I didn't miss your point about toxicity. I ignored it. I ignored it because just before you posted that to me you spent some time discussing how much of an asshole I am with another commenter who clearly has some kind if grudge against me. How this site would be better if people like me just logged off and didn't come back. How if you ever find yourself on the same side of an issue as me, you need to rethink your life choices.
Block me. Ignore me. Confront me. But I don't appreciate people talking shit about me instead of talking to me. That doesn't come across as being concerned with toxicity.
Sorry for my late response. Firstly, I think I did flag him on that thread, but what reason I used, I do not remember.Because of the Disqusitng commenting, I cannot easily go look at my list of all my comments (which all can see) and find exactly where we had the exchange in question
The best I can tell you is that there was a story that either mentioned Elon Musk or was about him. In any case, a woman had made a negative comment about Elon Musk and James lit into her claiming her to be part of a group of Musk haters.As a result, I responded to him about his nasty comment but also agreed with her about Musk.
At that point he accused me of being part of this cabal or whatever he thinks it is, and that I must do this all the time. When I pointed out that it literally was the first time I had ever commented on Musk anywhere (true), he kept pushing his Trump-like madness - I may have even compared him to TFG in that regard.Eventually I gave up.
If you were to look on Wonkette, you will see where others have mentioned this Musk nonsense from him. Some will mention him by mane, and some will be just random asides.Like on stories about conspriacy theories in which Musk is not mentioned at all, occaisionally someone will toss out a random"Don't say anything about Elon Musk"and those of us in the know know exactly who is being referenced there, and it ain't Musk.
I rarely comment on his comments any more, and while I realise I could block him, I never block anyone, except real trolls, as I at least like to see the nonsense that is being said by others.
Thanks to you Dok, for all the great work you do and for the stories you give us.
Please go back and re-read that conversation. If you do, I think you will find that I was NOT the one who said "if I ever find myself on the same side of an issue as [you], I will need to rethink my life choices." I never said that; it was a comment made by someone I was responding to. And, in fact, I replied that while I wasn't crazy about the way you criticized AOC for a legislative amendment she didn't even make, I didn't take so much of an issue with it as I did with a comment from someone else.
I never said you were an asshole, or come anywhere close to saying that. If you're getting me confused with someone else, I'll accept that as a legitimate misunderstanding.
I wish I could post my actual comment, but Disqus is being a bitch right now and I can't. I'll try again later. But regardless, I'm not the one who said what you are accusing me of saying.
Just found the whole conversation, which I hope clarifies exactly what I did and did not say. Please read. XOXO.
Bitter Scribe • 4 days agoSaying these perfectly self-evident, obvious things is what gets AOC tagged as a "radical." It's why I lose patience with all the "centrist" types who are forever losing patience with her.
22 •Reply•Share ›Avatar2Cats2Furious Bitter Scribe • 4 days agoI mostly try to avoid the AOC wars, but I lost my patience with some of the haters today and engaged. I probably shouldn’t have, because they’ll never give her an ounce of credit and it just made my BP shoot up.
I don’t love everything she does and says - I’d rather she direct her criticism of other DEMs directly and in private - but she does a lot of good stuff. It’s bizarre to me how much hate she generates from some of the “centrists” around here.
9 •Edit•Reply•Share ›AvatarProstate of Dorian Gray 2Cats2Furious • 4 days ago • editedSometimes you just have to tell an asshole they're an asshole. Especially when they don't think they are. But if I ever found myself on the same side as Shivaskeeper, I would take a hard look at my stance.
2 •Reply•Share ›−Avatar2Cats2Furious Prostate of Dorian Gray • 4 days agoI’m not crazy that SK devoted a whole thread to criticizing what the amendment MIGHT have done, without bothering to look for the actual text of the amendment (which I personally searched for and posted). But he doesn’t even come close to the disingenuous (at best) and sustained attacks leveled at AOC by KB.
There are people here - Skeptical KC comes to mind - who will promptly apologize (even if not necessary) and issue a correction if they happen to misread something. I genuinely appreciate that and hope to follow her lead, and admit if I get something wrong, which is a thing that happens.
What I can’t abide is non-commenters who instinctively double-down, and move the goalposts in order to support their arguments. Such behavior adds nothing to the (generally high) level of discourse here.
A lot of this is probably based on my training as a lawyer. Judges are generally cool with arguments about the facts and the law; they are generally NOT cool with personal attacks on opposing counsel. Which is not a bad system, if you think about it.
Seems a couple of years ago, a repug Gov. appointed a retired Brig Gen. to head a state agency. The guy proceeded to go on an agency-expanding spending spree that tanked the agency's budget, despite frantic warnings from the agency staff. Turns out the guy literally thought he could just go in front of the legislature and demand the money. Just like the Pentagon does with Congress. He skipped on to a new job, turning his back on the agency that now has to deal with cuts to the bone to pay for his spending.
There is so much to do in this area. Wissembourg is pretty charming too. It's still surrounded by a medieval wall and the old waterworks still go through the town center. We spent New Year, 2000 there. Those French know how to party...
Zwei was an RF-4 base back in the day. When it closed they made a civilian short haul airport out of it. It went bust after about ten years, but man was that better than the long slog to Frankfurt.
I guess you missed the entire point of my last non-comment, which was to try and have a constructive discussion while lowering the level of toxicity that sometimes arises around here.
You didn’t specifically criticize AOC by name; ok fine. But you did level a bunch of criticisms against an amendment she proposed, which you admittedly didn’t even read before leveling such criticisms. More specifically, you speculated that the amendment would cut pay for troops, which it did not do.
I still enjoy your photos of the goons, and particularly tiny goon and cat. I’ll leave it at that.
Only one country in the Western Hemisphere hasn't been involved in a war and/or coup in the last 50 years, Costa Rica. That's because they disbanded their military in 1949.
Late reply. Yeah I noticed the same. Now I dug deeper (it's there), but not that impressed. That kind of index is close to worthless imo and in my experience. The component ratings are often apples and oranges things, not really suitable for combination in an index. There is often some kind of scoring that is ultimately an attempt to capture qualitative measures or even perceptions as quantitative scores. Each rating component itself, even if straightforward quantitative data, should also be examined for how it does or does not support the single quality the index claims to measure, "effectiveness" in this case. I'm guessing there would be a lot of disagreement about that.If they are correlating an index with some other measured phenomenon, could be in this case ratings by peers of effectiveness, for example, in order to illuminate the measured phenomenon, that might be a useful exercise. But just constructing an index and claiming it supports a score on an abstract quality (legislative "effectiveness") doesn't really tell us anything except how the researchers define the abstract quality. And what they prefer legislators to be doing. What legislators or their voters actually prefer legislators to do, as politicians, doesn't seem to matter to the researchers.Bottom line, any such exercise that gives a very low score to Pelosi, and low to middling scores to Clyburn, Schiff, Porter, for example, is obviously not capturing what politicians and presumably their voters prioritize in terms of political engagement as a Congressperson. Certainly the list should not be cherry-picked as a certain commenter here does to support a perception already formed.Likewise, look at the low D Senate scores and try to defend those as measuring "legislative effectiveness".Entire sectors of legislative activity are not even addressed (affect on public opinion, GOTV impact, fundraising, effect on colleagues thinking, constituent support, district/state support in federal funding, to name a few). Summary: Index is garbage, index components and scores might be interesting but subject to scrutiny about what they mean. "Effectiveness" a preoccupation and then construction of the researchers, not necessarily the politicians or voters.
It isn't only obsolete weapons that are an appalling waste. Plenty of contemporary weapons and weapons systems (like certain fighter jets and submarines) were ineffective or outright scams from the drawing board.It's long been a peeve of mine that no government on earth seems to be doing R&D on cargo submarines. Peaceful freight and cargo purposes. Much more efficient Surface ships waste most of their power resisting the water and creating bow waves. They also have trouble with storms now and then. Storms don't worry a sub. Even a hurricane has little to no effect fifty fathoms down. Nice idea, but private corporations don't have the inclination, or in most cases the money. Governments do - but that's socialism. Also, western governments are run by politicians, which means, for the most part, lawyers. Find a politician or lawyer who knows one thing about science or technology. Good luck.
Been wondering how I should reply to this.
I didn't miss your point about toxicity. I ignored it. I ignored it because just before you posted that to me you spent some time discussing how much of an asshole I am with another commenter who clearly has some kind if grudge against me. How this site would be better if people like me just logged off and didn't come back. How if you ever find yourself on the same side of an issue as me, you need to rethink your life choices.
Block me. Ignore me. Confront me. But I don't appreciate people talking shit about me instead of talking to me. That doesn't come across as being concerned with toxicity.
Sorry for my late response. Firstly, I think I did flag him on that thread, but what reason I used, I do not remember.Because of the Disqusitng commenting, I cannot easily go look at my list of all my comments (which all can see) and find exactly where we had the exchange in question
The best I can tell you is that there was a story that either mentioned Elon Musk or was about him. In any case, a woman had made a negative comment about Elon Musk and James lit into her claiming her to be part of a group of Musk haters.As a result, I responded to him about his nasty comment but also agreed with her about Musk.
At that point he accused me of being part of this cabal or whatever he thinks it is, and that I must do this all the time. When I pointed out that it literally was the first time I had ever commented on Musk anywhere (true), he kept pushing his Trump-like madness - I may have even compared him to TFG in that regard.Eventually I gave up.
If you were to look on Wonkette, you will see where others have mentioned this Musk nonsense from him. Some will mention him by mane, and some will be just random asides.Like on stories about conspriacy theories in which Musk is not mentioned at all, occaisionally someone will toss out a random"Don't say anything about Elon Musk"and those of us in the know know exactly who is being referenced there, and it ain't Musk.
I rarely comment on his comments any more, and while I realise I could block him, I never block anyone, except real trolls, as I at least like to see the nonsense that is being said by others.
Thanks to you Dok, for all the great work you do and for the stories you give us.
Please go back and re-read that conversation. If you do, I think you will find that I was NOT the one who said "if I ever find myself on the same side of an issue as [you], I will need to rethink my life choices." I never said that; it was a comment made by someone I was responding to. And, in fact, I replied that while I wasn't crazy about the way you criticized AOC for a legislative amendment she didn't even make, I didn't take so much of an issue with it as I did with a comment from someone else.
I never said you were an asshole, or come anywhere close to saying that. If you're getting me confused with someone else, I'll accept that as a legitimate misunderstanding.
I wish I could post my actual comment, but Disqus is being a bitch right now and I can't. I'll try again later. But regardless, I'm not the one who said what you are accusing me of saying.
Just found the whole conversation, which I hope clarifies exactly what I did and did not say. Please read. XOXO.
Bitter Scribe • 4 days agoSaying these perfectly self-evident, obvious things is what gets AOC tagged as a "radical." It's why I lose patience with all the "centrist" types who are forever losing patience with her.
22 •Reply•Share ›Avatar2Cats2Furious Bitter Scribe • 4 days agoI mostly try to avoid the AOC wars, but I lost my patience with some of the haters today and engaged. I probably shouldn’t have, because they’ll never give her an ounce of credit and it just made my BP shoot up.
I don’t love everything she does and says - I’d rather she direct her criticism of other DEMs directly and in private - but she does a lot of good stuff. It’s bizarre to me how much hate she generates from some of the “centrists” around here.
9 •Edit•Reply•Share ›AvatarProstate of Dorian Gray 2Cats2Furious • 4 days ago • editedSometimes you just have to tell an asshole they're an asshole. Especially when they don't think they are. But if I ever found myself on the same side as Shivaskeeper, I would take a hard look at my stance.
2 •Reply•Share ›−Avatar2Cats2Furious Prostate of Dorian Gray • 4 days agoI’m not crazy that SK devoted a whole thread to criticizing what the amendment MIGHT have done, without bothering to look for the actual text of the amendment (which I personally searched for and posted). But he doesn’t even come close to the disingenuous (at best) and sustained attacks leveled at AOC by KB.
There are people here - Skeptical KC comes to mind - who will promptly apologize (even if not necessary) and issue a correction if they happen to misread something. I genuinely appreciate that and hope to follow her lead, and admit if I get something wrong, which is a thing that happens.
What I can’t abide is non-commenters who instinctively double-down, and move the goalposts in order to support their arguments. Such behavior adds nothing to the (generally high) level of discourse here.
A lot of this is probably based on my training as a lawyer. Judges are generally cool with arguments about the facts and the law; they are generally NOT cool with personal attacks on opposing counsel. Which is not a bad system, if you think about it.
Thanks for listening to my TED talk.
Seems a couple of years ago, a repug Gov. appointed a retired Brig Gen. to head a state agency. The guy proceeded to go on an agency-expanding spending spree that tanked the agency's budget, despite frantic warnings from the agency staff. Turns out the guy literally thought he could just go in front of the legislature and demand the money. Just like the Pentagon does with Congress. He skipped on to a new job, turning his back on the agency that now has to deal with cuts to the bone to pay for his spending.
I spose he got that idea from local arms manufacturers. "Just go tell them you've got to have that money for the national guard. For these bi-planes!"
There is so much to do in this area. Wissembourg is pretty charming too. It's still surrounded by a medieval wall and the old waterworks still go through the town center. We spent New Year, 2000 there. Those French know how to party...
Zwei was an RF-4 base back in the day. When it closed they made a civilian short haul airport out of it. It went bust after about ten years, but man was that better than the long slog to Frankfurt.
5G Superconducting Nanoparticle Quantum Entanglement Catalysis is at fault for changes that occur after one hits the ‘Enter’ key.
“There always needs to be one more edit, no matter what.”—My Editor’s Corollary to Murphy’s Law
I guess you missed the entire point of my last non-comment, which was to try and have a constructive discussion while lowering the level of toxicity that sometimes arises around here.
You didn’t specifically criticize AOC by name; ok fine. But you did level a bunch of criticisms against an amendment she proposed, which you admittedly didn’t even read before leveling such criticisms. More specifically, you speculated that the amendment would cut pay for troops, which it did not do.
I still enjoy your photos of the goons, and particularly tiny goon and cat. I’ll leave it at that.
Not sure Canada would want Waterbury . . .
Only one country in the Western Hemisphere hasn't been involved in a war and/or coup in the last 50 years, Costa Rica. That's because they disbanded their military in 1949.
All NASA budgets, since foundation, combined, including Apollo - $650 billionLast year's Pentagon budget - $750 billion
This is why we're still stuck on one planet.
Late reply. Yeah I noticed the same. Now I dug deeper (it's there), but not that impressed. That kind of index is close to worthless imo and in my experience. The component ratings are often apples and oranges things, not really suitable for combination in an index. There is often some kind of scoring that is ultimately an attempt to capture qualitative measures or even perceptions as quantitative scores. Each rating component itself, even if straightforward quantitative data, should also be examined for how it does or does not support the single quality the index claims to measure, "effectiveness" in this case. I'm guessing there would be a lot of disagreement about that.If they are correlating an index with some other measured phenomenon, could be in this case ratings by peers of effectiveness, for example, in order to illuminate the measured phenomenon, that might be a useful exercise. But just constructing an index and claiming it supports a score on an abstract quality (legislative "effectiveness") doesn't really tell us anything except how the researchers define the abstract quality. And what they prefer legislators to be doing. What legislators or their voters actually prefer legislators to do, as politicians, doesn't seem to matter to the researchers.Bottom line, any such exercise that gives a very low score to Pelosi, and low to middling scores to Clyburn, Schiff, Porter, for example, is obviously not capturing what politicians and presumably their voters prioritize in terms of political engagement as a Congressperson. Certainly the list should not be cherry-picked as a certain commenter here does to support a perception already formed.Likewise, look at the low D Senate scores and try to defend those as measuring "legislative effectiveness".Entire sectors of legislative activity are not even addressed (affect on public opinion, GOTV impact, fundraising, effect on colleagues thinking, constituent support, district/state support in federal funding, to name a few). Summary: Index is garbage, index components and scores might be interesting but subject to scrutiny about what they mean. "Effectiveness" a preoccupation and then construction of the researchers, not necessarily the politicians or voters.
It isn't only obsolete weapons that are an appalling waste. Plenty of contemporary weapons and weapons systems (like certain fighter jets and submarines) were ineffective or outright scams from the drawing board.It's long been a peeve of mine that no government on earth seems to be doing R&D on cargo submarines. Peaceful freight and cargo purposes. Much more efficient Surface ships waste most of their power resisting the water and creating bow waves. They also have trouble with storms now and then. Storms don't worry a sub. Even a hurricane has little to no effect fifty fathoms down. Nice idea, but private corporations don't have the inclination, or in most cases the money. Governments do - but that's socialism. Also, western governments are run by politicians, which means, for the most part, lawyers. Find a politician or lawyer who knows one thing about science or technology. Good luck.
Ta, Dok. Reduction in the defense budget has been a priority of mine for decades, but I'm not an elected official.
Yeah I worked a show With Charlie Daniels. He was a dick. All he did was complain about the Clintons. (It was that long ago).