• 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.

TIME person of the year 2010....

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
 
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.
 
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
 
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.
 
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!
 
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
 
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:
 
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.
 
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.
 
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.
 
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.
 
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.
 
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​
 
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

Back
Top