TIME person of the year 2010....

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
S

ShawnD1

Lifer
May 24, 2003
15,987
2
81
Fair enough. He actually did something that did something to somebody. Julian Assange would be a great choice too; he sure stirred the pot.

1101430104_400.jpg
 
GodisanAtheist

GodisanAtheist

Diamond Member
Nov 16, 2006
7,879
8,963
136
Let's all misinterpret man on the year for super nice guys of the year. It'll be a far more entertaining topic.

Movers and shakers don't always have to be the care bears.
 
sunzt

sunzt

Diamond Member
Nov 27, 2003
3,076
3
81
ConstipatedVigilante,

The person of the the year doesn't have to be a "good" person. I thought Bin laden shoulda been the POTY in '01, but they copped out and chose Guliani
 
S

ShawnD1

Lifer
May 24, 2003
15,987
2
81
sunzt said:
ConstipatedVigilante,

The person of the the year doesn't have to be a "good" person. I thought Bin laden shoulda been the POTY in '01, but they copped out and chose Guliani
Click to expand...

I think the idea is that they want to discourage people from stirring shit up just to get attention. Guys like Hitler and Stalin were already world leaders and they already were known globally, so making them man of the year doesn't make them any more famous. If you got on the cover of Time for doing something like shooting John Lenin, then all that does is encourage more people to shoot famous people.
 
J

Jiggz

Diamond Member
Mar 10, 2001
4,329
0
76
ShawnD1 said:
I think the idea is that they want to discourage people from stirring shit up just to get attention. Guys like Hitler and Stalin were already world leaders and they already were known globally, so making them man of the year doesn't make them any more famous. If you got on the cover of Time for doing something like shooting John Lenin, then all that does is encourage more people to shoot famous people.
Click to expand...

Exactly! That's why this year's POTY should encourage all college and high school kids to steal their classmates' or partners' ideas to go main stream!
 
Phokus

Phokus

Lifer
Nov 20, 1999
22,994
779
126
ShawnD1 said:
I think the idea is that they want to discourage people from stirring shit up just to get attention. Guys like Hitler and Stalin were already world leaders and they already were known globally, so making them man of the year doesn't make them any more famous. If you got on the cover of Time for doing something like shooting John Lenin, then all that does is encourage more people to shoot famous people.
Click to expand...

Yes, i'm sure Osama Bin Laden was just totally deflated when he didn't make Time's Person of the Year
 
S

ShawnD1

Lifer
May 24, 2003
15,987
2
81
Brigandier said:
I can imagine Osama after 9/11, "I work my entire life to attack America and finally I succeed and most people think the US Govt. did it? This is bullshit. I quit, I'm going home."
Click to expand...
And putting Guiliani the politician on the front page makes it look like the government did it! :awe:


Exactly! That's why this year's POTY should encourage all college and high school kids to steal their classmates' or partners' ideas to go main stream!
Click to expand...
The kid's living the american dream :flag:
 
N

Narmer

Diamond Member
Aug 27, 2006
5,292
0
0
Jiggz said:
Exactly! That's why this year's POTY should encourage all college and high school kids to steal their classmates' or partners' ideas to go main stream!
Click to expand...

Whether or not he stole the idea doesn't matter considering there were countless other social media sites out there. He built it into what it is today. I actually respect him for that.

DISCLAIMER: I do not have a Facebook account.
 
J

Jiggz

Diamond Member
Mar 10, 2001
4,329
0
76
Narmer said:
Whether or not he stole the idea doesn't matter considering there were countless other social media sites out there. He built it into what it is today. I actually respect him for that.

DISCLAIMER: I do not have a Facebook account.
Click to expand...

So the end justify the means? I guess ethics just got thrown out of the window.
 
C

Craig234

Lifer
May 1, 2006
38,548
350
126
ShawnD1 said:
I think the idea is that they want to discourage people from stirring shit up just to get attention. Guys like Hitler and Stalin were already world leaders and they already were known globally, so making them man of the year doesn't make them any more famous. If you got on the cover of Time for doing something like shooting John Lenin, then all that does is encourage more people to shoot famous people.
Click to expand...

I don't think so. No one considered for "Man of the Year" IMO does something like 9/11 to get the Time recognition.

I generally support the 'Man of the Year' choices, including the 'general' ones, but agree Giuliani is a joke of a choice and bin Laden was a clear choice.

But the nation didn't seem quite ready then to hear the story of 9/11, how it was designed to get the US to respond with war, to increase western-Muslim hostility.
 
C

Craig234

Lifer
May 1, 2006
38,548
350
126
Narmer said:
Whether or not he stole the idea doesn't matter considering there were countless other social media sites out there. He built it into what it is today. I actually respect him for that.

DISCLAIMER: I do not have a Facebook account.
Click to expand...

No surprise, coming from you - a combination of bad ethics and ignorance.

The story is, the key people felt - and IIRC he has admitted this - was that being first was the main thing.

And he *sabotaged* the project he agreed to help on - again IIRC he admitted this.

He has a good story now, that these were very different types of sites - but then why did he need to sabotage the other one to try to get his out first?

So, typically, you minimize and excuse wrongdoing - for bad ethics/ignorance. But, in the definition of the award, his being a sleaze doesn't preclude the recognition.
 
N

Narmer

Diamond Member
Aug 27, 2006
5,292
0
0
Jiggz said:
So the end justify the means? I guess ethics just got thrown out of the window.
Click to expand...

Craig234 said:
No surprise, coming from you - a combination of bad ethics and ignorance.

The story is, the key people felt - and IIRC he has admitted this - was that being first was the main thing.

And he *sabotaged* the project he agreed to help on - again IIRC he admitted this.

He has a good story now, that these were very different types of sites - but then why did he need to sabotage the other one to try to get his out first?

So, typically, you minimize and excuse wrongdoing - for bad ethics/ignorance. But, in the definition of the award, his being a sleaze doesn't preclude the recognition.
Click to expand...
So he screwed over some idiots, so what? Their's was small-fry and only catered to one school. He made it what it is today. They got their settlement, end of story. If the screwed party wants to create a new social networking site, they're more than welcome to.

I don't see what the big deal is.
 
SandEagle

SandEagle

Lifer
Aug 4, 2007
16,809
13
0
Clearly Erdogan should have won. He had a huge lead in TIME's online poll, up to the final ratings. But what does a poll matter if the editors have a disclaimer that they can choose whoever they want? suck balls POTY.

http://www.time.com/time/specials/packages/completelist/0,29569,2028734,00.html

"Take a look at this year's candidates (listed in alphabetical order) and, now that voting has closed, view the final ratings — though TIME's editors who choose the actual Person of the Year reserve the right to disagree"

Read more: http://www.time.com/time/specials/packages/completelist/0,29569,2028734,00.html#ixzz18EEHzYLw​
 
R

rchiu

Diamond Member
Jun 8, 2002
3,846
0
0
Heh, Time is there to sell magazine. The worse choice they pick the more talk they generate and that's good for sales.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom