Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: astroturf (Score 3, Insightful) 312

by Ungrounded Lightning (#48633483) Attached to: Colorado Sued By Neighboring States Over Legal Pot

As you can see, the moderation converged on a more proper +5 Insightful

  I've read the post carefully and it doesn't qualify as Flamebait IMHO. It states a controversial political opinion and thus invites a discussion, which may lead to flamage, but does not itself lead with a flame.

So this looks like someone who doesn't like the position trying to suppress it, by hitting it with the most plausible -1, in the hope that one more like-minded person will have mod points and get it suppressed before very many people see it. That works for "politically incorrect" subjects (such as criticisms of the "heat death of the Earth, everybody panic and suppress technology" interpretation of climate data), where a crowd of like-minded free speech haters are ready to suppress opposing opinions. But pro-pot doesn't appear to attract that much system-gaming opposition.

Right now it only takes two downmods to hide a non-anonymous itme. It seems to me that we have enough people willing to moderate that it's time to scale up the mod system, so a small astroturf operation can't shut down debate. Say: double it: Mods get 10 points, -2 hides, non-anynomous starts at +2, high-karma at +4, doulble everybody's current karma and readjust the cutpoints for bonuses, caps, and the like. That would mean it would take two moderators to suppress a anonymous post and four for authors willing to risk reputation. (It would also mean more work for those who are willing to moderate - but they might be more willing to spend a point if they had more to spend.)

Comment: Re:did you see that piece (Score 1) 330

by drinkypoo (#48632609) Attached to: FBI Confirms Open Investigation Into Gamergate

After all that has happened it's almost disingenuous to point out that the review never happened, like a "white nationalist" pointing out minor arguments over how many thousands of Jews died in a particular camp.

Hmm, evasion, godwin... BINGO! Man, this thread has been pay dirt.

It's true that review never happened but a good deal of favoritism did.

Welcome to commercial journalism! Boy, have you ever picked the wrong place to make your stand.

Comment: Re:did you see that piece (Score 1) 330

by drinkypoo (#48632603) Attached to: FBI Confirms Open Investigation Into Gamergate

the journalist does implicitly make a commitment towards their readers to perform their job with a certain level of professionalism and adherence to good journalistic practices

And that level is very, very low. Pretty much all sites inflate scores so that they will continue to receive review copies. As you say, whether genitals are involved is totally irrelevant. It's beyond hypocrisy to make this moment the stand against the lack of integrity in games journalism when there has never been any to begin with. Games journalism was born at a time when journalism in general had already become grossly commercial, and it set out to emulate it as closely as possible. The games magazines followed the format of the sports magazines, which were already about selling you shit. It would be shocking if it had not come out to be horribly corrupt.

The fact that sex was the tipping point proves just how pathetic the gamergaters are. If they could get laid, they'd be less jealous. They should spend less time hating, and more time hustling.

Comment: Re:Ethics? (Score 2) 327

by drinkypoo (#48632595) Attached to: FBI Confirms Open Investigation Into Gamergate

Its about corruption, about members of the gaming press having relations, both physical AND financial, with game developers they were promoting,

We already found out that this was a non-story, so why are you repeating it? zzzzzzz

When the news came out? THIRTEEN gaming sites issued THE EXACT SAME STORY about how they didn't need gamers and that gamers were "dead".

So you're offering as evidence your lack of understanding of how "news" works today? I guess you haven't heard of a wire service, either. Hint: It's how news is made.

Its REALLY simple folks,

Some people are making mountains out of molehills.

Comment: Re:Old news (Score 1) 327

by drinkypoo (#48632581) Attached to: FBI Confirms Open Investigation Into Gamergate

The FBI has also stated that some people named as hacking victims had in-fact hacked themselves. Didn't name names, but three names that come to mind are Phil Fish, Zoe Quinn and Brianna Wu.

They didn't name names, but you're completely willing to do so even though you don't know who did it, and it could have been someone on the other side completely. You are precisely the kind of person that you claim to be railing against.

Comment: Re:Wow. This whole sorry clusterfuck sucks (Score 1) 330

by drinkypoo (#48632577) Attached to: FBI Confirms Open Investigation Into Gamergate

Anti-gamergate is made up mainly of those rich middle class women who think that nerds who have been picked on their entire lives for being nerds are somehow opressing them.

[citation needed]

Gamergate is made up mostly of kids who fling slurs that would make a sailor bluch around on XBox live

They wouldn't blush or bluch, whatever that is, they would just shake their heads and wonder how those children became orphans, because surely children with parents would never behave like them.

Comment: Re:harassment attribution (Score 0) 327

by drinkypoo (#48632565) Attached to: FBI Confirms Open Investigation Into Gamergate

We already know several of the serious ones were false flag fakes.

Where's the evidence? We've all seen the evidence that the original basis for this whole flap was a bullshit lie, so we know that gamergate is founded on bullshit. But we haven't seen any evidence that any of the threats were false flag fakes. If you have any, provide it. If not, stop lying like the liar you are.

Comment: Gun practice teaches calm - biofeedback style. (Score 1) 527

by Ungrounded Lightning (#48631389) Attached to: Reaction To the Sony Hack Is 'Beyond the Realm of Stupid'

Have you seen people drive? Road rage? Now think many of these same people with guns.

Target range practice is a very powerful biofeedback mechanism for teaching the suppression of the production of adrenaline and of all symptoms of excitement. Aligning gun sights - a pair of visual targets separated by about the length of the gun barrel (inches, a foot, or several feet), aligning them with a target (at tens of feet), and holding the alignment, gives visibility to even microscopic tremors and movement. Getting the image right and stable means drastically suppressing this movement. Over a number of range sessions, this leads to learning how to be icy calm, as a reflex, in the midst of a very stressful environment (full of intermittent explosions, bright lights, acrid smells, and odd-temperature winds).

(The effect is extreme. It was discovered that good target shooters, thinking they were just controlling their breath, had actually learned to "stop their heartbeat" - compressing the time between the pairs of beats before and after firing a shot and doubling the time between beats during the trigger pull.)

The result is that, after just a few good sessions, this becomes imprinted. Even in a rage, putting your hand on a gun drops you into that icy calm state.

Comment: Re:Land of the fre (Score 1) 527

by Ungrounded Lightning (#48629431) Attached to: Reaction To the Sony Hack Is 'Beyond the Realm of Stupid'

Indeed, though antagonizing your opponents like that probably isn't going to help the cause.

There is no long a point in trying not antagonizing them. Pretty much anyone who is still actively lobbying against private ownership of guns is either ignoring the evidence, incapable of uncerstandng it, or has a hidden agenda (such as creating victim-rich zones for govenment or criminal activity).

These people are not going to be converted. Things are far enough long that we no longer need them as straw men to raise the bogus argumets to be knocked down with logic. (Those who can be convinced with logic are now mostly either convinced or subject to information shortage). But they remain useful as targets of ridicule, so those who are more interested in being with the in crowd than making smart decisions can be converted.

For those still uncertain on the issue: Do you want to reduce murder, rape, assault, robery, criminal victimization, and institutional suppression of minority groups? Or do you want to want to reduce gun possession? There is no longer any question: More guns mean less of all those things.

Comment: Re:Under US Jurisdiction? (Score 1) 280

by Grishnakh (#48627939) Attached to: Eric Schmidt: To Avoid NSA Spying, Keep Your Data In Google's Services

Now, on to the fight: America is explicitly NOT a democracy.

Yes, it is. You even say so yourself:

America is a democratic Republic.

"Democracy" in modern parlance == "democratic republic". When the word "democracy" is used in regular conversation, NO ONE is talking about Athenian-style direct democracy, unless they explicitly say so. It's only pedants like you who even think of this.

It was formed that way EXPLICITLY to prevent mob rule.

Democratic republics exist for several reasons. One is because no one citizen can possibly be competent at voting on every single issue that faces a large and populous nation, nor can every citizen be expected to invest that much time into the governing process. So we "outsource" most of the work of governing to politicians called "representatives", and elect them to represent us and do our bidding. The rules you talk about do exist to make sure there's a longer feedback loop, so people's short-term reactionary tendencies don't make a mess of things, and so that there's a rule of law: people have to follow laws, until the laws are changed.

The Constitution and Bill of rights spell out what America is supposed to be. If there is a true need for the Republic to change the rules it is built upon, then there are mechanisms in place to do that... but THEY HAVE NOT BEEN USED.

Yes, they have. The Constitution has been amended dozens of times since it was written, and countless Supreme Court cases have further changed laws. And if you have some kind of problem with a court effectively legislating and deciding law, then you have a problem with English Common Law, which this country was explicitly founded upon.

Why? We can argue about that forever. Regardless, the basic rules from which all other rules rest upon, have not been changed. That means a police state is incompatible with American law; both in the letter and spirit of the law.

Completely incorrect. If case law and legislation (at all levels of government) have resulted in a police state, then a police state is indeed compatible with American law, by very definition.

It's sad how poorly educated in basic Civics most Americans are these days.

Comment: Re:Under US Jurisdiction? (Score 1) 280

by Grishnakh (#48626693) Attached to: Eric Schmidt: To Avoid NSA Spying, Keep Your Data In Google's Services

Don't be stupid. Anyone who's an American Citizen is by definition an American, whether you like it or not, and whether you agree with them (and their idiotic ideas) or not. They certainly are "welcome" in America, they're Citizens and they were born here. Whether something is against the "spirit" of the founding laws is open to debate, and quite frankly, totally irrelevant since, as a representative democracy, this country (and any other with the same form of government) is supposed to reflect the will of the citizenry. If the citizens are a bunch of fools who vote for police-state laws, then that's what they're supposed to have. You're obviously the one here who opposes democracy and wishes to have an authoritarian government, because any government which does not reflect the will of the voters can only be authoritarian.

Real Users find the one combination of bizarre input values that shuts down the system for days.

Working...