And where I work, if I posted something deliberately meant to embarrass my CEO, I'd get my ass fired. Most people in normal jobs would.
I'll bet if you think about it, there is a difference between the CEO of your company and the president of the United States.
One of them is supposed to be a public servant. The other is paid by the taxpayers.
Let's say your job is to assemble the annual report for your company. Let's say your company lost $5million last year, and your CEO came and said, "Don't put anything out there that would embarrass me, so change the report to say that we actually made $50million last year." Do you do change the report?
if I posted something deliberately meant to embarrass my CEO, I'd get my ass fired.
When facts embarrass a dictator, facts will become illegal. Trying to make people believe that they can no longer believe what's true is the hallmark of totalitarianism. How easily Trump supporters have become comfortable with real tyranny.
About 3.5 million Americans are schizophrenic, about 1% of the population. It is a major root cause of homelessness, addiction, suicide, and many other social problems. Yet we consider it funny to ridicule them in ways that would not be acceptable for other disabilities. Why is that?
You're right. I'm ashamed of myself. I am afflicted with comic sans Tourette's, wherein when something strikes me as funny, I am unable to filter myself. About 20% of the population has this disorder and it's the leading cause of shitty humor.
But I'm curious: why does the number of people with a particular disability make it worse to ridicule them? Would it be OK to ridicule schizophrenics if the were a smaller percentage? I'm not criticizing your conclusion, I'm trying to figure out the threshold.
I meant without singling out just the facts they don't like, they are going after everything
No, they're only going after the stuff they don't like. The DoD public-facing website has been left alone.
I don't know if anyone else has noticed, but the DoD official twitter account has been throwing some serious shade on Trump, too. They tweeted this article:
What makes me curious is that you have no ties to technology, are a simple teacher in the arts, and yet you still seem to feel you're fit to make proclamations and that those proclamations are authoritative.
I was the director of computing at a top ten university for a decade. Designed its first computer music lab. Worked with Bob Moog creating keyboards sensitive to gesture.
I have ties to technology that are older than you, son.
If you ban "Uncle Tom's Cabin" from schools "because it uses the 'n' word and that's offensive", you're doing precisely what 1984 warns about.
Can you give an example of SJWs banning Uncle Tom's Cabin? It was banned in the South during slavery because they were afraid it would make the slaves revolt.
I think Trump will be a terrible president, but he is not part of the establishment who would be more than happy to send undesirables off to the gas chambers and ovens.
No, the people who would send undesirables off to the gas chambers and ovens are part of his establishment.
You mean the part where WAPO said: "But beyond the thematic similarities, a short section of Trump's speech sounded like it could have been lifted word-for-word from Bane. Watch and decide for yourself." Which is a complete fabrication?
"Watch it and decide for yourself" is not a complete fabrication. It's an exhortation to make up your own mind. Something that the new administration and its toadies don't seem to care much for.
WaPo had an article on the rogue re-tweeting at the National Park Service (part of the Department of the Interior). Ref: The National Park Service’s Twitter Has Gone Rogue [washingtonpost.com].
And how was that re-tweeting "shitposting" or partisan?
The National Park Service retweeted a photo of the inauguration and a past inauguration. Both showed hundreds of thousands of attendees. Are facts, or comparisons of facts, now considered partisan?
Maybe it has something to do with partisans of the former administration being unable to simply DO THEIR FUCKING JOBS without smarmy anti-Trump shitposting?
Can you give an example - one example - of this "shitposting" by workers at these agencies? Can you even point to anything remotely partisan in any of the tweets that were deleted?
Slashdot Mirror
I'll bet if you think about it, there is a difference between the CEO of your company and the president of the United States.
One of them is supposed to be a public servant. The other is paid by the taxpayers.
Let's say your job is to assemble the annual report for your company. Let's say your company lost $5million last year, and your CEO came and said, "Don't put anything out there that would embarrass me, so change the report to say that we actually made $50million last year." Do you do change the report?
When facts embarrass a dictator, facts will become illegal. Trying to make people believe that they can no longer believe what's true is the hallmark of totalitarianism. How easily Trump supporters have become comfortable with real tyranny.
Trump won and you lost, so suck it up buttercup. It's a new day.
Your unwillingness to make fun of the disabled is exactly why you SJWs lost so badly.
I live to serve.
I have a very good brain.
You're right. I'm ashamed of myself. I am afflicted with comic sans Tourette's, wherein when something strikes me as funny, I am unable to filter myself. About 20% of the population has this disorder and it's the leading cause of shitty humor.
But I'm curious: why does the number of people with a particular disability make it worse to ridicule them? Would it be OK to ridicule schizophrenics if the were a smaller percentage? I'm not criticizing your conclusion, I'm trying to figure out the threshold.
No, they're only going after the stuff they don't like. The DoD public-facing website has been left alone.
I don't know if anyone else has noticed, but the DoD official twitter account has been throwing some serious shade on Trump, too. They tweeted this article:
https://twitter.com/DeptofDefe...
The voices from my microwave have been telling me this for years.
The good news is that everyone will have access to broadband. The bad news is that the only content will be a single Twitter account.
Most of those books were banned by religious conservatives.
And Uncle Tom's Cabin is not on the list.
Yeah, I bet the Trump administration will make that a priority.
"Waiter, I'm sending this black russian back because it's not actually Russian,"
I was the director of computing at a top ten university for a decade. Designed its first computer music lab. Worked with Bob Moog creating keyboards sensitive to gesture.
I have ties to technology that are older than you, son.
It certainly won't be for lack of trying.
Nope. The White House website has now scrubbed all mentions of climate change and the history of civil rights.
But what if I want to go north/west?
Eventually, you will learn that he's something far worse.
And how were the EPA and USDA employees "shitposting"?
And are we really going to pretend that Donald Trump accusing someone of "shitposting" is not hilarious?
Godwin was repealed in 2016. You must not have gotten the memo.
Can you give an example of SJWs banning Uncle Tom's Cabin? It was banned in the South during slavery because they were afraid it would make the slaves revolt.
Were the Confederates SJWs?
Here on Slashdot, "male" and "female" refer to types of plugs, not biology.
No, the people who would send undesirables off to the gas chambers and ovens are part of his establishment.
"Watch it and decide for yourself" is not a complete fabrication. It's an exhortation to make up your own mind. Something that the new administration and its toadies don't seem to care much for.
And how was that re-tweeting "shitposting" or partisan?
The National Park Service retweeted a photo of the inauguration and a past inauguration. Both showed hundreds of thousands of attendees. Are facts, or comparisons of facts, now considered partisan?
You can watch the video of Trump actually saying these things.
Unless of course you are referring to Trump as the partisan liar. I can't tell from your post.
Can you give an example - one example - of this "shitposting" by workers at these agencies? Can you even point to anything remotely partisan in any of the tweets that were deleted?