Write you God damned congressman. Get a picket sign. The house is on fire, just because you told the kids not to play with matches doesn't mean you don't need to grab a bucket now.

Grab a bucket and do what? Using your fire/bucket analogy, it's a multi-alarm raging inferno billed as a "fire fighter training exercise" to give them practice should a "real" fire happen in the future. The Congresscritters are the government officials that signed off on the approval to run the training opportunity. There's no amount of writing or picketing that's going to help.

What's antitrust about this?

Not only is it that the guys making big bucks making decisions are horribly undereducated: they won't pay for security because that would cut into THEIR compensation (to have to pay competent engineering staff). So not only are they undereducated, they have a conflict of interest that promotes horrible engineering practices.

Which is the whole point. The company gives explicit instructions that personal cell phones are not to be used or authorized. You have to find something alternative (pay phone, calling card, tin cans...). Now if you happen to still use your personal cell phone for a call, you're breaking policy. They won't know [wink wink] that you're using your personal cell phone for convenience unless you happen to try to get reimbursed for it. And if you try, well, that results in some type of reprimand/discipline since you violated company policy.

They aren't commercials, but I hate the DJs between songs. I just wish they would play songs, one after another. I don't care about whatever drivel they want to talk about as if they were real DJs.

And while I know you said music stations, if you ever go to one of the talk stations, commercials are awful. ESPN radio seems to be about 50/50 mix between actual talk and commercials. I understand SiriusXM doesn't have control over ESPN's inserted ads, but the ones that SiriusXM plays in the spots where local affiliates would insert local ads....argh. Get rich quick schemes, shady testosterone supplements, trucking company help-wanted ads, and franchise opportunities are just awful.

You are really overestimating the amount of work that could be required. Applications like Couchpotato for movies make it as simple as visit IMDB and you can quickly queue up an entire artist's career with just a few quick clicks. Headphones is similar for music, but not quite the same. I don't imagine it would be too hard to something similar to Couchpotato once an organized source becomes readily available.

Exactly. Leave New York and go somewhere safe and free and rights are respected. I'd suggest somewhere in the safe Midwest, close to a major city so that you have services and activities that are of interest, but not too close so that you are under the actual jurisdiction of the big city's police department. I hear the St. Louis area is nice and quite. Maybe Ferguson?

It's not a New York City problem or even a big city problem, it's a law enforcement problem.

You're allowed to say fuck. Fuck fuck fuckity fuck.

Perhaps it was poorly stated on my part. What I was meaning was an article about WBC picketing a funeral does not make the article homophobic just because the subject the article about is.

The original comment was would Fark prohibit a legitimate news article that reported on a (horribly understated) misogynistic action. And I was saying no, because it wasn't the news article that was necessarily misogynistic, rather it was the action being reported on. If someone came along and said that the victim got what she deserved, then that would be prohibited.

The problem here is that the policy is apparently all about "misogyny", which makes it inherently discriminatory. The policy should be about sexism.

While I understand what you are saying, I disagree in the intent of the policy. Sexism is offensive, misogyny is hatred. Being offensive isn't prohibited for if it was, the internet would cease to exist. Being outright hateful is though.

If I say "that awful parking job had to be by a woman", I'm sexist. If I say "that bitch deserves to be raped for that parking job", I'm misogynistic. It's the later trolling they don't want.

No, for the same reason why a news article that talks about a white supremacist assaulting a African-American isn't automatically racist. Or one about Westboro Baptist Church picketing a funeral of someone who was gay doesn't make it automatically homophobic. The context of the whole article is what makes it misogynistic (or racist, or homophobic, or ...)

Now if that Reuters article had that same line, but then followed it with that the woman shouldn't have been out of the kitchen. Or she just needed to fix a sandwich. Or any other misogynistic ideas according to modern society then yes, it would be banned.