This will be one of the few times you'll hear this, but Microsoft did too good a job creating XP.
Correction: They did a good job *FIXING* Windows XP.
If you recall the "instant infection" days where you couldn't install XP and run updates without getting infected. I had a people I helped over the phone who followed the procedure:
1. Install XP
2. Download the SP2 ISO
3. Burn the ISO to disk
4. Start over because they were compromised while downloading the ISO.
5. Install XP, then SP2 via CD.
If I was able to get them a CD I would, but many of my friends where college were in different states, or even different countries, and this was quicker than waiting for a CD in the mail.
YRO is indeed an acronym for that, and it has been progressively bastardized over the past 15 years. If you're cool with that, fine. I am not.
Clearly your approach of bitching anonymously about it has yielded the results you're looking for. It's YRO, I know what YRO is used for in actuality, and I'll decide whether or not to read a YRO article based on my mood.
Clearly the people who submitted it are fucking idiots and...Timothy is a fucking idiot too.
Demonstrate this. Seriously, provide actual facts to prove that these people have an IQ between 0 and 25. Just because someone disagrees with you doesn't mean they're stupid; it means that if you have to resort to calling them stupid that you're either unwilling or incapable of having a civilized conversation.
I am indeed inclined to stop reading
Good. Fuck off.
(A) YRO is an initialism for 'your rights online'. This has nothing to do with your rights, nor is it online.
YRO may be an acronym for that, but clearly you haven't been paying attention to how it's actually been applied over the past 15 years, which as I stipulated, has not been 'News for nerds.'
(B) It does not fall under the category 'Stuff that matters'. Perhaps a fraction of the Florida populace care about it, but it absolutely is an irrelevancy.
Clearly the people who submitted it feel differently and...
(C) Timothy posted it, hence it was Timothy who held the hammer in his hand and proceeded to drive in that last nail. Fuck Timothy, fuck Slashdot, and fuck irrelevant cap like this.
...timothy agrees with them. He's an editor. Determining what and what does not matter to the majority of his readers by his judgement is specifically what he is hired to do. And if you don't like his editorial choices, you don't have to read them. Seriously. You can go under settings, click the exclusions tab, and filter out his posts entirely. Or filter out topics you don't want to read about, like say, the Zimmerman trial. Or, as you seem inclined to do, stop reading
(A) This is under YRO, which has not been strictly 'News for nerds' for as long as I've been a registered user.
(B) This was the first practical test of FL's stand-your-ground law, so it does fall under the category 'Stuff that matters'
(C) Timothy only posted it, which I infer to be at the behest of a lot of other users who felt that it was either NFN and/or STM
Posted by timothy on Saturday July 13, 2013 @09:59PM
from the you-can-now-stop-submitting-the-news dept.
Besides, OSC's SF books have nothing to do with his views on a totally orthogonal societal issue.
Not so. Enchantment is about pre-ordained heterosexual marriage and the struggle of the Christian partners against pagan deities. It's a thinly-veiled showcase of his beliefs.
Boycotting the former because of the latter is called an ad hominem. Case in point, a lot of people enjoy Disney movies and Ford cars despite Walt Disney and Henry Ford being nasty antisemitic pro-nazi nutjobs.
No, boycotting the business of someone whose beliefs you despise is called the free market. Christians do it all the time. Whether or not someone can enjoy a movie is incidental to whether or not they choose to do so. Personally, I boycotted the movie Powder because the director was a convicted child molester. I don't give a shit whether or not the movie was any good. Disney knew of his history when they hired him, and I won't give them a dime of my money for that product.
Exactly how is this story pushing that agenda? It's pointing out that more respondents to the poll view him unfavorably than do favorably. Nowhere does it imply that he has no support.
However, it does NOT state that 33% voted "Snowden did the right thing." It merely shows that 33% of the respondents to the poll viewed him favorably, and it's quite a stretch to infer that they think he did the right thing from that response.