Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re:Nice (Score 4, Insightful) 719

You completely missed the point that was made.

When you persecute people and infringe upon them, it is necessary for their own good and their own existence to push back. Do you think gay people like spending so much of their life fighting for gay rights and equal treatment under the Constitution and the safety of not being beat to death on the street for simply being gay? Or do you think they would rather just have the equality and the safety of every other human being and carry on with the rest of their life?

Those "uppity gays" and "uppity negroes" and "militant atheists" that religious people usually say "should just shut the fuck up if they don't believe, because then it doesn't concern them" are "uppity" and "militant" precisely because they have to be active in fighting against the way they are treated, dismissed, and impacted by those who are intolerant.

Of course, not everyone can afford the time or personal/professional risk of being militant. Thankfully, there are those that make it their life-long cause to do that for the rest of them.

It is also hypocritical to call people "militant" who are just standing up for their rights and pushing back against your imposition upon society. I would say the "militant" ones are those who are using law and mob-rule to impose their religion upon politics, government, education, law, and all of society. Making comments about people being "animals" based on the tone of their skin or suggesting we should murder them so they "can meet their maker and find out how wrong they are about religion". THAT is militant.

It's a rather perverse and sick tactic to push and bully someone pretty much forever and then, when they stand up for themselves, shout "he's being intolerant of me!" (or, in some cases, trying to discredit lack of belief by claiming it is as much a religion as belief -- when it is the non-existence of belief and nothing more).

I imagine there were a lot of dudes, like yourself, back in the 1960s talking about how "all them negroes are actin' like nutjobs with all that marchin' and militant sitting in the front of the bus and drinking from white fountains and shit". (I am not trying to implicate you as a racist or anything, but am just drawing parallels between the attitude and terms exhibited by those in multiple situations to dismiss, diminish, and denigrate other segments of society who are actively demanding fair treatment).

Comment Re:hes right (Score 5, Insightful) 1501

Yep. I used to sit about five feet from a guy who was in management (but not my management) who for some inexplicable reason disliked me. Not only did he dislike me, but he talked shit about me to other managers and employees behind my back. He was very nice to my face, though. I would never have known any of this if it weren't for a colleague and another manager who clued me into what this guy was saying. And, fortunate for me, these people always countered his comments, told him he was wrong, and otherwise stood up for me in his non-sense rally to bash me to people.

I would have rather he had just been an asshole to me and lay it out, so we knew where we stood.

Comment Re:Victim Card (Score 5, Insightful) 1501

It all derailed when it started referring to "verbal threats" and "verbal abuse" as "violence". Sorry, but unless a dev is at my door with a baseball bat, it's just words. Additionally, we've all dealt with people who are crude, terse, mean, or just flat out obnoxious prima-donas. It only impacts you if you give a shit. I've dealt with some of those in my career and all that matters to me is whether they are productive and talented. Telling me "you made a stupid fucking mistake" isn't any worse than "Please don't take this too harshly and please don't think I am picking on you. I like you and you are a swell fellow and all. However, I feel it is necessary that I impress upon you that this isn't really a bug and having this trivial and non-broken thing filed as a bug has consumed a little bit of our time that we would rather not be wasting on things like this. Also, here is a pat on the back and an atta-boy so you don't feel I am being mean to you, okay?".

Granted, it might be a little unprofessional to use crude language with people. CEOs and other muckety-mucks do it all the time, however. It's also a little different between using crude language and lashing out at people with crude language to insult them and put them down. But, again, that's just the way things are and it is just the way some people are. It really does not have to impact you in the slightest if you don't want it to (and it doesn't hurt to learn to give it back - especially if you can do so cleverly, with wit, and without the matching vulgarity).

I don't doubt this sort of thing does put some people off from contributing and participating. I sure as hell wouldn't participate in anything that involved Linus and other well-known and super-smart guys, because I know I'm not at their level and I would just constantly be on the receiving end of "how fucking stupid can you be?!". But you know what? Maybe that's okay. Maybe it weeds out people who don't have the spine to deal with it or who take everything so personally that everything has to become a drama rather than just getting work done.

Of course, Linus could be less of an asshole (even when his points are very fair). But I don't see why he should feel he *has* to be less of one. *shrug*. I also think it's a little different than if he was someone's direct boss in a workplace and he was walking outside of his office to constantly berate, ride, ridicule, and harass his employees for being totally incompetent.

Comment Re:Start there own site (Score 1) 62

He's a pretty douchy constant self-promoter and bragger. I also remember one of the few times I've sat around watching the TWiT (This Week In Tech) network with Leo Laporte and he was on it (the $10m/yr indie podcasting network with like 20+ shows and like 40 hours of content a week) and he asked him if he could use "This Week In..." for ONE of his shows that he wanted to do on his own network.

Next thing you know, JC was building an entire network of his own where EVERYTHING was "This Week In..."

That's pretty fucking low and douchey.

Comment Re:Nice (Score 5, Insightful) 719

"Religion".

I don't think you understand what that word means, yet like so many religious people, try to spread it around to every context to poison any argument.

Also, of course there are a lot of militant atheists out there. The same way there are/were a lot of militant "black people" out there. Guess what? When people trod all over you, threaten you, treat you like second class citizens, and impose their will (via legislation and political power) on you -- you're probably going to be a tad mother fucking militant.

"Stop being intolerant of my intolerance you assholes! C'mon guys!"

Comment Re:Definitely... (Score 1) 719

Hey, don't worry. Everything is going to be better in a few years, because we're going to elect someone who isn't Bush *or* Obama. All of today's sixteen year old kids will be ready and eager to vote in 2016 and they all know -- just like the teenagers from six years ago and ten years ago and fourteen years ago -- that 220 years of shitty presidents and politics is finally going to be over, because for the first time every they are going to vote in a real stalwart hero into office. This guy will totally be a man of his word and focus on the fundamentals and not a bunch of vote-buying bullshit that tramples over principals in an effort to appease constituents by appealing to their demands for things based on religion or other irrelevant things. This time, everything is totally gonna be different!

Comment Re:Definitely... (Score 2) 719

Yeah, because the Senate and House have sure had strong spines over the last two presidents, huh?

They've done nothing but consistently rolled over and played "yes-men" to the executive branch - essentially operating this country for a dozen years as a one-branch government.

Blaming it on the GOP or anyone else is also sort of undermined by everything else he failed to do in the last six years.

Anyone remember how the first thing he was going to do was not only shutdown Gitmo, but get us out of Iraq? In fact, you could "take that to the bank"?

Remember how it was going to be the most transparent presidency, ever?

Remember how Bush didn't need anyone to "let" him do anything, because he was the decider?

Remember the last six months to a year, how Obama frequently talks about how he needs to do things directly and is going to find ways to do them despite lack of support in the house and senate?

Yeah, if they really want to accomplish something, they could do it. He doesn't, so he doesn't.

Slashdot Top Deals

The opposite of a correct statement is a false statement. But the opposite of a profound truth may well be another profound truth. -- Niels Bohr

Working...