• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

#OccupyWallstreet

Page 132 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Icepick said:
The righties are representing tonight. These are only a few of the quality posts from the last few minutes.






Swearing is seen as a sign of desperation and weakness. Still winning.
Click to expand...

Way to sidestep the content of the post; swearing in this case was my exasperation at the lack of cognitive processes on your end.

That bill was introduced by a Republican in March of this year - the notion that it's connected to OWS in any way is, as i said, "fucking retarded".
 
Last edited:
Icepick said:
The righties are representing tonight. These are only a few of the quality posts from the last few minutes.

Swearing is seen as a sign of desperation and weakness. Still winning.
Click to expand...

Only a narrow-minded fool would think anyone who does not support OWS is a conservative.
 
Londo_Jowo said:
The Blaze site cited the NY Times article, it's not my fault if your/other forum member's hatred blinds you/them from reading and seeing that it was actually coming from a "credible source".
Click to expand...

Then quote the original source, not the crazy person source. Websites like that frequently use selective quotation, etc, so they simply can't be trusted.
 
Icepick said:
The righties are representing tonight. These are only a few of the quality posts from the last few minutes.






Swearing is seen as a sign of desperation and weakness. Still winning.
Click to expand...

If you would read instead of herp de derping you'd see that the HuffPo article is currently dated, but the bill it's referencing is far from "news."
 
Nebor said:
Wow, that idiot got fucked up. It seemed unrelated to Occupy Philadelphia, he just seemed like an impaired moron that started a losing fight and then wouldn't let it go. Always entertaining to see the police roll up to a beating and help out though. 😀
Click to expand...

The guy was drunk. And you're right- it's unrelated.
 
Jhhnn said:
Back to your usual mindless derision, I see. That number... lemme guess... you pulled it out of your ass, right?
Click to expand...

I live and work in NYC. I pass those idiots all the time. It's a mix of homeless/crazy people and middle to upper class white kids who think life isn't fair because a degree in English Lit isn't worth the sheepskin it's printed on.

PS: I'm paying the bill so they can have their useless protest so I get to mock them.
 
dwell said:
I live and work in NYC. I pass those idiots all the time. It's a mix of homeless/crazy people and middle to upper class white kids who think life isn't fair because a degree in English Lit isn't worth the sheepskin it's printed on.

PS: I'm paying the bill so they can have their useless protest so I get to mock them.
Click to expand...

Those poor vegetarian hipsters would probably be traumatized if they got actual sheepskin diplomas.
 
dwell said:
I live and work in NYC. I pass those idiots all the time. It's a mix of homeless/crazy people and middle to upper class white kids who think life isn't fair because a degree in English Lit isn't worth the sheepskin it's printed on.

PS: I'm paying the bill so they can have their useless protest so I get to mock them.
Click to expand...

I live and work in NYC, I've been down there a whole bunch of times. Your posts are definitely mindless derision, and you aren't paying any bill for them to have their protest. The police presence there is purely elective on the city's part and it was wildly disproportionate.
 
eskimospy said:
I live and work in NYC, I've been down there a whole bunch of times. Your posts are definitely mindless derision, and you aren't paying any bill for them to have their protest. The police presence there is purely elective on the city's part and it was wildly disproportionate.
Click to expand...

"Elective," or not, his tax dollars are paying for both the elevated police presence AND the cleanup. Those are facts. You can't argue them.

But, honestly, it wasn't fucking "elective." That's just ridiculous...
 
Nebor said:
You didn't really address his point, which is that OWS, as it exists, will not accomplish anything because they're trying to accomplish everything through means that everyone agrees with.
Click to expand...

They are not necessarily the actuators. They are more the catalyst.

If there is an environment for acceptance of change, it is time for leaders to come forth and push for issues that people would support WITHOUT BEING TOLD UP FRONT WHAT THEY ARE.

This sounds a LOT like gift shopping.

The OWS is like my wife. I need to know what they want without them giving me a shopping list even though I would like it because it would make my life much easier.

The OWS wants the politician to be on the same wavelength without having to tell them what wavelength it is.....


my 2¢
 
Londo_Jowo said:
Unless the linked source comes from NPR, Huffington Post, or the New York Times liberals in this forum piss their pants and squeal like little babies.
Click to expand...

Not really. There are other sources. When in doubt I click on the link, look at the titles of the other stories, and the comments on the article.

If I see a bunch of hate and vitriol, 9 out of 10 it is a podium-thumper site that focuses on its audience and the emotions it wants to hear, NOT the facts.

If the story has a good rep, you can probably get it everywhere.

I guess the only tip for proper CoC on these is that if you KNOW you are getting it from a biased site, SAY SO! Admit it with something like "Hey, I know Beck is really biased on this, but he brings up a point about X that I think is pertinent" rather than posting it as if the entire article was God's word....
 
Londo_Jowo said:
The Blaze site cited the NY Times article, it's not my fault if your/other forum member's hatred blinds you/them from reading and seeing that it was actually coming from a "credible source".
Click to expand...

Point #2.

Don't make us do the work for you.

If you find it so easy to find the link, why didn't you post it in the first place?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top