Even better. I have a lot of opinions. I think I would actually be good at that job.
You should give it a go. Perhaps a blog about fitness, but with strong opinions. Remember that you have to attract people, which means balanced analysis won’t work.
And remember when writing this blog don’t mention anything about gay sex and showers that didn’t work out too good for the last fella
“Gay sex in the showers!? How having gay sex helps you recover after workouts with increase protein intake”
The necessary collaborationist, the useful idiots.
5 Likes
It sounds like a deliberate attempt at controversy and shit stirring on HER part, not Andrew’s.
2 Likes
You got instant social credit for that one, see the system is working perfectly!
2 Likes
Maybe and even if not as instantly I’ll also pay for it with a post removed and a frozen account xD
2 Likes
Ah my comrades, fighting the good fight.
Yes, that is how it works.
Ok, this is BS…
I understand the conservative view point, and I’m a conservative (well, mostly) myself. But what’s with all the name calling, personal attacks I’m seeing lately?
It’s nobody’s business what someone does and calling someone a loser isn’t civil at all. It smacks of cyber bullying. Be glad you aren’t banned or anything.
Is this a response to my post?
no, it’s for someone else… I just hit reply on a random person because I’m so used to doing that to reply to a thread… it must have been the phpBB days.
No worries. In which case I can’t really respond.
I’ve experienced some odd modding recently that is nothing like my experience before. Dont know what is going on but hope it’s just a blip on the screen.
I promote this site heavily in other places and to friends and strangers. I hope that I’m not shooting myself in the foot.
1 Like
On topic -
I think the articles make her seem like she has an issue herself – it is unfortunate that she had brought what appears to be a personal problem into such a political sphere (I mean, really, IMO if you’re bothered by not receiving sexual attention, I doubt it is because you miss catcalling as much as it is feeling insecure). The problem persists, and I doubt anyone here will disagree that it is indeed real, but this lady just seems like someone not worth listening to/reading from.
1 Like
Oh sure. You’re so top down. 
There goes your Harvard admission.
1 Like
I have a career in opinion articles now.
This is on the same intellectual level as people who criticize the government of X must be racist against the people of X.
We mods are mostly men. Has it occurred to you that you’re criticizing our culture of moderation? 
Without taking the time to read all her articles, I can’t thoroughly assess that claim, but it looks like she talks about it as much as any feminist would. Search the article and book titles on her website, and the P word never comes up. Search the Guardian, and it comes up repeatedly… because it’s the name of the column.
The problem as I see it is that you’re starting to go Rowland style but without the token sophistication. I like Rowland’s presence – much as I despise him – because he manages to be interesting (enough) while he’s trying to shove proverbial koolaid down all our throats (i.e. brainwash us). If you just shout koolaid good, fruit juice bad, it’s dull.
As for rules, if you look through them you will find one that’s basically a soft ban on zero-content posts. We had a problem with a “news” website that kept posting its own articles without any commentary, which meant we had to click on the links just to find out what was up beyond the headlines, and they were mostly low quality articles, so we decided it wasn’t in the site’s interest to continue allowing those posts. Then the “news” website decided to add “commentary” in the form of one sentence per post, and in each and every case the sentence was just the headline repeated, or the first sentence of the article – not much of an improvement. We tried explaining this to them, and they don’t seem to post here much anymore.
We don’t have a hard ban on posts like that because sometimes a headline is sufficiently descriptive, and sometimes a subject is sufficiently interesting, that a zero-content post is justified under the circumstances.
Your post wasn’t quite zero-content, but it was close. If there’s no coherent-to-the-average-reader explanation of what it’s about, then it might as well be zero-content.
And if you’ve forgotten what the average reader – the proverbial man in the street – is like, then you’re probably spending too much time in an echo chamber. It can happen to anyone, but society doesn’t stop existing because of it. (Not yet anyway.)
If not getting your preferred app matches is the closest equivalent to casual street harassment you can think of, then you’re not thinking very hard. 
1 Like