Well, has it?
About not calling "police officers" pigs - Has the rabble.ca editorial staff released its reasoning yet?
Sun, 2010-08-08 13:36
#1
About not calling "police officers" pigs - Has the rabble.ca editorial staff released its reasoning yet?
Sun, 2010-08-08 14:25
#2
You must either give up your heresy against the holy babble inquisition or suffer the rack, which is not nearly as torturous as THE PILLOWS!
Mon, 2010-08-09 07:45
#3
No.
Mon, 2010-08-09 09:14
#4
Given that Maysie is scampering about on the west coast for a couple of weeks, and others involved are somewhat dispersed for the summer, I'm not sure when it will happen. I would like to be part of the discussion myself as my feelings coincide with Maysie and Catchfire. I would definitely like it to happen sooner rather than later but it's kind of out of mine and the other mods control.
Mon, 2010-08-09 09:19
#5
Are we there yet?
Mon, 2010-08-09 09:29
#6
Are we there yet?
Goddam, jr -- great minds and all. You just beat me to it.
Mon, 2010-08-09 09:38
#7
You kids should have gone before you left the house.
Mon, 2010-08-09 10:48
#8
Catchfire
I can't stress enough how seriously all the mods are taking this issue, and Kim the publisher takes our concerns very seriously. Even our scheduled monthly staff meeting was cancelled this month, so to get everyone on the editorial board together in the midst of much-deserved vacations, is difficult to say the least.
It would be nice, in the spirit of knowing who your allies are, if that reality was recognized and respected.
Mon, 2010-08-09 12:10
#9
The mods position on this is and has been clear. The flack and protest in my case is aimed at those who made the unprincipled decision. I can't speak for others.
Mon, 2010-08-09 13:06
#10
This headline popped up on babble's news feed today:
Pig on highway squeaks by police
Ontario Provincial Police were on the prowl for a pig seen running on Highway 401 near St. Thomas around breakfast time Monday.
Michelle once said that these news items are randomly generated, but I have my doubts. There seems to be a conspiracy at work here.
Mon, 2010-08-09 13:21
#11
Catchfire
Then of course comes the condescending accusation of; 'please be patient with us white settlers we have other MORE IMPORTANT things to do, like "take a vacation on your land.....that you are waiting to have access to'.
Are you suggesting that the entire rabble staff cancel their vacations that they've had scheduled for months in order to deal with a complaint about editorial policy? This is a pro-labour site as well, by the way. I think that you are invoking land rather cursorily here as well, remind. Canadians live, all the time, on FN land. What does vacationing have to do with anything? Seriously, what do you want the mods to do here? We've given our position very clearly, which includes being unhappy about the time frame. Some of the posts in these threads are bordering on harassment. This is our place of work, you know. How do you expect us to be on side with you, to defend your points against those who disagree with you, when I come on here and see this kind of post? It's offensive. I'm to the point where I don't want to explain anything anymore--why should I, if it only invites more hurtful and wayward accusations?
Mon, 2010-08-09 14:17
#12
remind
Are we there yet?
Personally, I find this mocking and ridicule very offensive. The extent that it further marginalizes and alienates is beyond my comprehension of any type of a progressive action.
Given that the person in question, who is asking, already belongs to a marginalized and ridiculed demographic makes it even more reprehensible, IMV.
That at first he was told a 1 week time frame, and then has had the deadline repeatedly extended, smacks of a micro version, of what white Canadian settlers have done to the Aboriginals, who actually have the rights to the geography called Canada. In fact, it is a stark reminder, to me, of our continued abhorant behaviour towards them, while thinking nothing of it, and indeed it is played out even down to the point of our blaming and mocking them for making an issue of our making them wait for what is their rights and entitlements. In this case information that he was promised.
Then of course comes the condescending accusation of; 'if you want to consider yourself an ally with us, please be patient with us white settlers, and consider the reality that we have other MORE IMPORTANT things to do with our lives, like; "take a much deserved vacation on your land.....that you are waiting to have access to'.
unfuckingbelievable...really.
Mon, 2010-08-09 16:49
#13
personally, i don't see why the mods need to "police" the language used on the site. in the spirit of freedom of speech etc. why not just let fellow babblers take the reins for letting people know when they use offensive language. it seems to work that way anyways.
what's the harm? someone sees it and has to deal with it/confront the person? i'm not sure why this is even an issue,
Mon, 2010-08-09 17:15
#14
I lean in that direction, but it's problematic. On the less moderation, let things settle themselves end, even if there was no moderation at all and no banning our own culture and style would evolve and I bet it wouldn't look a whole lot different that what we see now. I mean, all the moderators have always been babblers first.
But it would be painfull to arrive at that point. Before a civil equilibrium was reached, there'd be many a hard feeling, I'm sure.
And, babble has always tried hard to be a kind of place where people who may feel reluctant to express themselves, for whatever reason, can find this a place to express themselves. That's even more difficult to do without rules and moderators.
I'd rather have the rules and moderators than toss that objective aside.
Mon, 2010-08-09 17:46
#15
And, babble has always tried hard to be a kind of place where people who may feel reluctant to express themselves, for whatever reason, can find this a place to express themselves. That's even more difficult to do without rules and moderators.
When I joined I was needled mercilessly by a certain babbler who I've since come to loath. I've seen lesser people actually quit due to his/her behaviour. The mods were absolutely of no help initially.
Mon, 2010-08-09 17:52
#16
Yeah, rules that make sense. This one doesn't however, at least not accompanied by the rationale put forth thus far. But lets demonstrate a little patience in the meantime given the vacation season and all. Our calls are important to the Rabble management I'm sure.
Mon, 2010-08-09 17:56
#17
Some of the posts in these threads are bordering on harassment. This is our place of work, you know. How do you expect us to be on side with you, to defend your points against those who disagree with you, when I come on here and see this kind of post? It's offensive. I'm to the point where I don't want to explain anything anymore--why should I, if it only invites more hurtful and wayward accusations?
It's unclear to me why you tolerate this behaviour. If someone doesn't like rabble's editorial decision, they should write to them. They can even post their missives here if they like. They can condemn them, scorn them, as they please. If they really find it intolerable, they can leave. They have lots of options.
There may be some deep meaning for progressive folks in this pig and pit bull dispute. I admit that I can't see it. I guess that puts me on the side of the oppressors. I'll just have to live with that.
As for harassment - please put a stop to it.
Mon, 2010-08-09 18:01
#18
When I joined I was needled mercilessly by a certain babbler who I've since come to loath.
I've learned over time to replace 'loath' with mild amusement.
Mon, 2010-08-09 18:12
#19
There may be some deep meaning for progressive folks in this pig and pit bull dispute. I admit that I can't see it. I guess that puts me on the side of the oppressors. I'll just have to live with that.
I'm guessing that it all depends on ones perspective, but I wouldn't go as far as to say you're with the oppressors in this regard. If you are up for taking anything at all from the debate in progress though, perhaps it would be enough to consider withholding ridicule from what others may perceive as important.
Mon, 2010-08-09 18:18
#20
hmm. sloppy editing resulting in double post.
Mon, 2010-08-09 18:19
#21
When I joined I was needled mercilessly by a certain babbler who I've since come to loath. I've seen lesser people actually quit due to his/her behaviour. The mods were absolutely of no help initially.
And, if we clamped down on that kind of needling, which was probably artfully done so as to stay within the rules, or maybe put a toe over them, then that person and others would adust their style to find a new way to needle.
What I try to do all the time-- I say try, because I still haven't quite mastered it yet-- is to separate my ego from my ideas. Just because I might be wrong on this subject or that, doesn't mean I am wrong as a human being, or there is some deep irrepairable flaw in my character. And, the odd time I am right, doesn't give me cause to think I am superman.
Well, not for too long, at least.
Take for example, E. Tamaran, the subject at hand. We dissagree. One day, I hope we will agree-- and I think one day we will. But it's just a dissagreement over the use of a word. But, I cannot, even if I tried, summon up any anamosity over it.
Mon, 2010-08-09 18:19
#22
Summoning up some formatting would be swell in its own right though TP. 
Mon, 2010-08-09 18:20
#23
Yeah, I must have hit the quote thingy instead of the edit thingy.
Mon, 2010-08-09 20:20
#24
I am still completely unclear how the hell police are even remotely considered allies of the left. PLEASE!! We all know this not to be true. While they stick their jackboots on the necks of the population aka our real labour allies, we debate whether these idiots in charge are allowed to be called what they are most of the time?
Ridicules.
BTW, just a sentence to add - a girlfriend of mine was drugged and gang raped by TWO police officers. She was 24 at the time. Friends of labour my ass.
Fuck the police.
Mon, 2010-08-09 22:10
#25
Membership in a marginalized group should not be licence to display childish lack of patience. To assert otherwise is to claim that such members have no agency on their own behalf.
The equating of the ability of one staffer to quickly repair a a simple blunder with the ability of the entire staff to meet to iron out a contentious policy is one of the least intelligent comparisons ever to appear on Babble.
Mon, 2010-08-09 22:38
#26
remind
Are you suggesting that the entire rabble staff cancel their vacations that they've had scheduled for months in order to deal with a complaint about editorial policy?
Nope, if I believed such a thing I would have stated so.
I am, however, observing that NO time frame should have been given, let alone several shifting ones, as apparently times/dates were suggested from somewhere, in some discussion(s) amongst some staff, even before people went on holidays. And I am suggesting that the meeting, where the decision for the hyprocritical halfway measure was made, should have contained a larger measure of thought, given the mandate of this publication and the position of the moderators.
And I am also considering that, supposedly all the office staff is on holiday, but yet the issue with the First Air photo was resolved almost immediately, so why could this not be decided in a more timely manner too?
...this kinda indicates, to me, perhaps in error, that a dance is going on behind the scenes, and no, I do not mean with/by the mods,
This is a pro-labour site as well, by the way.
...and this re-enforces my perception that something is going on behind the scenes, and that certain people are expecting babblers to "appreciate" the difficult position in balancing the wishes of rabble's sustaining partners, and the publication's expressed anti-oppression mandate.
If that is what is expected of us, then tell us straight out, and let us decide on our own choice options. As opposed to our being, perhaps, treated like mushrooms.
I think that you are invoking land rather cursorily here as well, remind.
Yes, you are correct, I used a lacing of angry rhetoric, which I, at first, felt justified in, given the nature and intonation of what I was spotlighting as having occured. As...playing a guilt trip card was unacceptable, as was the ridicule and mocking of others, and moderators acceptance of it.
But...as you are correct about the rhetoric, I now see that 2 wrongs do not make a correct, or pleasant, atmosphere, and I should have toned back my chagrin a bit, and took the high road.
What does vacationing have to do with anything?
Exactly my point, we could have done without the "much deserved" vacation spiel, along with the guilting present in your "the spirit of knowing who your allies are, if that reality was recognized and respected."
As IMV, that is pretty damn condescending, when all that was required was something like; "nope, no one is back yet, and 'I can't stress enough how seriously all the mods are taking this issue', so I guarantee we are not just trying to ignore this until it goes away".
Seriously, what do you want the mods to do here? We've given our position very clearly, which includes being unhappy about the time frame.
Sensitivity and respect I think would be appropriate, given your principled postions have been stated. But because your response and ignoring of the mocking ridicule that occured, both were slightly lacking, and this perceived lack, is indeed based upon your stated position that you are taking this situation seriously.
Some of the posts in these threads are bordering on harassment.
This is why I, long ago now, suggested the moderators not use their babbler names whilst moderating and not try to present themselves as equals when they are.
Then things, such as my breakdown of oppressive actions and language-that people may not consciously be aware of-might not be taken personally, and can be taken as part of the anti-oppression critique in which they are given.
This is our place of work, you know.
Exactly my point, we are not in equal positions as "babblers", as you are in a position of power over us, at all times, even though you ask for us to think of you as equal allies.
That you do expect us to perceive you as equals, when you are not, means that the burden is on yourselves, to conduct yourselves from a more sensitive position, as your words have more weight than ours do.
So, perhaps stop trying to walk the fence and just have a moderating team moniker when working and use your own identity when not? As I really think it would help resolve the taking of things personally issue.
How do you expect us to be on side with you, to defend your points against those who disagree with you
Really interesting juxtapositioning on your part here, given you are now setting "us" apart from yourselves on matters of social justice and equality, thus making it appear like our position is markedly different from yours, or something.
So really, you are now infering that we need to get you on "our side", thus stating this apparent inequality you perceive, in conjunction with a notion that we are equal allies, is incongruent, at best.
when I come on here and see this kind of post? It's offensive.
Was not trying to offend you, was just indicating how you and others offended on a very real level.
In fact, I find such a position very patriarchial in response tone, instead of acknowleging that your words offended, because they lacked sensitivity, you are blaming another for offending you, because they indicated the offense they experienced when they saw/read your and other's kinda posts.
Would you have preferred that I wrote you a private letter about it? Because really, I was not trying to offend or defame you, I was indicating only what a lack of sensitivity and offense occured.
I'm to the point where I don't want to explain anything anymore--why should I, if it only invites more hurtful and wayward accusations?
Hmmm..troubling internalization, given the nature of this site and job position, though on the bright side perhaps it will give you some empathy into what people, who are not privileged white males, feel and experience every day of their lives, even here.
How often are feminists expected to explain, or Aboriginals, or the differently abled, here?
So, in all honesty, I empathize with you catchfire, on how difficult it is to have to explain, and re-explain, things, all the time.
Again, I was not meaning to offend, or harass you, and I have not even posted about this matter, except for indicating the hypocrisy present in allowing "pit bull" to stand, so as I said before, if you prefer, I will write you and the publisher, a private letter in the future, about such types of things occuring on your part, as opposed to dissecting publically, hoping more will understand the unconscious oppressive nuances that occur.
Mon, 2010-08-09 22:49
#27
remind
jrootham, apparently your ability to judge intelligence is impaired, which is not in the least surprising to me, given your oppressive and ridiculing comments above, and those that have now followed.
And I will now exit this thread, as I will not tolerate oppressive labels and slurs such as childish and unintelligent being bandied about, about other babblers and myself.
Mon, 2010-08-09 23:22
#28
What evidence do you have to offer that my ability to judge intelligence is impaired?
Tue, 2010-08-10 01:09
#29
Cueball
How about ridiculing someone as being childish when they were told they would get an answer to a question within a week, and then given various excuses over a seven weeks period for why the answer has not be given. Perhaps you would like to articulate what precisely in the title of this thread, or the OP qualifies as "childish impatience".
Perhaps you were just brown nosing.
How about baiting?
How about personal attacks?
How about doing both these things, when you have repeatedly attacked others for doing them?
How about being a hypocrite?
Tue, 2010-08-10 01:10
#30
Cueball
Heh. DP.
Tue, 2010-08-10 01:51
#31
The situation got clearly explained. Everybody has to get back from holidays so that they can all take part in the discussion. It's going to take weeks.
Given that situation going when? sounds a lot like children riding in a car.
Just because I am not a holier than thou leftist and not a mod I get to be the safe attack point.
You don't want to be called a child? Don't act like one.
Tue, 2010-08-10 02:05
#32
Sorry, you don't get me to fuck off. For that epithet to be effective I would have to have some reason to care what you think.
Frankly, your thinking that the OP is reasonable leads me to question your ability to read.
Tue, 2010-08-10 02:07
#33
Cueball
Heh. What a moron. I only intervened on behalf of another poster who you baited and personally attacked as a child. Then you attack Remind, and called her stupid for pointing out that you were baiting and personally attacking another poster. You should grow up. There is nothing in the OP that is at all untoward or impatient. This decent into your typically snide and completely irrelevant baiting and personal attacks begins with you, and you alone.
It would have been perfectly fine if you could have left well enough alone, and let the mods deal with the question in the OP that is entirely reasonable, and not at all insulting, or derogatory. But you are so stupid you can't just let it lie and just had to make your ridiculous quip that was completely irrelevant, not useful and not on topic. E Tamaran was merely reiterating his interest in this issue now that the other thread on this topic is closed.
You can fuck off now.
Thanks.
Tue, 2010-08-10 02:23
#34
Cueball
Ok. Please "evidence" (as you put it) what is not reasonable, or what is insulting or that is impatient about the OP?
Title:
About not calling "police officers" pigs - Has the rabble.ca editorial staff released its reasoning yet?
Content:
Well, has it?
People routinely start new threads when the starting thread is closed. How does that indicate impatience?
And regardless, what does any of that have to do with your baiting and personal attacks. Oh shithead that is always demanding that other people be "polite" but who can't contain himself from personal attacks and baiting? OG made his statement, E Tamaran hasn't even responded, but nonetheless you just couldn't help yourself, could you?
Tue, 2010-08-10 02:24
#35
This is the only the only thread that I am aware of which concerns the response of the moderators to a particular issue where they have previously explained that there would be a delay and given the reasons for the delay. To ask "when?" during a time when the answer is known to be "not now" is a childish response.
As far as baiting and personal attacks go, note that I am posting all this under my real name.
I am pissed at the behaviour of some babblers, E. Tamaran and Remind, to be specific.
I have expressed that pissedness, I have every intention of continuing to express that pissedness, at least I have no intentions of capitulating to your interventions on this matter.
Tue, 2010-08-10 03:08
#36
Cueball
As far as baiting and personal attacks go, note that I am posting all this under my real name.
I am pissed at the behaviour of some babblers, E. Tamaran and Remind, to be specific.
I have expressed that pissedness, I have every intention of continuing to express that pissedness, at least I have no intentions of capitulating to your interventions on this matter.
One of the great advantages about being a threat to no one, and not being in anyway out of step with the values of mainstream society is that you get to post under your real name, and no one is going to harass you, or follow you around, or fire you for what you have said, or otherwise take issue with your innocuous self, especially if you are white, I should add. You reek of self-satisfied privilege. If you want to brag about that, be my guest. As for capitulation, you capitulated a long time ago as far as I can tell.
Notice: None of the sitting mods post under their real names.
As for the topic at hand, all I can say is that it is perfectly normal for persons to begin a new thread when the previous thread is closed. Your pissedness at other persons on this board does not give you the right to bait and personally attack them simply for opening a new thread on an ongoing discussion on this board, in particular when there is absolutely nothing untoward about the opening post, in any way shape or form.
It is a succinct title, amended with a simple question. The previous topic was closed. Here is the new thread: End of story.
Your pissedness is entirely your problem.
Tue, 2010-08-10 03:19
#37
I just read Jaron Lanier's "You Are Not A Gadget". He points out that one (of several) things that reduce the human connection in the current internet design is the use of anonymity and pseudonimity. It is unfortunate that Babble contributes to that.
We differ on what constitutes a threat to the existing order.
I am not going to explain myself yet again.
Tue, 2010-08-10 04:09
#38
Cueball
Wrong thread.
Tue, 2010-08-10 05:14
#39
Cueball
Explain what? As far as I can tell you have no position to explain on anything, only criticism of others behaviour that you dole out in a rude and snide manner.
As for people being fired for what they say on the internet, or being harrassed for it, or having to drop out of their candidacy from public office because some lame brained friend posts a mildly rude picture on their facebook account that is the real world. What is not the real world. is some pseudo-intellectual culture studies gib-gab about "pseudonimity" that has no relevance to anything.
Feel free to regurgitate that bullshit all you want, and feel safe and snug in bed at night knowing that no one is going to be bothered by it in the slightest.
Tue, 2010-08-10 06:07
#40
Ahh, the free exchange of expression and opinion into the wee hours, savoured over a steaming mug come morning. God but I love this place.
Tue, 2010-08-10 08:20
#41
Oh for Christ sake you two cut it out! Like seriously, just stop.
FTR I have no great problem with the title or the OP. I am at least somewhat aware that the opening poster is a tenacious individual, and maybe not the most patient person in the room. These are qualities I do not have a great problem with. Probably because I actually am the most patient person in the room. (right up to the instant that I'm not, I should add)
Tue, 2010-08-10 08:34
#42
I can hardly wait until oldgoat and catchfire awaken this morning.
I sure hope no one objects to moderators sleeping.
Tue, 2010-08-10 17:10
#43
Cueball
What about calling Jrootham on his overt trolling, baiting and personal insults? Clearly the record shows that he instigated and then continued attacks on people on a very personal level, calling Remind stupid, for reacting to his insult of what you agree is a pretty innocent thread, and OP. "You two" really does no justice to the license that Jrootham is being given to bait, mock and personally abuse people.
He picked this fight. So much is clear. Anything I said was entirely deserved in the light of the non-moderation of his snide and derogatory commentary.
Tue, 2010-08-10 17:28
#44
Srsly, Cue, I thought that jr's first comment was funny, in a North American pop culture kind of way, one of those lines many of us know from the distant past -- well, obviously I did, because I seconded it and would have written it if jr hadn't. People read one another differently online, I guess -- you pick up on some vibes; I pick up on others. Picky picky, eh?
Would you be going after me the way you are after jr if I'd typed that very same joke first?
Tue, 2010-08-10 17:34
#45
Frustrated Mess
I just read Jaron Lanier's "You Are Not A Gadget". He points out that one (of several) things that reduce the human connection in the current internet design is the use of anonymity and pseudonimity. It is unfortunate that Babble contributes to that.
We differ on what constitutes a threat to the existing order.
I am not going to explain myself yet again.
And then he complains that Facebook, with your image and name attached, lacks the proper form to be human in nature. Blah, blah, blah. Reading his diatribes I can only conclude the real problem with these technologies is that 1) they're not developed and owned by Microsoft; and 2) they contribute to a sharing of art and content to which there is a lack of proprietary ownership whereby some faceless corporation, like MS, can rake in the billions.
I heard him on a radio interview explain how facebook lacked in developing human relationships and the interviewer contradicted him saying her experience was positive and facebook has helped her to rekindle and develop new social relationships and then he began his backtracking. And it seems everyone, absolutle everyone, involved in Web 2.0 technology development and delivery is ideologically motivated so thank God we have his pure, unideologically tainted soul, to warn and save us. Barf.
Tue, 2010-08-10 17:44
#46
Cueball
ok.
Tue, 2010-08-10 17:59
#47
Cueball
Srsly, Cue, I thought that jr's first comment was funny, in a North American pop culture kind of way, one of those lines many of us know from the distant past -- well, obviously I did, because I seconded it and would have written it if jr hadn't. People read one another differently online, I guess -- you pick up on some vibes; I pick up on others. Picky picky, eh?
Would you be going after me the way you are after jr if I'd typed that very same joke first?
I'm guessing that it all depends on ones perspective, but I wouldn't go as far as to say you're with the oppressors in this regard. If you are up for taking anything at all from the debate in progress though, perhaps it would be enough to consider withholding ridicule from what others may perceive as important.
Indeed, I am astonished at how far the board, this site and its members have gone in trying to repress one of the sole FN voices left on this board to save the police from insult. Indeed it is mostly astonishing in the light of how truly irrelevant and petty this whole debate is. It's irrelevance and pettiness is precisely why it has become so important.
If the board can not even tollerate this minor abrassion to the reputation of authority, what really can be expected of the board, and the web site when the chips are down? That is why the issue, which is apparently so petty, is in reality a big deal.
Calling the "police" pigs? The real response of a sane editorial policy should have been: "So what?"
Tue, 2010-08-10 18:09
#48
And those who have to keep making the same point over and over again (mansplainin') wonder why there are so few women on babble.
See?
Tue, 2010-08-10 18:31
#49
Cueball
Is that is what is going on? Or is it that a whole series of really bogus explanations have been forwarded in defense of this decision such as that calling the Police "Pigs" is opressive language and anti-labour -- which even Sven can see is really just retroactive justification for an action of adminstrative fiat, which was done without forethought or relation to any kind of policy.
This fudgification did absolutely nothing to enhance the sense that the decision was being handled in an up front manner, rather the opposite. It looked like people were covering their ideological ass, and cloaking it in "progressive" language. This was compounded by repeated offers to put forward a principled position, first within a week (starting on July 16th), and then within another two week from that date, and then various explanations were forwarded to explain why none of these timelines were adhered to.
We are now edging in on 2 months, since the first offer to resolve the issue in a "week" was proposed.
None of that gives any sense that the issues is being dealt with in an honest and forthright manner, and even if it is not the case, one could easily see how one might think that the decision and the explanation of the that decision are being delayed, in the hope that the issue will just "go away".
I don't actually believe that to be the case, but under the circumstances, it is completely understandable why some people might think the issue is not being dealt with in an honest manner, especially in the light of the fact that the original explanations for the policy were so overtly a total crock of shit.
And again, there is nothing impatient or untoward in E. Tamaran opening a new thread on the same topic, when the previous thread is closed. How does opening a new thread amount to "mansplaining", "harrassment" or "impatience", particularly in the light of how patently innocent the opening post and thread title are?
It is perfectly normal for people to re-open subject topics of interest to them. It is those who decided to mock this perfectly innocent act who are jumping the gun and harrassing people, really.
Tue, 2010-08-10 19:28
#50
this has become the lamest thread i've read yet. I've seen enough outright hypocrisy on here in the last few dozen posts it makes me sick. a post about a slack response by the mods has become a "no, YOU'RE stupid!" insult-fest amongst babblers.
while i disagree with the the mods decision to ban the word "pig", i can't believe this has become such a fiercely contested issue on here when there are so many other things more deserving of our time and effort. Just call them cops, the fuzz, heat, smokey, or some other term if you have to for the next little while until we can get the mods in on a discussion about the use of the term "pig" when they get back from vacation or wherever they are, i just think it's odd we're spending time angry because we can't use a particular insult on a lousy internet forum. aren't we better than that?
Tue, 2010-08-10 19:38
#51
It doesn't have anything to do with that milo, not for me anyways. It has to do with the fact that we are even debating whether or not the police are "friends of labour" and therefore shouldn't be branded as "pigs". Until you have been on the receiving end of police brutality then you may never understand how angry one can get when a progressive board decides it must safe guard the feelings of the police over and above the anger we feel towards them.
At least that is what I am pissed about. I'm not mad at oldgaot, or catchfire or maysie. Just the fact that this is even an issue pisses me off.