a legitimate thing that electoral officers are prohibited from identifying particular political parties - no system's perfect, but it's a reasonable step you can use to prevent either the actuality of, or the implication of, bias from the electoral officers (given it's us who to the counting of the votes, it's best to just avoid this stuff completely). In practice what happened when people asked this question was that we just directed them to either other voters who might be able to help, or (and this was more usual), we told them to go have a chat with the people outside the polling station who were supporters of the various candidates (and who would happily give them guides on how to vote). Basically, there's plenty of people who can help them with answers to these kinds of questions who aren't involved in recording and counting the votes, and it's better that they speak to them about it. I'm cool with that - it strikes me as sensible. Worth noting too that we're not volunteers - we get paid!
No, we are allowed to do that. We're allowed to direct them to other voters (who aren't electoral officers) who might be able to assist them. So while this could mean we could suggest they just asked another voter in the room, generally speaking, we told them to go outside and chat with the folk who were promoting the various parties. Seemed to work ok.
It's not a disgusting smell, it's just a smell that you don't like. To some, it's an acquired taste. Like the smell of cigars, or the taste of anchovies, or whatever. Yes, smokers smell. No doubt. But it's not a disgusting smell per-se.
I worked the election too and saw the same thing. A huge number of people came up to me asking which ones were "the Liberals" (meaning the Liberal National coalition, rather than the Liberal Democrats), and of course wasn't allowed to tell them, but it was pretty clear to myself and the election officers I was working with that people saw the word "Liberal" at the start of the ballot paper and then just ticked that box.
It's newsworthy because it fits the Western (US mostly) view of Iran as a country to be mocked - all part of the ongoing propaganda campaign that's leading up to Israeli strikes on Iran, backed by the US's big stick, and wholeheartedly supported by an American public that can't see past Fox News.
This is complete and utter rubbish. I've been to Iran a number of times, just two weeks ago returning from a two month trip there (with my non-Iranian wife, her second trip to Iran), and I can categorically say that you are utterly wrong. Don't get me wrong - Iran's treatment of women is appalling, but you are way off base here - nothing like what you describe happens. As TapeCutter points out, you're probably thinking about our good friends, who flew planes into the WTC, the Saudis.
She's got chops. You shouldn't just dismiss her as "Art Critic, I don't give a shit". eldavojohn's potted bio is disingenuous and (IMHO) designed to push certain buttons beloved of/. readers - Arts, Humanities, Media Studies, Lucas. She actually makes a reasonable argument - Lucas has created something unique modern art and culture, whatever you think of the Sith movie. Take the hyperbole away fro the summary and the article and the argument's kinda interesting. Someone makes a comment further down about a game designer which follows the same logic but is (again, IMHO) on a much smaller scale.
Slashdot Mirror
" gay game mechanics" (my emphasis)
Using the word "gay" as a synonym for "bad" isn't nice. I know it's common, but that doesn't excuse it, and you probably wouldn't use the descriptor for another minority group in the same way. Please consider not using the word gay this way. Thanks!
Pick any one.
Hi - my partner works in problem gambling and (according to her) there's reasonably strong evidence for a biological (read:chemical) component to gambling addiction. I think the wikipedia article even touches on it. Yep, it does.
This is one of those stories where non-Americans sit back and watch, gobsmacked, as American /.ers rant on about gun-ownership, utterly unaware of what barking lunatics they all sound like.
You guys have a massive cultural blind-spot when it comes to this stuff. It's incredible.
I love that your homepage at the time of posting was www.NSA.co.il
you've had it with these motherfucking snakes on your motherfucking brain!
I'm not sure why you think your explanation is obvious. Here's another obvious explanation: "the paintings are there to symbolise the animal spirits they worshipped. The hand prints and stencils are there to show their animal gods how many worshipping children they have in this tribe."
Both explanations project our own viewpoints onto these people - there's nothing obvious about either. The only thing that's "obvious" here is that it seems, assuming the men have longer ring fingers thing held true back then, that the paintings were done by women.
Thanks - it wasn't meant to be a joke :-/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cruelty_to_animals#Psychological_disorders
Just saying...
You've missed my point - I was trying to point out that there are plenty of things that I do in my life that I'd rather my boss or mum didn't know about. It's just not appropriate. They're not vile things, or threatening things, they're just things that I wouldn't do in front of them. My point was that if you restrict your life to only doing things that your mum or boss would approve of, like this guy is suggesting, then you're really doing yourself a disservice - you're constantly living with the weight of someone else's expectation of how you ought to live your life hanging over you. Ain't now way to live.
What a horrible, fearful, shuttered way to live your life.
Calm down fella! I think it's a legitimate thing that electoral officers are prohibited from identifying particular political parties - no system's perfect, but it's a reasonable step you can use to prevent either the actuality of, or the implication of, bias from the electoral officers (given it's us who to the counting of the votes, it's best to just avoid this stuff completely). In practice what happened when people asked this question was that we just directed them to either other voters who might be able to help, or (and this was more usual), we told them to go have a chat with the people outside the polling station who were supporters of the various candidates (and who would happily give them guides on how to vote). Basically, there's plenty of people who can help them with answers to these kinds of questions who aren't involved in recording and counting the votes, and it's better that they speak to them about it. I'm cool with that - it strikes me as sensible. Worth noting too that we're not volunteers - we get paid!
No, we are allowed to do that. We're allowed to direct them to other voters (who aren't electoral officers) who might be able to assist them. So while this could mean we could suggest they just asked another voter in the room, generally speaking, we told them to go outside and chat with the folk who were promoting the various parties. Seemed to work ok.
It's not a disgusting smell, it's just a smell that you don't like. To some, it's an acquired taste. Like the smell of cigars, or the taste of anchovies, or whatever. Yes, smokers smell. No doubt. But it's not a disgusting smell per-se.
I worked the election too and saw the same thing. A huge number of people came up to me asking which ones were "the Liberals" (meaning the Liberal National coalition, rather than the Liberal Democrats), and of course wasn't allowed to tell them, but it was pretty clear to myself and the election officers I was working with that people saw the word "Liberal" at the start of the ballot paper and then just ticked that box.
WTF is an "eco-Marxist" other than someone you don't like? Calling people names isn't really an argument.
I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that there's a good chance you're making one of those correlation/causation fuckups...
Dupe... http://science.slashdot.org/story/13/03/13/1247255/manga-girls-beware-extra-large-eyes-caused-neanderthals-demise
There won't be now, but when I saw this story there were exactly 666 comments *giggles*
"I pointed out that Ahmadinejad looks like he hasn't gotten a decent shave or haircut in months."
No you didn't - you said you mistook the guy for a monkey.
Whether he's a racist, or whether you've experienced racism in your life, is immaterial. You called the guy a monkey.
Fuck you, you rascist wanker.
It's newsworthy because it fits the Western (US mostly) view of Iran as a country to be mocked - all part of the ongoing propaganda campaign that's leading up to Israeli strikes on Iran, backed by the US's big stick, and wholeheartedly supported by an American public that can't see past Fox News.
Not sure why this is labelled as flamebait when the parent's not - they make the same point.
This is complete and utter rubbish. I've been to Iran a number of times, just two weeks ago returning from a two month trip there (with my non-Iranian wife, her second trip to Iran), and I can categorically say that you are utterly wrong. Don't get me wrong - Iran's treatment of women is appalling, but you are way off base here - nothing like what you describe happens. As TapeCutter points out, you're probably thinking about our good friends, who flew planes into the WTC, the Saudis.
She's got chops. You shouldn't just dismiss her as "Art Critic, I don't give a shit". eldavojohn's potted bio is disingenuous and (IMHO) designed to push certain buttons beloved of /. readers - Arts, Humanities, Media Studies, Lucas. She actually makes a reasonable argument - Lucas has created something unique modern art and culture, whatever you think of the Sith movie. Take the hyperbole away fro the summary and the article and the argument's kinda interesting. Someone makes a comment further down about a game designer which follows the same logic but is (again, IMHO) on a much smaller scale.