Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!


Forgot your password?
Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! No Flash necessary and runs on all devices. ×

Comment Re:Responsibilities of a publicly traded company (Score 2) 1018

Have you ever looked to see some of the things Leslie Jones said? Obviously not. It's very telling that she still has a twitter account while Milo does not.

Stuff she said as she was being harassed.

It's basically the difference between yelling obscenities in the middle of a heated argument and walking up to someone and yelling obscenities without provocation.

Comment Re:So.. (Score 2) 1018

hate speech is "speech that offends, threatens, or insults groups, based on race, color, religion, national origin, sexual orientation, or other traits.

Everything is hate speech? Awesome.

You need to leave some wiggle room since defining hate speech is similar to defining obscenity, you'll know it when you see it.

Comment Re:Responsibilities of a publicly traded company (Score 3, Insightful) 1018

Take, for example, the radical feminist Clementine Ford. She has repeatedly engaged in blatant anti-male harassment and is known to then cry wolf when a man responds with anti-female harassment and had a man fired from his job for his comment. Yet, for some reason, Clementine Ford's account is still miraculously active. No matter what Trump said he did or didn't grab, this woman should be off Twitter permanently by that same policy.

That's seriously the best you could come up with? Some woman making a few dick-themed insults in what looks like larger back-and-forth conversations?

This is what actual harassment looks like.

For one he's targeting visible characteristics (weight, attractiveness, and skin colour) of his targets. Clementine Ford's dick jokes are just non-specific insults since no-one can actually see the target's dick.

Second Milo was the instigator going after people who did nothing to deserve it. There's no context for your examples but they look like excerpts from conversations.

Finally Milo wasn't banned just for posting a few offensive things, he was banned because he knew it would trigger his troll army to join in on the fun by escalating the harassment. You posted no evidence of troll armies from Clementine Ford.

Comment Re:Funny definition of "small handful" and "confus (Score 1) 524

GOP politicians go on massive hunts looking for voter fraud after every election, and never comes up with anything but a small handful of people who were just confused.

Here's a list of ~400 people who were not just charged, but convicted of voter fraud: http://thf_media.s3.amazonaws....

400 people over at least 8 elections.

About half are registering ineligible voters (no reason to think they actually voted, more likely someone trying to scam a turnout organization like happened to ACORN), or voting when ineligible (non-citizen? felon?).

There were only 7 cases of impersonation at a poll, and it's unclear how many voter ID laws (the major push for the GOP) would have stopped.

And I did see 32 cases of absentee ballot fraud.

Are there more than listed there? Of course.

But nothing that would sway an election, and certainly not "millions".

Comment Re:To be fair... (Score 1) 524

To be fair, undocumented citizens did receive assurances that they would not be deported if they voted: http://www.bizpacreview.com/20...

Cavuto is being an idiot or a liar. Re-watch the clip and listen closely.

The questioner is asking a poorly phrased question about I don't know what.

Obama is answering a question about US citizens who are co-residing with illegal immigrants, and those US citizens are concerned their names and addresses will be taken from the voter roles and used to deport the non-citizens they're living with.

Comment Re:Congress has passed a law... (Score 2) 154

Too bad the Democrats put the nuclear option into the rules. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

It has to suck to be them. Particularly one of the 52 D senators that voted to change the rule. We should send them all nice 'thank you' notes, perhaps with a pacifier.

So what? There's no system of government that can withstand absolutely terrible politicians.

If the GOP hadn't decided on a policy of blanket obstructionism then Democrats wouldn't have needed to axe the filibuster.

And if the GOP had nominated a sane and competent Presidential candidate there wouldn't be a need for a filibuster now.

If you want to protect your country then stop trying to craft rules that will stop authoritarians and start focusing on not electing them.

Comment Re:Good to see mocking the President back in fashi (Score 4, Insightful) 524

Why is it not racist to mock Trump on his hair, his skin color, his small hands?

Because "bad spray tan" and "ridiculous hair extensions" is not a race.

And the "small hands" thing is generally just needling him since he's bizarrely insecure about the size of his hands.

Well I do care. I don't care for Trump, but I do care that apparently it is okay to be racist against white people, but everything a white person says can be considered racism.

It's not OK to be racist against white people.

Thankfully it's also relatively rare (at least compared to racism against non-whites).

Comment Re:Good to see mocking the President back in fashi (Score 5, Insightful) 524

After eight years of it being racist, mocking the President as well as other dissent is patriotic once again. That alone made voting for Trump worth it...

And to think, it almost became sexist instead!..

Mocking Obama was always fine.

Mocking Obama in a transparently racist manner was racist. Just like mocking Hillary with obviously sexist insults was sexist.

Just because it's possible to mock Obama or Hillary without being racist or sexist doesn't mean that any offensive thing you say magically becomes not racist or sexist.

Comment Re:Crybabies (Score 4, Insightful) 524

Never Happens


That's clearly a right-wing, biased publication, no?

Broerman said after their deaths, the Sosas remained on active voter rolls and mail ballots were still sent to their home because they did not meet the criteria to have their names deleted from eligible voter rolls.

Notice how mail-in ballots, the one voting method where voter fraud is actually very easy to commit, is never a target of GOP efforts to combat voter fraud?

I wonder why?

Comment Re:Crybabies (Score 5, Informative) 524

Only if you count illegals. We have no idea what the vote count would be if you didn't count illegitimate votes in California, which is where her lead is coming from.

So not only do you think there were millions of illegal voters, but you think these millions of people are in such an effective air-tight conspiracy that not one of them is willing to spill the beans. And they performed this conspiracy, which risked jail time and/or deportation for every person involved, to run up the score in a state in which Clinton would have won anyway.

That is literally an insane idea.

The simply reality is that the US doesn't bother trying to account for voter fraud because the Electoral College makes it mostly pointless.

Which is why GOP politicians go on massive hunts looking for voter fraud after every election, and never comes up with anything but a small handful of people who were just confused.

Comment Re:So now Clinton supporters can't handle the resu (Score 1) 1424

The riots are justified


To put on peaceful and lawful demonstrations is certainly the right of Americans. But to riot? Are you serious?

My mistake for accepting the premise.

I'm aware of a lot of protests, and I'm sure there are a handful of people in those protests who are simply out to cause trouble.

But I'm not aware of anything that I'd consider riots.

Comment Re:So (Score 0) 1424

So my rural state will get basically no political say in picking a President?

Yeah, there's a reason things like the electoral college were set up and it was to give states good reasons for being part of the union.

And slaves, don't forget slaves.

How else do make slaves count for 3/5s of a person politically without giving them an actual vote?

Well you invent the electoral college where slaves can increase the number of electors without having a voice in who they are.

Comment Re:Electoral college does reflect the popular vote (Score 1) 1424

The vote of each state.

There are many reasons why a straight popular vote is bad and the electoral college is better but the best one I can think of is what happened in the recent election. Hillary Clinton won 300 counties while Trump won 5000. If you think that the election of a nation should be swayed by a handful of cities while the rest of the nation is completely ignored, well, you're an idiot.

The same could be said of someone who thought you should ignore the will of the majority of the population just because they lived in cities.

Even worse could be said of someone who thought relatively partisan states should be effectively disenfranchised, since the entire election rests on the decisions of the tiny fraction the people who live in swing states.

Comment Re:So now Clinton supporters can't handle the resu (Score 1, Flamebait) 1424

For months before the election, the MSM & Hillary supporters hammered about how Trump & his supporters wouldn't accept the results of the election.

The talk about the election was about Trump not accepting the results if he lost, and concerns about what his supporters would do in the aftermath.

Hillary is accepting the results, even though she has damn good reason to be pissed off (leading in the polls going in, won the popular vote, had the FBI director break the law to create an October surprise), she's never said or done anything to signal that she doesn't accept the results.

Now that Hillary has lost, her supports can't accept the results. Death threats to electors. Riots in the street. Offering the pay fines for electors who break the law. MSM story after story about how the circumvent the will of the people. Jill Stein taking donations to force a recount where even she says that there was no fraudulent or illegal activity.

It seems life is not without a sense of irony.

The riots are justified and not an attempt to overturn the results, they're a signal to Trump that there's strong popular resistance to his campaign pledges and the majority of the country does not want him as President.

The recount is also justified, it's unlikely but possible that Russia or some other group did compromise the election in those states. If so it means Trump didn't actually win.

As for Lessig and threats to the electors, that is unjustified. As screwed up as the EC is, it's the system that was in place and everyone else agreed to beforehand, you can't change the rules afterwards. But Clinton, the entire Democratic establishment, and the vast majority of the Democratic party, are completely against the electors changing the result.

That is why you can't hold Clinton accountable for the people asking the electors to change the result, but you can hold Trump accountable for the open Nazis and racists in his camp.

Slashdot Top Deals

For every problem there is one solution which is simple, neat, and wrong. -- H. L. Mencken