RationalWiki talk:What is going on in the clogosphere?/Archive14

This is an archive page, last updated 5 October 2023. Please do not make edits to this page.

Archives for this talk page:

<1>, <2>, <3>, <4>, <5>, <6>, <7>, <8>, <9>, <10>, <11>, <12>, <13>, <15>

, (new)(back)

Milo Yiannopoulos gets banned from attending furry convention

https://www.rightwingwatch.org/post/milo-adopts-fursona-but-furries-say-no-thanks/ He was also planning on hosting a propaganda pannel along with a neo-nazi furry group but he got banned before he could even do it. He's now claiming the termination of his ticket was "a breach of contract" and he's threatening to attend anyway. RockfordRoe (talk) 22:18, 16 September 2019 (UTC)

I'm told by fellow furs that the convention plans on enforcing his ban in a manner that is a bit more corporal. If he tries to attend, the security's gonna kick his ass. Tyrian (talk) 13:09, 20 October 2019 (UTC)

I just attended this past weekend, he and his usual gang of idiots weren't there, fortunately. It would be so hilarious if he tried to go to AnthroCon or even Biggest Little FurCon. RockfordRoe (talk) 18:10, 12 December 2019 (UTC)

how do you know he wasn't? he may have put in a lot effort for fursona costume. i'm assuming its some kind of weasel. AMassiveGay (talk) 18:43, 12 December 2019 (UTC)

Because these things usually have pretty good security, and Milo would've followed through with his plan, which would make him stand out. If he did attend, he got kicked out before Rockford could see him. Tyrian (talk) 19:00, 22 December 2019 (UTC)

Dinesh D'Souza shares "#burnthejews" hashtag.

http://www.newsweek.com/filmmaker-pardoned-trump-shares-tweets-hashtag-burnthejews-and-1003260

This link should be included in his RW page in some way. ^{— Unsigned, by: Az curmudgeon / talk / contribs}

Seems fair to me, 5 dancing Israeli mossad agents on fbi file celebrating the greatest American tragedy while it was happening, also went on a talk show and specified they were there to document an event they supposedly had no prior knowledge of. Can someone debate this point or just instaban me cause you dont like what I have to say ^{— Unsigned, by: 205.185.117.190 / talk / contribs}

"America's First Non-Binary Person" decides he's just had too much porn

Found this from the Android SmartNews app, which I'm beginning to decide is seriously mis-named. He used to be a trans woman, then decided he was "America's first non-binary", now says "it's all a sham" and explicitly calls out Autogynephilia as the "cause". And the story is featured on the "news" page of The Heritage Foundation. Pere Ubu (talk) 19:31, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

I feel like non-binary people will be quite surprised to find that the concept only dates to 2016, given that it had already surpassed the nearly synonymous(and much older) term "genderqueer" in 2014. ikanreed ^{🐐Bleat at me} 20:16, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

"yang gang"

The inevitable consequence of this is we're gonna find out, that, no memes were not even slightly responsible for the election of donald trump, and it was in fact: constant unearned media coverage, american voters being complete dumbasses who can write their own ideals onto almost any politician, the fact that republican base vote consistently with no concern for how complete shit their candidates are, and that the democrats managed to pick the single most likely to lose candidate from their field of primary choices in 2016. ikanreed ^{🐐Bleat at me} 21:05, 21 March 2019 (UTC)

effective altruism

Remember when this charity was actually built on minimizing harm to human beings? There just needs to be a law that whenever you deem spreading your ideology is the ultimate good in the world, you get shot and replaced with better people. ikanreed ^{🐐Bleat at me} 15:27, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

the list of other worthy recipients is also fucking amazing, let's not minimise the clogginess here - David Gerard (talk) 11:39, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

70k for a webpage where people vote on what they think is going to happen. Amazing. And for a moment, I had a hope that the 150k they gave to "CFAR" was the "center for aids research". 18k for a goddamn 2 day workshop on the dangers of AI? The mind boggles at the harm that could be reduced with this money. ikanreed ^{🐐Bleat at me} 14:57, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

As a member of the EA movement, I was very surprised by this donation recommendation. My hunch is that they received too few "valid" applications for funding, given the unexpectedly large donation to the fund that they received, and ended up recommending funding them all, which suggests that (a) they are failing to sufficiently publicise this fund, and (b) if you think you could come up with a better use for that money that's EA-relevant and related to the "long-term future" of humanity, you actually should submit an application for funding (next time), because you might actually get funded. I'm totally serious about this, by the way.--Greenrd (talk) 07:51, 14 April 2019 (UTC)

just picturing them coughing up their skulls in horror at having to consider an application from RationalWiki, an educational 501(c)3 - David Gerard (talk) 13:49, 18 April 2019 (UTC)

We should let China spy on us? Wait, what!?

Here's a bizarre article from the Washington post, We Should Let China Spy On Us. --2001:8003:4163:AD00:E133:E9DE:EE3:ACB0 (talk) 16:39, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

I thought it was bizarre from the headline - but then I read it and thought it made some good points actually.--Greenrd (talk) 12:15, 27 April 2019 (UTC)

No we should not, there is no price or freedom, fuck off. ^{— Unsigned, by: 205.185.117.190 / talk / contribs}

For fuck's sake, please, this is not difficult! Sign your posts with (~~~~) or (if that's too fucking hard) by clicking on the fucking sign BUTTON: on the toolbar above the edit panel. (You can indent successive talk page comments using one more colon (:) for each line.) This keeps the place tidy and stops you looking like a complete arsing tool so please, just fucking do it already. ^{— Unsigned, by: CosmikDebris / talk / contribs}

Seeing as the WIGO page is locked...

... can somebody add this?

"Fireman prophet" Mark Taylor blames Dems for Missouri tornadoes as revenge for anti-abortion bills. RoundeTheeHorne (talk) 18:36, 25 May 2019 (UTC)

Sho' nuff. Cosmikdebris (talk) 19:37, 25 May 2019 (UTC)

Metric System

In a scene straight out of Bizarro World, Tucker Carlson complains that the world has fallen under "the yoke of tyranny" of the... metric system.

If somebody who can edit the WIGO page wants to post this, go ahead. RoundeTheeHorne (talk) 18:22, 6 June 2019 (UTC)

Aborted baby blood libel

What the fuck is this shit? [1] LMFAO. — Oxyaena ^Harass 23:36, 6 June 2019 (UTC)

Shakespeare

I actually read that article in question before it was posted here. In a nutshell, it's this: JAQing off. — Oxyaena ^Harass 15:50, 14 June 2019 (UTC)

Brexit = end of the Union

Why is this in Clogs? It's been a concern since before the referendum and is discussed seriously by people on all points of the political spectrum. Or is it an excuse to dig at the author and her politics? LondonGrump (talk) 07:02, 25 June 2019 (UTC)

ive moved it to blogs. the UK is finished. AMassiveGay (talk) 09:47, 25 June 2019 (UTC)

It definitely seems to be a dig at Dawn Foster, but the idea that Brexit will break up the UK has featured widely in academic [2] and news sources across the political spectrum[3][4][5][6][7], with John Major and Gordon Brown amongst political figures to mention it. The main criticism of the Foster post would be that it's not saying anything new. --Annanoon (talk) 10:13, 25 June 2019 (UTC)

its not saying anything we have postd in blogs though. (I have though, since the referendum, constantly. its always been clear from the start - the Scottish idependence ref was so tight and so divisive.) AMassiveGay (talk) 10:28, 25 June 2019 (UTC)

"It's just a joke"

But I also feel the military from Area 51 has to respond to a joke post either way. It's not really them taking a joke "too seriously", it's more of a damned you do damned you don't kinda of thing when it comes to Internet shitposters. They also may end up getting serious people on board. --It's-a me, LeftyGreenMario! 18:00, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

serious people on board, read - idiots. what would they expect to achieve? warehouses full of flying saucers? grey men wandering around? its not like they haven't given them adequate warning to hide anything from another planet if there was anything. AMassiveGay (talk) 18:14, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

PizzaGate being ludicrous didn't really seem to stop an idiot from waltzing in there. I wouldn't underestimate human stupidity. --It's-a me, LeftyGreenMario! 18:17, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

On the other hand, a government seeing a not insubstantial percentage of its citizens concerned about their secrecy, even in jest, and deciding the correct response is to fucking shoot them. It's hard not to sympathize with the kooks(and irony shitposters). ikanreed ^{🐐Bleat at me} 18:28, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

Will the government actually shoot a bunch of civilians? That's horseshit. — Oxyaena ^Harass 19:36, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

Given that the US government dropped bombs in Philly on civies once, I dunno why you think its bullshit. Revolverman (talk) 20:13, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

No, I don't think that. More likely they'll use local police or MPs to deploy traditional crowd control countermeasures such as "Please disperse" instructions followed by symbolic arrests, tear gas, and bean bag guns. However, they did heavily imply in a public announcement that lethal force was appropriate where necessary. Which is fucked up. ikanreed ^{🐐Bleat at me} 19:52, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

You must watch the Margaret Thatcher video

it is the best thing ever and I too came here just to post it. It's only three minutes - David Gerard (talk) 08:13, 10 September 2019 (UTC)

Note to the phantom sub editor who amended the Steve Baker post

I did think about citing Paradise Lost in the post but didn't because a)Satan is a fictional character so any quote attributed to him is not real b)I doubt Steve Baker knows Milton from his arsehole and c) it has greater impact and connotes that Steve Baker is an evil fuckwit. Not quite Giles Coren vs The Times subs - fuck Giles Coren anyway - but I've reverted your edit. LondonGrump (talk) 14:25, 6 October 2019 (UTC)

Bill Maher

He did invite the anti-vaxxer and the Prager wanker, but he only nodded along with one of them. 147.147.183.238 (talk) 16:23, 10 November 2019 (UTC)

Donald Trump makes anti-Semitic comment

Seriously, you linked to Electronic Intifada?

Why wouldn't you link to The Jewish Daily Forward? Or the Jewish Telegraphic Agency? Or the Jewish Daily Current?

Those are are left-wing Jewish news agencies.

Come on, guys. I realize some/many of you may be anti-Zionist. But choosing EI? You can do better than that. Aron (talk) 00:00, 10 December 2019 (UTC)

I'm not familiar with that source and can't comment one way or another, but other than some opinion injection, I don't think the article said anything that different than the Washington Post did. Having said that, IMHO it's not really Zionism. Basically Trump reflects (in his own special way) the evangelical position on Israel, meaning he can be anti semitic in his tropes *and* claim to push a "pro-Israel" narrative. The usual tribal bullshit now applies depending on where the Jewish lobbyists lie, the left-wing oriented ones (like J Street) have a free hand to call out the bullshit, the right-wing ones (being more aligned to the President) end up hemming and hawing as tribalism usually dictates. Soundwave106 (talk) 13:31, 10 December 2019 (UTC)

MBFC rates them as decent. ☭Comrade GC☭^{Ministry of Praise} 15:13, 10 December 2019 (UTC)

But here's the thing: the story is about Jews and Israel. Yet a pro-Palestinian and anti-Israel news source was used in the past. Surely you can see the cognitive dissonance (PS Sorry for all the minor edits. I am a total n00b at WML) Aron (talk) 09:05, 11 December 2019 (UTC)

The main Israeli newspapers (e.g. Ha'aretz) and the Washington Post (mentioned above) are all paywalled. If there is a non-paywalled link, fine, maybe it could be added, but there's little value in adding things that people can't read without at minimum pissing around with browser settings. --Annanoon (talk) 11:12, 11 December 2019 (UTC)

Anything Pro-Palestinian is more trustworthy than anything coming out from Apartheid apologists imo. — Oxyaena ^Harass 14:21, 11 December 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for being so transparently bigoted! Aron (talk) 15:30, 14 December 2019 (UTC)

Also, all of the news sources I listed are free to read. So no paywall issue there.Aron (talk) 15:33, 14 December 2019 (UTC)

How is objecting to Apartheid bigoted? — Oxyaena ^Harass 19:50, 30 March 2020 (UTC)

Misunderstanding Joe Saladino

I'm pretty sure that whoever added linked Saladino's tweet misunderstood him and took him out of context. He's actually against banning all those things. He took a libertarian stance and implied that, logically, banning porn might as well lead to banning other things, which is a (possibly non-fallacious) slippery slope. In other words, he was being sarcastic, and the tweet was only meant to be satirical.

Don't get me wrong, his profile is still chock full of batshit wingnuttery. However, this was arguably one of his more sensical tweets. My suggestion is to replace it with a link to one of his actually crazy tweets. G Man (talk) 19:32, 13 December 2019 (UTC)

moral panics and kids sexy talk

not a moral panic, nothing in the article suggests a moral panic, and rainbow parties were never a source of consternation in the uk. read the fucking article AMassiveGay (talk) 19:50, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

Is the Numbering correct?

Currently the numbering stands at clog3267432, but is that right? I think someone must have added way too much numbers once.Tuxer (talk) 15:06, 28 March 2020 (UTC)

Red-baiting

As if Venezuela somehow ranks alongside fucking North Korea and the Soviet Union lol. — Oxyaena ^Harass 19:49, 30 March 2020 (UTC)

You expect any sort of distinction between those countries when they can't distinguish something as obvious as socialism/communism/neoliberalism? --It's-a me, LeftyGreenMario! 21:19, 30 March 2020 (UTC)

I wonder if Venezuela toilet paper jokes will start to go away now that many Westerners can’t find it either. Chef Moosolini’s Ristorante Italiano^{Make a Reservation} 22:18, 30 March 2020 (UTC)

venezuela, a country currently the subject of embargo by the us, is by no means an egregious nor unwarranted inclusion with that list of the usual suspects of nominally socialist/authoritarian countries (for the record, its the former soviet union they mention, though why they don't just say Russia is a little odd.) by all accounts, and by any metric, Venezuela under Maduro is a fucking horror show more than worthy of its inclusion here. Maduro has ruled by decree since 2015 so certainly authoritarian enough, with huge increases in hyperinflation, poverty, unemployment, malnutrition, child poverty, shortages of basic goods, and crimes rate - 200,000 murders in the last 15 years, leading to over 3 million of its citizens fleeing the country. at the moment its probably a worse place to be than north korea.

literally everything else in that article is complete dogshit. venezeula appearing in a list of countries you don't want to be and/or on Americas shit list is the least risible thing about it. AMassiveGay (talk) 23:05, 30 March 2020 (UTC)

Quantum Physics "Rogue Scholar"

I have made an account specifically to ask about this, as it is making me feel unwell. A search through the internet which started with this very site's article on Alternative Cosmologies has led me to someone called "Michael Bush" on Quora, who calls himself a "Rogue Scholar" (bad sign, I know). He keeps putting certain images (made by himself, as, he doesn't cite any other sources in anyone of his answers) in all of his answers regarding questions of Quantum Mechanics and General Relativity (he says that the first is unequivocally false and that the second is true). I will give you the question where he has detailed his beliefs: https://www.quora.com/What-paradox-would-you-give-to-an-AI-to-confuse-it (first answer). I understand that his crackpot index is off the charts, and that his mighty dismissal of every single quantum physicist on the planet is obviously wrong, but I would appreciate if anyone knowledgable in these subjects would look at his grand unifying diagrams. I would like to know what specific part of them is wrong (if they truly are). Thanks in advance!--RoAwesomeFace (talk) 19:50, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

The Nation colomnist Katha Pollit

She recently wrote an colomn about Joe Biden, in which she says: “I would vote for Joe Biden if he boiled babies and ate them.”

Source: https://www.thenation.com/article/politics/joe-biden-tara-reade-allegations/

Article by The Hill: https://thehill.com/homenews/media/499057-nation-columnist-criticized-for-writing-shed-vote-for-biden-if-he-boiled

Should this be added? Dr. (“LiNK” 49) (talk) 03:28, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

Washington Times Baphomet Statue Tomfoolery

The Washington times has published an article stating that since confederate statues are coming down because they are offensive, christians have the right to wrap american flags around statues of Baphomet and set them alight failing to realise nobody actually worships ol' Baphy and most people on the left would see that as the absolute sickest most kickass bonfire party ever

Source: https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2020/jun/26/christians-should-destroy-all-baphomet-statues/

Even if they don't do it (which lets face it they won't) I think this should be added to clogs because its good for a laugh. On the very slim chance they do go through with it we should be giving out invites to the shindig of the decade 203.100.222.84 (talk) 15:10, 27 June 2020 (UTC)

Jeez, that web page consists of several megabytes of advertisements and Javascript abuse as a wrapper for a stupid "editorial" consisting of a mere 163 words that looks like it was written by a middle school student. No one will organize and attend a protest resulting in the destruction of the Baphomet statue. The Washington Times and their irrelevant opinions should be ignored. —cosmikdebris ^talk stalk 17:20, 27 June 2020 (UTC)

Twitter thread about UK brexiteers in France

Its a fake as exposed by Alex Hern of the Guardian. Reverse image search showed the profile pic is a generic stock image. Still funny and there are plenty of entitled Brits who actually think like that to mock especially in Gibraltar but alas lets not get caught up in frauds. Source : https://twitter.com/alexhern/status/1278311924405583872 203.100.222.84 (talk) 14:38, 1 July 2020 (UTC)

Yeah, there's also no "David Saunders" book series either as specified in fake Twitter account profile (there's a guy who's collaborated with a few management books by that name, that's it). Removed it. We really need to be careful making WIGOs out of social media junk IMHO, this shows why. Soundwave106 (talk) 15:21, 1 July 2020 (UTC)

Clogosphere is perfect for this. It's an entertaining piece of performance art, I say let it stand--Hastur! (talk) 15:26, 1 July 2020 (UTC)

tory voter gives vague disapproval of jeremy corbyn

full headline - imagine the state we'd be in if corbyn had been in charge' - the view from the red wall'. its click baity for sure, but not especially considering its revisiting a constituency that was an unassailable labour stronghold but voted tory the last election. it a vox pop of first time tory voters (and a school girl who might now vote tory when eligible but voted labour in a mock election of some form) to see if the sunak's summer statement had made them regret voting tory (it hadnt). a couple had been spoken to before in another piece asking first time tory voters their opinion on the cummings row. leighs not a massive place and theres been a lock down. i imagine it quite difficult finding people who are tories and willing to talk to you. and they've got the emails of two first time tory voters already, and one of them owns a restaurant which is relevent to the summer statement. corbyn is mentioned in that one line and isnt eleaborated on. it doesnt warrant questioning the working class credentials of a member of the public, whose class isnt even mentioned (a small pizza place is hardly elon musk and i couldnt anything for the property thing) and isnt especially relevant - being a tory voter in a working class town that voted tory for the first time in 100 years is. its a lightweight piece with a clickbait headline. not some nefarious plot from the lame stream media nor a scathing and vicious slander needing to be addressed. corbyn's already gone. we can drop the hard done by act now. AMassiveGay (talk) 12:21, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

Hi AMassiveGay. The article puts that quote next to a sub-headline that reads "Working-class voters in Leigh do not regret voting for Tories after listening to chancellor’s summer statement". It's pretty obvious that we are suppose to conclude that such a quote comes from someone who is representative of 'the working class'. A position which is only tenable if your idea of working class is something laughably vague like 'born poor + has an accent + drinks stella'.

The fact is that a small business owner (whether it is Musk, or 'Mom n Pop's organic bakery farm for free-range gluten free banana bread loafs that are ethically slaughtered') has very different economic concerns from the people who receive a wage/salary. The opinion of a man who sits on the directors board of four different companies, is not going to be comparable to a bar-maid collecting glasses for minimum wage or even a decently paid contractor.

It is lazily sourced and although it would have taken more effort to get hold of people who could actually represent the working class more broadly, you would think that that is a price one would be willing to pay as a decent journalist.

Even if that wasn't an option, it would take barely any effort at all to just drop the working class from the lead in and put 'people'. In which case it would be a lazily put together vox-pop, rather than another embarrassing example of the liberal tendency to reduce class to mere cultural affect.

Get ready, it's... (talk) 13:40, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

working class IS a laughably vague term. its use in this article is vague and need not be anything more. it isnt an academic article. it doesnt need a strict or narrow definition, outmoded and bearing no resemblance to the poorly delineated concept of class in britain today. its term that has no official usage, only informal and often as a subjective self descriptor and no one wants to say they are middle class. here it is used in broad terms. people either self describing as working class or within the broad church of what people nowadays mean by working class. likely no bankers or landed gentry. that any one person or group could be representative of the mixture that is working class is itself idiotic.

but a discussion of the working class is beside the point. your taking a clickbait head line as if it were being presented as a strongly argued and well supported fact instead what it is - click bait. the crack at corbyn is the bait part. the sub headline explains what is meant by the crack. a punchy way of saying former labour voters in a former labour stronghold now a tory seat suggest they are standing by their switch to conservative 6 months on and after hearing sunak's summer statement.

the article, such as it is, supports this, while explaining at the outset is revisiting an earlier look at the 2019 general election, where labour were destroyed after seemingly being abandoned by former labour heartlands in the north - the red wall in the headline.

as i have said from the outset, its a thin piece of vox pop that doesnt warrant the attention its gotten - ive seen two articles inflating the importance of this one just because of corbyn got a shout out, and it does not warrant the disingenuous clog that tries to discredit a guys opinion because they are not in its view sufficiently working class as a small business owner (i havent seen where it gets the director of a property development firm anywhere), when his class is not explicitly stated nor of particular relevance or necessary within the article, and implies he might be some kind of stooge as he was interviewed and featured in a earlier article which can be explained by the article revisiting the area earlier as already stated, and directly referenced with another interviewee in the piece. and his particular small business very relevent to the summer statement.

far too much is being assumed from far too little when all we can really take from this article is vox pops are difficult amid social distancing and you've got a deadline to meet. that and click bait is a super effective tactic AMassiveGay (talk) 18:28, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

In the words of the philosopher kings Paul and Barry Chuckle, ‘Oh Dear Oh Dear.’

The term working class is used with some variation, yet generally refers to those receiving low levels of income in the form of wages or a salary – i.e. not those earning the majority of their income from profits derived employing others. It can be loose at times, but come on… let’s not take the piss here.

To describe the owner of a pizza restaurant (who also sits on the board of directors for 3 other companies: https://companycheck.co.uk/director/906595010/MR-JONATHAN-NEIL-TWENTYMAN/companies<this link is wrong but I'm leaving it here for accountability reasons>) as ‘working class’ is to stretch the term so painfully that it leaves one asking why the author even bothered to use it in the first place. Its a hilariously sloppy application of the term that's inclusion has roundly made the article a target for mockery.

The clog does not debate the failings of labour strategy or whether the pizza-bar owner was correct in his assessment or not. The clog isn’t a conspiracy to undermine the interviewee, so calm yourself down. A click-baity Guardian article tried to pass the views of a local business owner off as working class and ended up a laughing stock. Get ready, it's... (talk) 21:22, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

Mea Culpa time. I argued that Andrew Twentyman who is featured in the article owns several businesses when in actuality it is his brother who owns them along with the pizza restaurant. Regardless, the point stands that someone who employs several people in a restaurant that he owns is far from any meaningful definition of 'working class' and attempts to spin him as such to make his words carry more weight is desperate. Apologies for the mistake, operating on very little sleep on this end due to a shoulder injury. Usual infallibility shall follow shortly! Get ready, it's... (talk) 22:11, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

since you've decided to be such a patronising prick about it i'll keep this short.

one - your description of working class is far too narrow and hasnt been true or useful to classify the working class in the uk for years, its a far from homogenous group that can be stratified on not least social, cultural, and economic basis, even by race and age, and by self description and ones roots.

two - i'll repeat again, thats all irrelevant as the this chaps social class and whatever criteria is being used, the article is not explicit in its assessment of his social class nor is it important or necessary - being a newly tory voter who previously voted labour in a previously labour constituency now in tory hands and the mini budget.

three - the clog is both disingenuous and conspiratorial seeing as it implies one interviewee has been mischaracterised as working class, when the article does not assign his class nor make important or necessary for an explicit confirmation. it further implies something shady by referencing the appearance of this one interviewee in an earlier article - something explained in the article. it just looks like more of 'corbyn was sabotaged' carping that appears once in a while with less than stellar evidence.

at the very best its a clog that criticises a clickbait headline while ignoring the actual, though admittedly thin, article which makes the clog wholly trivial and misses the point by a long way. its articles and the content contained within that are important here, not their sloppy headlines. AMassiveGay (talk) 03:50, 11 July 2020 (UTC)

AMassiveGay. Please read my responses properly.

At no point have I presented ‘my’ or even ‘a’ singular definition of working class. Nor have I argued that it is a homogeneous group. I have merely pointed out that academic definitions along with most common use dictionary definitions (see: Oxford and Cambridge) tend to overlap and identify a necessary condition for being working class in a persons relationship with businesses – i.e. not owning one.

With any given definition, not just in sociology, it is likely that not every person/thing will fit neatly into one camp or the other and it is guaranteed there will be plenty of variation between members of each grouping. The same can be said for splitting biological sex into the categories of male and female. Yet the existence of intersex people does not mean that distinctions between men and women are meaningless nor does it mean that such a distinction papers over differences between individual men and women. The same is true for definitions of working class, or definitions of the colour 'blue' for that matter.

The paper leads with the interviewee’s quote and a sub-heading about working class opinions. It’s pretty obvious what conclusion we are to draw from this. What’s more the author has gone on twitter to defend her decision to portray the owner of an artisanal pizza restaurant as “working class”… so.. you know… there’s also the authors own admission that that’s exactly what she was implying…. Oops! https://twitter.com/helenpidd/status/1281298135738920960

It’s a lazily researched article that among other things attempts to launder the opinion of a restaurant owner as working class. The only way it can do that is by stretching the term working class to the point of tortured absurdity, hence its place in clogs.

The clog doesn’t seek to undermine Andrew’s opinions or set up a conspiracy about Corbyn being sabotaged. Nor do you have any grounds to call it ‘disingenuous’. Not everything you disagree with is a Corbynist plot to save ‘Dear Leader’. Get ready, it's... (talk) 06:26, 11 July 2020 (UTC)

I don't know if this is the 'done thing' but I've now changed the description of the clog so its more clear that what is being referred to is the out of touch positioning of a business owner as 'working class' and not any deep-fake conspiracy. Get ready, it's... (talk) 12:12, 11 July 2020 (UTC)

how about you knock off the patronising bullshit, you fucking gobshite, particularly when it fails to address anything i have said. a few comments on twitter, the site that nuance forgot proves nothing except concur with an earlier point -a too narrow a definition (you basing your argument on a dictionary definition, seriously?). at the very worst its maybe a stretch. and just how is he out of touch? the twitter link you provided would suggest not being on universal credit is 'out of touch' judging by some objections to pidds classifications - the reasoning for such objections are absent i might add. perhaps you refer to something in the actual article that suggests out of touch? or make reference to anything in the article that is an point of contention for? anything that might be at least vaguely interesting.

because your still focusing the supposed class of some no mark. there isnt even a look at his comment on corbyn, the sole mention corbyn gets in the article, and a pretty vacant comment at that. its not all he said. restauranteur is actually very pertinent to the article. you can base a judgment on the validity of his opinions with actual useful context.

its also worth noting that reasoning for this article, why they were in leigh in the first place, was for the first time in 100 years voted tory, dropping corbyns labour, and nationwide corbyns labour were annihilated. of the many reasons for this, one was taking for granted northern voters, those traditional labour heartlands. where labour held - london and liverpool mainly, working class looked very different to those in the north. in average age and race for example. their values differing consequently. voting differently. the point here is the labour party, the defacto party of the working class, is no longer so, failing to reach so many it claims to represent. the conservatives no make that claim. the tories led by an old etonian. i posit the problems labour has surrounding the disparate groups under the umbrella of working class are addressed by a rigid and inflexible definitions that ignore who these groups actually are now and what it is they want or need are now, and to juggle conflicting needs.

if there us a problem with this article it is that there is no representation those on the bottom rungs of the scale for what is working class. the bickering over clickbait headlines and obsolete definitions of class does not address this, missing the point of the article in favour of inanity.

the clog is still disingenuous by its focus on inanity over the content of the article, and it does look like the familiar carping from corbyn supporters, whether it is or not is of no matter, because thats what it looks like and it provides nothing else. AMassiveGay (talk) 15:44, 11 July 2020 (UTC)

Okay, I'll ask some questions before I go any further. I just want to check that we are on the same page and see if we can get some kind of mutual understanding going forward. Also I want to take the tone down, I'm aware some of my jokey comments may have come off disrespectful (and at least one of them definitely was) but I really don't think calling each-other names on the internet is doing either of us any favours.

So just trying to articulate my position while teasing out your own.

1. In what way would a definition of working class that centres on those who receive wages/salaries be too narrow on the front of culture/social background/age or roots?

An explicit hypothetical example would be great, perhaps also with a reason to believe that these examples are numerous enough to cause serious problems.

2. Considering the author has publicly stated that they believe the owner of the pizza restaurant is working class, and that his quote is accompanied by a sub-title discussing 'working class opinions'. Do you believe it is unfair to argue that the article puts him forward as a representative of the working class (or at least a meaningful sub-section of it)? Just yes or no.

If you still feel that your answer is 'no' on that one then I fear we might just have to differ.

3. Do you feel I should be held responsible for other people making bad arguments (or not making arguments) on twitter? Why am I being told about them?

4. You seem to be presenting views on post-Corbyn labour as though they are points of contention in this discussion. I'm not sure what you're expecting from me here... you're aware that I'm not taking umbridge with the content but with the framing of one particular source? I get that you might find that shallow but I'm not really sure why your posting your opinions on the state of UK labour or what you think I'm suppose to make of them. Get ready, it's... (talk) 18:52, 11 July 2020 (UTC)

1. a doctor recieves a wage. a banker receives a wage. the prime minister receives a wage. its irrelevant. nor is the how much that wage is on its own. not all working class are working poor, and at times some trade professions such plasterer or plumber for example have been highly lucrative. you need more. the decline of manufactoring and the rise of of an economy based on the service industry along with the proliferation of tertiary education, makes things so much more nuanced.

2. i say read the article. it contains more than one persons views, and the headline is irrelvant clickbait.

3. yes, if they form part of your own argument - the twitter link you provided and the comments pridd was responding too.

4. this is the whole point of the article and why this whole is discussion a trivial inanity. the headline does not exist on its own and is secondary to the articles content, and is barely relevant at all. the article concerns labour and former labour supporters, ostensibly working class, and their views after labour was so thoroughly destroyed at the polls. it helps to provide some understanding for reasons that happened and the mountain labour needs to climb to come back, and what labour as a party stands for today. but sure, keep up with your pedantic reading of a headline of no concern to anything and your stellar no-true-scotsmanning. ive spent too much time on something i could have just responded to with 'read the fucking article' AMassiveGay (talk) 14:05, 13 July 2020 (UTC)

Fuck Amp

Your Wall Street Journal Kyle Rittenhouse article's url is infested with AMP. It should be https://www.wsj.com/articles/who-is-kyle-rittenhouse-and-what-happened-in-the-kenosha-shootings-11598653456 instead. 46.208.88.225 (talk) 16:26, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

What is the problem with AMP? I've never seen to have an issue with it. Rockford the Roe (talk) 16:35, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

Herman Cain Again, Again

It's amusing, but do we need 2 WIGOs about it? Whoover (talk) 04:04, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

Never mind, I was sure I saw this here last week, but I don't see it here now. Whoover (talk) 04:08, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

Militant Vegans

The left wing media thing is complete bollocks, of course. The rest of it, however, is not. Environmental and animal rights groups have been on MI5, Special Branch and MOD police's radar for at least 30 years. Maybe not as long as the New Age Travellers of the mid 80s but far off. Extinction Rebellion has been on the terrorism watch list since the beginning of the year. The Home Office is at the moment turning up the heat on left-wing, anarchist and environmental activism. They are all now included in the Prevent counter-radicalisation programme. All thanks to Priti "Nosferatu" Patel. LondonGrump (talk) 21:23, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

Animal rights is basically a bobo version of the anti-abortion cult. There's something extremely toxic about rhetoric that fiercely sentimentalizes something normal people just don't care about. It encourages acts of violence: we'll -force- you to care about our lost darlings. Farm and food processing facility invasions ought to be treated as harshly as clinic blockades. Smerdis of Tlön, wekʷōm teḱsos. 04:17, 7 October 2020 (UTC)

Ethics (and dipshittery aside), is there really a moral equivalence between PETA and National Action? Extinction Rebellion and the UDA? LondonGrump (talk) 15:43, 9 October 2020 (UTC)

'Moral equivalence' is itself a treacherous notion, conflating complicated problems into a simple 'as bad as' scale. Fortunately, I don't know of any successful murders perpeetrated by animal-rightsers in the way the anti-abortion cult has pulled off. If that's the scale, then no, animal rights is not as bad as anti-abortion nuttery: at least not yet. I do think there are similar mindsets involved, and some of the stunts pulled on the west coast of the USA by an outfit that calls itself DXE ('Direct Action Everywhere', apparently not very good at acronyms) are easily as obnoxious as the similar stunts from outfits like the Lambs of God. More importantly, the anti-abortion nuttery is probably too deeply embedded to entirely get rid of. With this, we may still have a chance. Smerdis of Tlön, wekʷōm teḱsos. 06:40, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

John Waters and Gemma

There must have been something special in the water at Hot Press, John Waters, Olaf Tyaransen and Craig Fitzsimons, if it's not rape, it's abusing wives and citing God or stirring up hate and condemning any who oppose as a Pedo. There's video footage doing the rounds of Gemma and Johns little Gestapo-esque aide-du-idiocacy, Dee Wall (real name Delores Webster) coughing at protestors and giggling. Cardinal Chang (talk) 09:05, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

Separation

I think we should have a template which show whether an article covers stupidity or the article is the stupidity.--Hedvigsen^{Skreonk here} 11:12, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

Trump Fox Noise News interview (note to the editors)

I added two sources, just in case one of them is deemed unreliable and/or too biased. You're more than welcome to delete one and keep a preferred source of your choice if you want to keep the entry more concise. -- G Man (talk) 02:04, 4 November 2020 (UTC)

To whoever posted UN Watch Whataboutism

Go back and read the tweet. We have standards here. LondonGrump (talk) 09:02, 10 November 2020 (UTC)

Oppression in the British aristocracy

Fuck the aristocracy, fuck them all and painfully, but what part of titles and estates only passing down the male line is not discriminatory and therefore not oppressive? And since when does titled mean wealthy anyway? I know an Honorable who hasn't got a pot to piss in. The only difference between him and any other loser is the title on his bank card and his posh accent. Fuck him too. LondonGrump (talk) 16:23, 14 November 2020 (UTC)

i'm not convinced people always read the articles they post. i was about to grumble about the wigo, but beaten to it (i know i'm a little, only just seen it). AMassiveGay (talk) 22:05, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

More "brain training" BS

https://intuiti.it/ is advertising a card deck, and the website says at the top "The cards that enhance Creativity", and it has lots of sciency-sounding things. Except further on down, the homepage says "Intùiti is not an algorithmic function that can 'make people creative'". Which is probably to cover their legal asses. Anyway, these "brain training" games should be illegal. --Interiot (talk) 21:47, 26 November 2020 (UTC)

Ebenezer Scrooge is the good guy

Can't be arsed to find a way around the WSJ paywall but what's the issue?

Perhaps, like 1984, it's more written about than read but A Christmas Carol (a shit book written like Dickens was paid by the word) is about the redemption - not the punishment - of Ebenezer Scrooge. Ergo he's the good guy. LondonGrump (talk) 12:34, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

The issue is that according to them Scrooge didn't need any redemption, he was good at start. His wealth hoarding and business practices were good for the economy and for the people. Scrooge and Marley accumulated wealth and that somehow triggered a revolution that boosted wages, literacy and nutrition. 2804:431:C7F2:EE4B:547D:9798:DB53:565F (talk) 20:49, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

RE: "Bernie's mittens a sign of white privilege"

LMAO people actually believe that? Smh some people are just getting bored, and are constantly looking for things to be offended by- especially since they already have a confirmation bias against Bernie for not going down the identity politics rabbit-hole. --Goatspeed. _{Fossil evidence of my evolution}CircularRasoning^{See my experiments} 06:06, 2 February 2021 (UTC)

Not people. One person. Magnified beyond all significance by the internet. This is the Modern World. LondonGrump (talk) 23:34, 2 February 2021 (UTC)

It does seem to be a telling example of wokism's game of one-upmanship, to the point where it seems to be clutching at straws. And yes, that a ridiculous take like this gets amplified by the Internet is also telling. Smerdis of Tlön, wekʷōm teḱsos. 13:42, 3 February 2021 (UTC)

If we must fight another civil war....

... having Mr. Potato Head as the casus belli is an excellent idea. Smerdis of Tlön, wekʷōm teḱsos. 23:33, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

There is no "wrong" or "right" way to cook carrots

Bennet is a dumbass who promotes harmful ideas but out of things to attack her on, carrot slices being inconsistent just seems cheap and petty? I've cut carrots probably at inconsistent slices. I did peel them. But they're going to end up pulverized for soup anyway. It kind of reminds me of East Asian people denouncing how an Indian-heritage woman is "ruining" rice by rinsing after steaming (though only following BBC) but actually some SE Asians say they do this. Or that cheese on ramen is ruining ramen, but it's common practice in South Korea and among Korean-Americans or those with Korean heritage? Cultural appropriation is valid discourse and there's good and bad technique for cooking, but I can't fret over carrot slice thickness. --It's-a me, LeftyGreenMario! 22:48, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

Agree, kind of a meh complaint. At any rate, her Onlyfans dis in the second video is kinda funny, because lately Onlyfans is trying to broaden themselves instead of being focused on adult models, and there are actually some (non-adult, for the gutter minded :p ) chef-oriented Onlyfans out there. Also, "props" for Bennett (who previously had made anti-Semitic statements) for using Old Bay spice, a Baltimore success story from a Jewish man, Gustav Brunn. He created an enduring American spice blend, despite the challenges of dealing with Nazis in his original homeland of Germany, and dealing with anti-Semites in America. You probably didn't mean it, Bennett, but you just gave a great shout out to American immigrants and diversity there! PanGalacticGargleBlaster (talk) 23:38, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

You definitely do need to peel carrots. And chop the top off. Chef Moosolini’s Ristorante Italiano^{Make a Reservation} 23:44, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

I generally peel them and parsnips, as well as potatoes, so I'm also wondering why she apparently didn't peel (the photo didn't seem super clear to me either). Again probably bad technique (her grip on the knife, I also can't tell if it's a proper grip but I do feel that a finger on the knife grants more control). But length of carrot slices seem like a nitpick and I still think it's important to know what she's cooking in the first place.

Anyhow, in the U.S. it's really hard to find food that isn't a product of immigrants. Ketchup has Chinese contribution. Pizza and burgers are self-explanatory. French fries from Belgium. Even in the U.S. the American stuff is icky brown native crap like corn, turkeys, chocolate, tomato, spicy peppers, potato. Without diversity, what the hell will food be? I certainly can't live without authentic Chinese food. --It's-a me, LeftyGreenMario! 23:56, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

As to peeling carrots, that's the common thing to do, but it's not always needed or wanted. For example, I'm fermenting a few carrot chips. Now, I could have peeled them, but I simply scrubbed them instead, because (a) the small amount of peel won't deter from the end result, and (b) much of the needed lacto-baccili is on those peels. (no, not for any probiotic reason, but rather because that's what causes the ferments. I just like the taste of pickled things. I make my own sauerkraut because what I make is miles ahead of anything I can buy at the megamart.) Kencolt (talk) 07:54, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

i tried making sauerkraut once. didnt really pan out AMassiveGay (talk) 07:27, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

Article about restaurants and wages

The article itself goes into the proposal for hiking wages. Didn't say it was in support of it. Tuxer, do you read the links you share? It wasn't the first time you didn't really accurately summed up an article. --It's-a me, LeftyGreenMario! 15:24, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

heh i felt sure this was about the uk. didnt know you had unemployment benefit stateside. AMassiveGay (talk) 17:05, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

Oh the U.S. does have unemployment benefits. Apparently they "run out", which sounds like bullshit given how difficult it is to land a job. It's sooooo gross that healthcare is tied to *full-time* employment too. --It's-a me, LeftyGreenMario!

Again this is right in the article.

One common response to these kinds of stories from left-wing corners of Twitter is that, if employers are having trouble hiring workers, they should simply raise pay. But that’s much easier snarked about than done; restaurants tend to run on low margins and often have trouble raising their prices, and jacking up wages immediately isn’t necessarily a realistic option (there’s a reason most proposals for minimum wage increases are phased in over years).

The problem with this narrative is that it might be flat-out wrong. It’s not actually clear that unemployment benefits are keeping a large number of Americans from going back to work. Aside from the anecdotal accounts—which do carry some weight—the evidence is a little spotty at this point, and there may well be other more important factors at play, mostly having to do with the horrific plague that hasn’t actually disappeared yet, even if spring breakers in Miami Beach and Trump voters in North Dakota sometimes act like it has. Let’s break down the possibilities.

I'm going to rewrite that summary of the clog post. Agree or disagree, the article does not support the summary, and don't share it if you show that you just made a knee-jerk reaction to a headline. As I said earlier, you messed up big time and you messed up here again. I don't want to continue catching these misrepresentations of articles being shared. --It's-a me, LeftyGreenMario! 18:57, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

Space AIDS

That post should be celebrating time travel, seeing as it links to a page from before the World Wide Web. LondonGrump (talk) 19:37, 22 April 2021 (UTC)

honestly didnt notice the date. a friend sent it to me and i therefore just assumed it must be current. tis funny though AMassiveGay (talk) 19:44, 22 April 2021 (UTC)

Referring to Fred Hoyle in the present tense gave it away...LondonGrump (talk) 17:55, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

i had no clue to who fred hoyle was to know he's been dead a while. AMassiveGay (talk) 18:19, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

It was definitely a find worthy of adding to the Fred Hoyle article, in my opinion. PanGalacticGargleBlaster (talk) 20:49, 22 April 2021 (UTC)

had no idea we had a page on the fella AMassiveGay (talk) 21:27, 22 April 2021 (UTC)

RE: "Anal sperm-eating worms are turning men gay"

LMAO I wheezed like a tea kettle! This reminds me of a satirical essay I wrote for an altmed essay competition a while back. --Goatspeed. _{Stalk me}CircularRasoning^{See my latest prototypes} 23:25, 22 April 2021 (UTC)

The place that broke this story was MEMRI TV (aka the Middle East Media Research Institute). Generally I take translations from them with a slight bit of wariness (my impression is that they are usually pretty accurate, but they do have a strong pro-Israeli bias, and occasionally that bias sneaks through in off translations). Seems like one other source confirmed this clip's translation is close enough though (not quite correct, but the woo was on mark). PanGalacticGargleBlaster (talk) 00:13, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

That Slate article

https://slate.com/human-interest/2021/06/kimono-cultural-appropriation-care-and-feeding.html

I don't see a problem with it. Maybe you think the person asking the question is paranoid or being silly, but I think the person's heart is in the right place and there's a reasonable, thoughtful response. Overall, it's really tame and it's not clogworthy in the slightest and I think it's rather mean we consider a question posted in good faith like this clogworthy. --It's-a me, LeftyGreenMario! 22:44, 5 June 2021 (UTC)

It’s 100% a clog. Japanese guy is gonna be told by the superior enlightened white people that they can’t use his gifts because it would be racist to the Japanese. Like, grown adults with kids thinking you can’t wear clothes because people in other countries wear them is absurd. “Cultural appropriation” is BS. Chef Moosolini’s Ristorante Italiano^{Make a Reservation} 00:15, 6 June 2021 (UTC)

To be honest, I thought it was a reasonable answer. I'm not too familiar with the fine details of kimonos, but the discussion reminded me of the kilt in Scottish culture. At least when I visited a long time ago, kilts were actually more formalwear (people would wear them to church), and there was correct ways to wear them, symbolism a plenty with the tartan color choices, etc. There was a definite Right Cultural Way here. Nobody cares, of course, if someone wears generic utilikilts and whatnot at a more fun event, but showing up in a kilt haphazardly at a legitimate Highland formal event would probably be... well, stupid. I imagine the kimono is kind of similar, no one's going to care if the kid wears a pretty kimono gift, but if I didn't know what I was doing cultural wise, I wouldn't think showing up at a more formal social event in a random kimono would be wise. PanGalacticGargleBlaster (talk) 02:53, 6 June 2021 (UTC)

DuceMoosonlini: You got this entirely wrong. First, the person who posed the question appears to be a white woman whose husband's close friend is a Japanese American who gifted her children Japanese-themed gifts. Second, the person answering the question doesn't make immediately apparent her race (author is Nicole Chung) but she's been raised with Korean culture so probably had more exposure to Korean culture than the person posing the question has been exposed to Japanese culture (also note the author's last name, Chung). The answerer also took the time to get the perspective of a Japanese-American which further does not support your argument that this piece is by an insensitive white person talking down on a Japanese person. No offense but I think you're projecting your biases on the intents of these people and then coming up with a conclusion that seems completely off from the meaning of the article. "Cultural appropriation" is not BS as an entire concept. As the answerer said, there are discussions about being respectful while having fun, and I agree those discussions are important. There's no case of knee-jerk reaction about racism or oversensitivity, it just seems like a mature, thoughtful response, and the answerer has demonstrated their limits about this and even encouraged the question-asker to ask her friends about this.

PanGalacticGargleBlaster: I feel what you're answering is more in spirit with the article. I do feel a kilt at a formal event is not appropriate (depends on context) but I also think there's a point that you probably shouldn't dress as, say, a stereotype for Halloween or propagate stereotypes. I think people generally don't care if you do show up in a costume party in a kimono, but there's just a thought-provoking question to ask: should an important cultural garb be reduced to a cute costume? --It's-a me, LeftyGreenMario! 20:06, 6 June 2021 (UTC)

I think you have partly misunderstood Duce's comment. Duce wrote: "Japanese guy is gonna be told by the superior enlightened white people that they can’t use his gifts". The questioner is asking whether it is okay for her kid to wear the kimono she got as a gift from her Japanese godfather, indicating that the concern is about appropriation of Japanese culture vis a vis a gift from a Japanese person. Also, the author's page links to this page for her book, which indicates that she was "raised by a white family in a sheltered Oregon town". If the questioner were to report this answer to the godfather, it wouldn't seem to be entirely unfair to describe this as a Japanese man getting told by Americans whether his gift was racist against the Japanese, regardless of what the answer actually is. 𝒮𝑒𝓇𝑒𝓃𝑒 ^talk 21:02, 6 June 2021 (UTC)

I understand a bit better that the godfather is probably going to be asked about cultural appropriation but I still don't see how the person from the article is going to end up talking down on him and lecturing him about cultural appropriation as opposed to just asking if it's okay to wear this and what's the appropriate way to wear it, nor do I see the article encourage that kind of behavior. --It's-a me, LeftyGreenMario! 22:01, 6 June 2021 (UTC)

I think the thing is that the godfather seemingly wasn't asked about cultural appropriation. It seems like the mother posted a question to the site in place of asking the godfather about the appropriate use of the kimono. Maybe there is some further context, but as-is it seems like the mother places greater confidence in Ms. Chung as an authority on what is and is not cultural appropriation than in the Japanese godfather himself. Since the culture in question is Japanese, and Ms. Chung is not herself Japanese, this seems a bit backwards. Although the godfather might not be getting explicitly lectured or talked down to, the apparent failure to consult him suggests that, to the mother, his take on the matter is of lesser importance than that of Ms. Chung, a Korean-American raised in "a sheltered Oregon town". Although Ms. Chung's reply is pretty tame, and she does consult a Japanese American, this was a choice on her part, and the mother presumably would have taken her advice seriously regardless.

Consider this analogous case. Suppose that I am an American, and I give some U.S. cultural item to a Japanese friend of mine. Wanting to treat the item respectfully, my friend sends a letter to a Scottish advice columnist, asking how this item ought to be treated. The Scottish columnist replies in a tame manner, reporting on the reply they received from a U.S.-raised colleague. While the advice might in-itself be good, the question remains why my friend sought it from a Scottish columnist, and not from an American columnist or, say, me. 𝒮𝑒𝓇𝑒𝓃𝑒 ^talk 01:35, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

I think you're overtthinking about the intents of the letter sender. There could be a lot of reasons the decision was made but I still don't believe it's a clog whatsoever. --It's-a me, LeftyGreenMario! 20:10, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

100% a clog. It takes a special kind of stupid to start agonising about cultural appropriation when the cultural artefact in question is literally being gifted by someone from that culture. How much more permission do you need? Helena Bonham Carter (talk) 20:50, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

Putting aside everything else I want to say in response to this particular comment for the moment, are y'all saying you think this should be a clog because of the woman asking the question, and NOT -- I should remind, as it's current wording in the Clogs implies -- how that question is being answered? ℕoir LeSable (talk) 21:11, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

The question itself is as dumb as Slate giving it the time of day with anything other than: "It's fine. Stop your dumbfuck worrying & let your 5-year-old daughter wear her fucking kimono like she wants to, and as her Japanese godfather clearly fucking intended. Thanks for writing." Helena Bonham Carter (talk) 21:28, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

Chef Moosolini’s Ristorante Italiano^{Make a Reservation} 21:59, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

I think that's a misconstruing of the situation [EDIT: this is in response to DM's initial interpretation, not a continuation of the above thread]. The responding author is Korean-American, not white. Frankly, I do think there are some folks who are overbearing about "cultural appropriation" (and are, indeed, usually white (or otherwise not of the culture being discussed) and perpetually online), but this particular article is a good brief examination of this particular scenario. As probably indicated by some of my previous edits, I don't begrudge people asking stupid questions if it's done in good faith.

Also I don't mean to pull the "race card" here, but as a fellow Korean-American, I'd completely agree with Nicole's input -- particularly the closing line "I don’t think having this discussion [about cultural appropriation] and letting her occasionally wear the kimono she was given need to be mutually exclusive." If I bought a friend a hanbok, I'd certainly be pleased if they shared it on social media. On the other hand, I'd frankly be pissed off if they decided to go to a Halloween party in it. ℕoir LeSable (talk) 21:02, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

As I said, saying this good faith question is a clog is frankly mean spirited and then being flippant about it to assert how stupid the question is isn't really helpful. --It's-a me, LeftyGreenMario! 23:56, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

Oh yeah, I'm in full agreement that this article shouldn't be a Clog and that I think the original question was made in good faith, if that wasn't clear. I apologize for sounding flippant about it. ℕoir LeSable (talk) 00:08, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

Oh, no, I wasn't directing your comment at you but at Duce and HBC, but I just think we shouldn't encourage shaming people who do this. I still feel we should give some credit that this person is trying her best to be considerate, even if her priorities on whom to ask aren't appropriate or that she's worried that her children wearing it at all is inappropriate, basically acknowledging her ignorance on the culture and taking caution, even if too much caution, to proceed. I feel I could be in that same position to worry such a thing about appropriation. --It's-a me, LeftyGreenMario! 00:51, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ No. The question / concern doesn't make sense on any level, and all the good faith intent in the world doesn't change that. If you disagree, then please feel free to sketch out any plausible scenario in which this 5-year-old kid wearing this gifted kimono could possibly amount to an meaningful example of cultural appropriation. Helena Bonham Carter (talk) 15:41, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

Halloween costume. Next. ℕoir LeSable (talk) 03:04, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

OK. How does wearing her kimono to go trick-or-treating, or for a Halloween party, qualify as a meaningful example of cultural appropriation? Is this something to do with parties and festive occasions in general, or are you carving out something Halloween-specific here? Helena Bonham Carter (talk) 17:24, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

It's not to do with parties or festive occasions in general -- if, for instance, a white person married a Korean-American person, and they decide to hold a traditional Korean or Korean-"Western" fusion wedding ceremony, I'd say that's an occasion where the partygoers wearing a hanbok is acceptable. At least for me, it doesn't have to be so formal either -- I wouldn't necessarily be against someone cosplaying as a fictional character in such dress at a geek convention as long as they took the time and effort to do it respectfully. Not acceptable would be, like, masquerade balls or frat costume parties where the dress is not seen as an element of a culture, but merely something that's "Oooh, look at me, my aesthetic is so exotic!" -- a sentiment that has been very commonly associated with East/Southeast Asian cultural aspects by Westerners for centuries (compare: decapitated Buddha heads, bad Chinese tattoos). I just pick Halloween as it's the most common example given its association with frivolous and kitschy costumes -- and at least for me, it's hard not to feel a tiny bit put off when you go to a pop-up Halloween costume store at the mall and see a cheaply-designed outfit from a culture adjacent to yours being sold between the "Sexy Minion" and "Skeleton with Obvious Boner Joke" costumes.

And this is all aside from the whole "wearing a costume based on racial stereotypes to a Halloween party" thing that should go without saying. ℕoir LeSable (talk) 19:08, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

I don't know how to break this to you, but 5-year-old kids so inclined don't buzz wearing a pretty dress because they're trying to impress anyone with their "aesthetic", exotic or otherwise. It's literally a childish delight in a pretty thing. Try walking me through the bit where any serious, fair-minded person would believe that delight was disrespecting their culture. Helena Bonham Carter (talk) 20:29, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

(Ah shit, I missed the response here, sorry for the late reply) So if a 5-year-old white kid decides that they want to dress up in blackface because they want to dress up as their favorite character or role model or whatever, or wear a Native American headdress because they think the feathers are pretty, that's totally fine then? Because it's a child showing admiration for something they like or thinking it looks pretty or cool? Or do you think we should be instead judging the parent who allows them to do so? ℕoir LeSable (talk) 19:58, 23 June 2021 (UTC)

i would think the real concern a parent might have is their child getting abuse from fucknuts calling them racist (you know some fucknuts will give kids shit over such things) or get abuse themselves with their parenting skills brought into question.

honestly dunno why we have clog on an ADVICE column giving ADVICE to a concerned parent. if in doubt ask, like they did. its not like they were told they were worse than hitler. get a fucking grip people there are real issues to get worked up about. AMassiveGay (talk) 20:46, 23 June 2021 (UTC)

humane pest control

i find it very strange this article could be considered a clog. if it were insisting you must deal with all pests and infestations without harming them in anyway else you worse than hitler and should be shunned from decent society and forced to live in a cave like the savage you are, then sure thats a bit much if there is hornet nest in your pillow.

but i dont think it is asking too much to not want to have kill things that are only pests because they are on your kitchen counter because a wall with a big enough hole is giving access to furry critters or you didnt mop a spilt glass of orange squash and thats how you get ants. you can go ham on the blighters if thats your thing, if not the article asks is there a humane method for getting rid of common pests on your own.

rats and mice? prevent them access to your property, job done. traps humane or otherwise would not work, just catch some, while more will keep coming. the solution to ants sounds preferable to me than poison if their suggestion is effective. ive put poison down before for ants and you end up with little containers filled with dead ants before it works - a few days at least. scrubbing work surfaces with vinegar seems much less icky - a win in my book. i loathe insects dead or alive.

cockcroaches they said would take more effort to get rid even for professionals, moths take time again but are easy to keep from being a problem in the first place, wasps - get a professional and foxes need to be dealt with humanely because its a crime any other way.

all suggestions on if you wanted to deal these yourself humanely. should you want to. it wasnt saying you should. it wasnt saying you could even if your infestation is too severe. it admits some methods are a ball ache. call the exterminators if like. humane ones or the ones everything will die ones if must. the article aint judging.

some folk dont to want actively destroy these things if they can help it. even if they dont like the things. it says as much at the beginning of the article. if you are not one such person, call rentokill if you got roaches. if you are, and you really love roaches for some reason, well you have options you lucky person.

i read the article earlier, before this was posted. had an infestation of bed bug that took an age to deal with. with poisons - fuck humane with them cunts. my flat mate panics every time he sees a spot of fluff in horror at the thought of their return. i was hoping oto seeing some treatment for them that didnt involve repeat calls from the exterminator (paid for ourselves because the housing association dragged their feet and we wanted them gone.) and various chemical bought from amazon wih varying levels of carcinogens. just in case. they didnt do bed bugs in the article and i havent been infested with any of the other pests. nice to know that i might not need the exterminator (very expensive) or coating the flat with so much poison it will kill me before the vermin, if i ever do.

anyway, not a clog to merely suggesting humane options and a not clog for not demanding kill it fire AMassiveGay (talk) 15:05, 6 July 2021 (UTC)

I found it very strange that anyone would propose to catch and release fleas. I do this for spiders, myself, though. But a lost ant is a dead ant; if their suffering means something to you, better to just step on them. Solicitude for animal's feelings goes way too far, and that's why it struck me as a clog. Smerdis of Tlön, wekʷōm teḱsos. 16:29, 6 July 2021 (UTC)

if the article was some kind of polemic, you might have point. its was just some folk are squeamish. here are some options. i wouldnt bother with most, the cockroachs especially. i didnt feel like it was lecturing me on what should do make me feel bad that wouldnt. it was just a vaguely interesting lightweight article. AMassiveGay (talk) 20:26, 6 July 2021 (UTC)

i was surprised to see the artice to be honest as much as anything else because i just been reading it before i saw it posted here. small world i guess AMassiveGay (talk) 20:30, 6 July 2021 (UTC)

It struck me as a strange example of animal-rights extremism. But foxes, yeah; we have red foxes in these parts, none of my neighbors are henhouse hobbyists so I am happy to see them. Smerdis of Tlön, wekʷōm teḱsos. 13:44, 7 July 2021 (UTC)

I really don't know what's your specific issue with the animal rights folk, it's almost baffling that it looks like you have an axe to grind. --It's-a me, LeftyGreenMario! 15:03, 7 July 2021 (UTC)

No secret I am very much against animal rights. There seems to be something uniquely toxic about the mixture of inappropriate sentimentality and moral judgmentalism, something that turns extreme and violent in the face of the realization that nobody cares. We've had the anti-abortion cult bawling for its lost darlings for fifty years now. While I breathe I will resist the rise of something very similar. Smerdis of Tlön, wekʷōm teḱsos. 15:17, 7 July 2021 (UTC)

Fleas caused the Black Death. They are the eternal enemies of the human race, and we must not rest until they are destroyed completely! Chef Moosolini’s Ristorante Italiano^{Make a Reservation} 15:22, 7 July 2021 (UTC)

I get that you might be somewhat less than serious here, but while I don't disagree that fleas pose some threat to individual humans or even local populations through the diseases they spread, there are effective treatments to most of such diseases by now. The bubonic plague hasn't been an existential threat to mankind since the discovery of antibiotics, despite regular outbreaks in less developed countries.

That said, just like I celebrate Jimmy Carters efforts to rid the world of Dracunculiasis by driving a parasitic creature in to extinction, I would welcome similar attempts in regards to other parasites. Like fleas for example.

Might be easier said than done though. Knight Commander^{In Service}_{To Her}^Goatness 15:34, 7 July 2021 (UTC)

No, we must destroy the flea for vengeance! Millions of Medieval voices cry out from the great beyond! Will you ignore them? Chef Moosolini’s Ristorante Italiano^{Make a Reservation} 15:40, 7 July 2021 (UTC)

(EC) I find interesting how the article doesn't mention mosquitoes. Probably people living in Africa or India would laugh if you tell them to relocate the Anopheles living in their houses. All of the animals he mention are also capable of transmitting diseases, even if in a smaller scale, sorry if this sound like a snowballing, but I don't think it's possible to decide at which point an animal is dangerous. Of course, some of them, like scorpions and some mosquitoes, spiders and snakes are always dangerous, but that does not convince me that you should just release cockroaches and mices on the wild so they can invade other houses and possibly infect other people with the diseases. GeeJayK (talk) 15:49, 7 July 2021 (UTC)

Yeah, mosquitos are actually the deadliest animal to humans in the whole world. Humans are in second place. Chef Moosolini’s Ristorante Italiano^{Make a Reservation} 15:56, 7 July 2021 (UTC)

(EC)Gazillion cattle souls cry out from the great beyond. For vengeance against mankind. We must rid this world of ourselves, for the good of every other species in existence. Drink the Cool Flavor Aid y'all. Knight Commander^{In Service}_{To Her}^Goatness 16:00, 7 July 2021 (UTC)

No, it is now clear that we must destroy every other species in existence. If they're out to get us, then we gotta get them first! Go team humanity! Chef Moosolini’s Ristorante Italiano^{Make a Reservation} 16:02, 7 July 2021 (UTC)

Kill every animal in the world so we might all become vegetarians! No, wait. Kill all the plants too! Some of them might try and kill us too. Better to kill everything so we might die on our own terms of starvation. Knight Commander^{In Service}_{To Her}^Goatness 16:08, 7 July 2021 (UTC)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘Or cannibalism. Followed by starvation. Knight Commander^{In Service}_{To Her}^Goatness 16:09, 7 July 2021 (UTC)

I unironically wanted to discuss a criterion, but since we're just shitposting now, song theme for slaying the whole world. GeeJayK (talk) 16:10, 7 July 2021 (UTC)

.

Also, I have to say I'm surprised that no one mentioned Startship Troopers yet so I'll do it. The only good bug is a dead bug. I say kill 'em all! GeeJayK (talk) 16:30, 7 July 2021 (UTC)

As this article is from uk, im not sure that mosquitos are a common infestation. common pest sure, but i dont think anyone has to call the exterminator to rid them from your house. also, in uk they dont carry much in the way of deadly disease in these parts.

More of note (aa mentioned earlier) is no mention of bedbugs. probably as there is no 'umane' method to dealing with them. nor should you. kill them fire, with poison, under heel of your boot, with a thermo nuclear device. there is nothing they dont deserve having done to eradicate their kind from existence, no such thing as overkill. never suffer a bed bug to live and dont let your guard down for a second - they are incedibly resistant and hard to kill. anyone whose been blighted from these apple seed sized shits and been woken up in the night an found one these cunts on them, squashed em under a thumb knowing that it is your own blood that bursts out them as you end them, will under stand. fucking little shits. AMassiveGay (talk) 19:29, 8 July 2021 (UTC)

Bedbugs are a fascinating example of evolution at work. They literally co-evolved with us, same as the house mouse and sparrow. When we go, they go. Smerdis of Tlön, wekʷōm teḱsos. 16:07, 9 July 2021 (UTC)

Rolling Stone

Considering Robert Maxwell, Ghislane Maxwell's old man, was an agent for MOSSAD, why is this a clog? AMassiveGay (talk) 08:37, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

porn for kids

im missing whats particularly cloggy about a linked story that notes a rabid twitter mob is rabid and deleting poorly worded tweets almost immediately is too slow for the braying mob halt its unstoppable outrage. someone did a bad tweet. clarifications are moot. someone did a bad twitter. they must be destroyed. the tweet was bad. so point of the clog? i dunno what the point here is. the story is about twitter mobs. the clog is someone done a tweet wrong. AMassiveGay (talk) 21:11, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

Good image about the vaccine passport

Enjoy. --2001:8003:DDB1:C600:5D64:3934:326E:31C5 (talk) 23:53, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

Nicky Minaj and Piers Morgan

Should we be giving professional snowflake / troll Morgan any attention? If we don't talk about him, he'll go away. LondonGrump (talk) 06:04, 17 September 2021 (UTC)

this is asking a group of people who cant help but feed trolls to not feed trolls. its unlikely AMassiveGay (talk) 08:16, 17 September 2021 (UTC)

Is this a clog or just stupid?

Seattle elementary school cancels Halloween parade, says it has historically marginalized students of color ^{— Unsigned, by: 2804:14C:5B72:83F4:52E:29FD:7530:30E2 / talk}

Never heard that one before, traditionally around this time of year it's been the fundies getting spooked out by anything remotely resembling witches or something, and not the woke warriors. Seems dumb at first glance. Seems also like it's just this one school being silly, so far. The main thing I get Googling this side of the aisle on this sort of subject is several "cultural appropriation costumes" type articles (which tend to be useless articles as this sort of thing is always a judgement call), and tips from the Ric Romero side such as "don't wear blackface, it's racist". PanGalacticGargleBlaster (talk) 01:33, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

These types of articles seem to be consistent with this time of year as "War on Christmas" articles from what I've noticed. Throwing the baby out with the bathwater is an unfortunately common tradition among school administrators when dealing many issues.-Ryan1257 (talk) 17:39, 28 October 2021 (UTC)

Inflation has its advantages.

It iss a godsend to debtors, the bane of creditors, and cuts down the value of hoarded wealth. Smerdis of Tlön, wekʷōm teḱsos. 14:38, 26 November 2021 (UTC)

It's a lot nuanced than that. The majority of formal creditors/debtors will be unaffected because interest rates will usually take inflation into account (inflation in interest rates etc) meaning neither side comes out ahead. Folks who have not CYA'd for it - say informal lenders, folks who have given goods on credit etc - will be the ones who are stung. The Intercept writer is seemingly living in an odd world where the 1% don't employ folks who know this.

Also, the 1% don't keep their wealth in cash in shoeboxes or in a savings account – it's in assets. Art, property, shares and so on. That stuff holds it's value or even increases in value regardless of inflation (generally). So they're not hurt there either – in fact, they might even win more (poorer folks holding cash will suffer more).

The real reason the 1% don't like 'high inflation' is because it reminds them of the 1970s, and when the oil-shocks ruined many a assumption about business plans etc and changed the economy. That's the crux of the issue for the 'rentier' super-rich; they want tomorrow to look just like today, so their investments are safe (is also why they're leading the screams against the shift to homeworking etc). And in more sinister reasons; high inflation makes it harder to asset-strip big companies and leave them as zombies.

It deserves to be a clog because it pretty ignorant (though a different ignorant). It's not inflation which causes debt-loads to shrink, it's economic growth. Inflation needs to be watched somewhat, partly because many companies (big/small) are carrying a lot of Covid-debt and high debt interest might kill them off even before they can grow out of the debt. Mass company death will cripple chances of growth and make things worse. KarmaPolice (talk) 04:44, 12 December 2021 (UTC)

Dawkins was already terf, right now he's just bitter

He had his award removed earlier in the year; https://www.theguardian.com/books/2021/apr/20/richard-dawkins-loses-humanist-of-the-year-trans-comments Now he's just being an angry clown because he was snubbed by his scientific peers. BumblingBuffoon (talk) 15:39, 2 December 2021 (UTC)

He really is an embarrassment to himself. For someone so defensive about freedom of speech and expression he has a rather staid, dull, conservative personality these days. Even the wild stories about him wrestling his postman naked seem somewhat boring due to his involvement in the story, regardless of any factuality and/or lack there of in the tale. Cardinal Chang (talk) 18:44, 2 December 2021 (UTC)

I didn't realise Dawkins was a feminist, let alone radical. Maybe we need a more honest word for these trans-haters. LondonGrump (talk) 09:18, 4 December 2021 (UTC)

Tick box question

Where does [8] go, as it ticks several boxes? (The pupils who flagged up the issues should be praised for using their critical facilities.) Anna Livia (talk) 20:11, 19 March 2022 (UTC)

Latest post about ivermectin senator guy

This doesn't seem to be a clog? it's just news, this should probably be in a different section. PhoxyDude (talk) 03:06, 14 April 2022 (UTC)

Does the onion really count here?

Unless they post some bad satire, i think an onion article would just go in blogs instead, right? PhoxyDude (talk) 00:54, 9 June 2022 (UTC)

hollywood and guns

the fetishisation of guns in the movies must be factor though, right? serving as both advertisemnet for guns and reinforcing a gun culture? not the sole culprit, but there must have some influence on some level.

that hollywood movies have a world audience doesnt get hollywood of the hook. i live in the uk. if i get hard from watching all the big guns going off on the screen, the guns stay on the screen. in the us, you can go out and buy the real thing. AMassiveGay (talk) 07:21, 14 June 2022 (UTC)

It's similar to the nonsense argument that video games cause violence. There have been multiple studies, and surprise, no such link has been found. Guns can be bought in the UK, there are gun clubs etc. But mass shootings are incredibly rare, Hungerford might be the last one, a lifetime ago Cardinal Chang (talk) 10:23, 14 June 2022 (UTC)

Oh, wait, there were the Plymouth Shootings last year, the Moss Side farce in 2018, Cumbria in 2010 Dunblane in 1996 and Hungerford in 87. While shootings occur, it's the rarity everywhere else vs the near daily frequency in the US that highlights just how bad things really are. Cardinal Chang (talk) 10:32, 14 June 2022 (UTC)

Mind you, there is now this https://www.rte.ie/entertainment/2022/0614/1304700-stars-sign-open-letter-over-gun-depictions-on-screen/ Cardinal Chang (talk) 14:31, 14 June 2022 (UTC)

There is a recent study that suggests that guns in movies increase children's interest in real guns. But I imagine the effect is minor overall, given that mass shootings are pretty uniquely an American problem and gun-filled action movies are hardly unique to America (just ask John Woo). Portions of gun culture in America to me almost are cult-like in their paranoid delusions (hell it's not surprising that even the Moonies are exploiting this with a gun-worshiping Pennsylvania "church") and if one is going to tackle a culture that is causing the mass shootings, though no studies exist that I can see, I'd suspect this lot way before Hollywood. 35.140.177.2 (talk) 15:31, 14 June 2022 (UTC)

minimum working age

did no one ever have a paper round? or read the posted article? why is this a clog exactly? AMassiveGay (talk) 20:19, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

Magic Nerds mad about tiddies

A creator from the Wizards of the Coast creator program has been fired for allegedly sexualising the game with her onlyfans content and antifeminist chuds are blaming it on her being 'too hot so feminists shut her down' instead of a corporate decision about their image. Read the comments on this Source: https://boundingintocomics.com/2020/07/03/wizards-of-the-coast-removes-lizbeth-eden-from-magic-creator-program-for-photos-featuring-nudity-and-sexualized-posing/ ^{— Unsigned, by: 203.100.222.84 / talk / contribs}

Do book reviews go in the clogosphere?

If so, here's a good one, from a soldier in the Spanish Civil War. Enjoy! ^{— Unsigned, by: 2001:8003:59db:4100:c477:8214:79d9:b102 / talk / contribs}

Spells coming through your tv screen

Why do they think you have wear a Victorian witch costume to cast spells? Didn't they know that God's Not Dead casts a spell to turn your children into shrimp-eating, mixed-cloth-wearing, hell bound sinners? There's even an atheist on screen! ikanreed ^{🐐Bleat at me} 14:44, 6 October 2022 (UTC)

The "concerned Texas mother" who posted this is literally a farmer, so obligatory Blazing Saddles.

(I haven't seen the sequel, but I have caught enough of the original Hocus Pocus on the teevee. The real "devil's bargain" must be in how many souls were sold in order for that hot mess of a movie to actually become popular...) 35.140.177.2 (talk) 14:58, 6 October 2022 (UTC)

A lot of people seem to think Elon Musk buying Twitter heralds the return of Trump and associated ills

Is that true? I'm genuinely curious. I know where Musk's political loyalties lie, but the resulting PR would be a disaster. Then again, Musk is a literal proll, so I'm not sure he'd even care. Vee (talk) 17:59, 27 October 2022 (UTC)

I kinda hope his stewardship of the platform renders the whole industry toxic, well more toxic than it currently is. So much so, that it becomes financially untenable. Implodes in a glorious display of human selfishness and narcissism, to fizzle out impotent and spent like MySpace is today. (Undecided if I'm referring to Twitter itself, all of social media or simply Elon Musk. Why not all three.)

Bloody hell, can you believe we can now look back at Myspace with slight misty eyes nostalgia? Don't, it was just as shite Cardinal Chang (talk) 18:39, 27 October 2022 (UTC)

Musk already is having to calm down advertisers, to point out one aspect.

The other aspect that I think doesn't come easily to those who babble about politics all day: most social media users don't post about politics. Judging by the relative low traffic of most "conservative" political social media sites, my hunch is that most of the reason is not because of "censorship" of viewpoints, because there are plenty of outlets for free-for-all political discussion of any political orientation where "censorship" doesn't apply. Rather, I suspect that politics is not what most people want to use social media for. It's to keep in touch with friends, post funny memes, listen to tunes, and the like. "Social shit". No duh.

It's my theory for one reason why Tiktok has succeeded of late: anecdotally, their algorithmic feed seems very good at pushing the dumb but fun meme crapola. (There obviously is toxicity on Tiktok especially if you look for it, but whenever I've browsed Tiktok's main feed, admittedly not much, it seems rather clear of a lot of the political talking head bullshit brigade as well as the anger karma farming. My experience is limited here, though, so corrections welcome.) Whereas Facebook is dying, with a reputation of pushing toxic content and anger karma farming into people's feed whether people wanted it or not.

In other words, what Musk is buying Twitter for is not what I postulate as a successful formula for a successful social media site these days... which would really be, for your algorithmic stuff, downplay the anger shit, upvote the cute cats and whatnot. And don't let the algorithm interfere with the personal connection (as Facebook really annoyingly does now).

It's actually worse for Twitter in a sense, because he's become a toxic repulsive tech bro symbol to many. And since I bet he won't be able to bring back all the racists from Parler/Gab/etc. due to advertiser pressure, I bet he'll also tick off "conservatives" too. We'll see. 72.184.99.135 (talk) 19:49, 27 October 2022 (UTC)

the reasons people prefer not to post political stuff on social media is because they fear the harassment that comes with it, according to the article you cite. also, not posting political content says little about consuming political content, or that social media is not all equal. if i wished to share photos of my niece and nephew, i would not be posting them on twitter or youtube. my hot take on the issues of the day, though - #what i think. i would also not bother responding to a youtube video via youtube video of my own. i would not bother watching a youtube video that i thoroughly disagree with. not all the way through. 10 mins easnt exactly a long time, but its long enough to prevent all but already interested bother. a tweet take a second or two to read to consume and a second or two to respond, and i dont have to worry about the lighting and the sound and does my hair look alright. i would not do any of this via tiktok either. its not really twitter with videos because the video component removes the immediacy of twitter. its not really youtube either, as the short length of the videos are not really enough for effort of producing a video that says anything more than look at me. 'look at me' is the reason for the tik tok, being visually and sonically interesting is the name of the game not your politics. that, and tiktok is chinese and there are alot chinese people on tiktok.

Twitter does not mean the death of facebook, tiktok does not mean the death of youtube. they all serve different purposes, used and consumed in different ways by different people. they can all exist in their own space alongside each other. as much as their owners would like no one site is a one stop shop for all ones social media needs. if facebook dies it will because of the rise of a better facebook not because of twitter or tiktok. if twitter dies, it will be because of a better twitter.

twitters problem, now musks problem is advertising revenue. ad revenue has dropped significantly as a result of the pandemic. facebook and instagram are better and bigger mediums for businesses to spend their advertising budget on, and dont have the same kind of toxicity problems that twitter has, and twitter has a tiny userbase by comparison. letting nazis tweet risk shrinking their userbase so less ad revenue, hence musk is talking about subscriptions. but who would pay to use twitter? AMassiveGay (talk) 12:45, 3 November 2022 (UTC)

Sure. "Politics" has a special meaning on social media though: a bunch of people IN A RAGE POSTING ALL-CAPS BULLSHIT WHO ARE MAD AS HELL AND POST ABOUT *EVERYTHING* AS POLITICS EVEN IF IT IS NOT!!!! (Insert deranged personal attack here) It gets tiresome *real* fast when someone on general social media babbles about politics all of the time, especially if they are mad and not very coherent. A lot of these types are *really* engaged and it thus tends to warp any primitive "engagement" algorithm, so on something like Facebook people you tangentially know (or even bullshit clickbait posted by God knows who) tended to be prioritized over the normal updates you previously got from close friends. Basically, it's the r/TheDonald problem Reddit had (where their high "engagement" flooded the general feeds with bullshit), but it equally applies to those affected with "Trump Derangement Syndrome". Obviously many people have a political side but from what I see most people are more subtle or a little more nuanced, IMHO, it's more like maybe "let's check out this commentator I agree with" every once in a while or post a news article here and there. There's a correlation between "high engagement" and "high asshole factor".

I kind of agree with this article that over the last decade there has been a shift from the text-dominant social media of the past to video (and pictures). This shift does not bode well for the text-oriented Twitter in the first place. (Add to this the fact that Twitter previously had Vine, which should have fitted the times perfectly, and killed it for some reason.)

But social media platforms actually can rapidly decline if a major change causes user revolt or if something way improved comes along. Myspace "died" when Facebook came and was better (and new owner Rupert Murdoch desperately tried to flood MySpace with ads for teh revenuez). Tumblr "died" when The Powers That Be decided to ban porn on the platform. Digg "died" when a redesign was horribly botched.

Twitter's base from my perspective was celebrities, journalists, and other people of news and culture and whatnot. It was in trouble before Musk precisely due to the r/TheDonald type problem of lots of "highly engaged" assholes who often formed mobs that attacked not only each other but the high-profile content drivers. ("Celeb XYZ deletes Twitter account due to harassment / abuse" was not an uncommon news story of late.) Opening the floodgate to even more highly engaged assholes, charging celebrities (who generate the content non-assholes actually might be "highly engaged" by) for a "verified" check box, and firing half your employees (many who probably have the skills to create whatever the next Twitter will be)... well, at this point I'd put the odds on Twitter having a Digg-style exodus higher than the odds of Twitter thriving. It may still be around, of course, but it could be a wasteland. We'll see. 72.184.99.135 (talk) 15:47, 3 November 2022 (UTC)

[EC] There's also the non-corporate alternatives where some (maybe especially technical) people go when pushed to finally abandon Twitter. Mastodon (decentralized Twitter alternative sometimes described as "Twitter without Nazis") has so far gained roughly 200000 users since Musk completed the Twitter buy.[9] But while a very big increase for Mastodon, it's a tiny drop for Twitter. Still, Musk certainly seems to boost the chances of decentralized, non-corporate and non-profit alternatives eventually becoming big in the mainstream, more than anything before him. As a reaction to him (a little like with Microsoft and software development forges). --ApooftGnegiol (talk) 16:10, 3 November 2022 (UTC)