Saturday, April 11, 2009
When I speak I scream...
Did a little live "broadcast" earlier, which was the first since moving into this place. Everything seems to work. Other than that, nothing exciting here.
Sunday, April 5, 2009
Today's Children: Tomorrow's Socialists
I'm not implying liberals are socialists. I'll wait until we've become a one-party government to do so.
Friday, April 3, 2009
There's no words on it.
Just made a bit of an effort to clean the blog up and figured I'd post the video that it is named after. Enjoy
Wednesday, April 1, 2009
Your Account is Invalid
From Digg support:
"Your account was reported to us for abusive activity in comments. Specifically, "Hey, what's good, faggot?"..." (I had made this remark as a reply to "good morning wingnuts" in a thread for a Conservative article.)
I have no beef with Digg. They are required to have (and enforce) some opinion-limiting provisions in their TOS as an insurance policy from offended liberals seeking justice (aka unearned money) via lawsuit and I had clearly violated one of them. They responded promptly to my inquiry and reinstated my account quickly after verifying that I took another look at the TOS.
In yet another confusing contradiction to the belief that we are progressing as a society, it looks as though we're losing our own freedom of expression insurance policy, the Digg Community's only unwritten law: "Don't tattle (aka hit the report button). It's babyish and only serves to limit the honesty in our communications with one another". To me, this violates the very purpose of Digg's existence. If people wanted to hang around in a virtual circle-jerk of agreement, there are plenty of web sites to do so for any political or philosophical ideology. Digg is the destination to find out what other people think is important, give props if we agree and debate if we do not.
In closing, I do not want to offend any good-minded democrats. I still want to be able to come to Digg and I respect whatever you have to say and understand that what I think does not matter.
I've read many of the Daily Kos submissions today (Thank you, sir!) and even though the authors are unable to find compensation for their work, I personally think they are all just magnificent examples of journalism at it's finest (May I have another?) .
"Your account was reported to us for abusive activity in comments. Specifically, "Hey, what's good, faggot?"..." (I had made this remark as a reply to "good morning wingnuts" in a thread for a Conservative article.)
I have no beef with Digg. They are required to have (and enforce) some opinion-limiting provisions in their TOS as an insurance policy from offended liberals seeking justice (aka unearned money) via lawsuit and I had clearly violated one of them. They responded promptly to my inquiry and reinstated my account quickly after verifying that I took another look at the TOS.
In yet another confusing contradiction to the belief that we are progressing as a society, it looks as though we're losing our own freedom of expression insurance policy, the Digg Community's only unwritten law: "Don't tattle (aka hit the report button). It's babyish and only serves to limit the honesty in our communications with one another". To me, this violates the very purpose of Digg's existence. If people wanted to hang around in a virtual circle-jerk of agreement, there are plenty of web sites to do so for any political or philosophical ideology. Digg is the destination to find out what other people think is important, give props if we agree and debate if we do not.
In closing, I do not want to offend any good-minded democrats. I still want to be able to come to Digg and I respect whatever you have to say and understand that what I think does not matter.
I've read many of the Daily Kos submissions today (Thank you, sir!) and even though the authors are unable to find compensation for their work, I personally think they are all just magnificent examples of journalism at it's finest (May I have another?) .
Tuesday, March 24, 2009
John the Secretary Kerry confuses taxpayers for his wife. He wants your money.
This guy lives off of his rich wife and American tax dollars but wants to question your ability to take back some of the revenue you reluctantly mailed in.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
