shrugs
Bigots gonna’ bigot.
(Channeling my inner liberal there.)
On a more serious note, though, did you not see how huge the turnout for “CFA Appreciation Day” was and how paltry the turnout for the alleged boycott was?
Wow, that is serious. See how my brow just wrinkled?
I’d say “yes”, but that’d just be plain weird considering it’s the internet and all.
I use to work at a store, and I had people bitch at me for things I had nothing to do with. This guy’s a tool, yes. The person at the window handled it well, yes. I don’t know… maybe it’s a big deal because he recorded it, but shit like this happens all the time. The girl was just doing her job. I would have acted the same way if I were in her shoes. I’m sure most people would. That’s how they are trained to act.
Sure, this guy’s an idiot that deserved what he got. He did apologize, and he seemed to really regret what he did. I think he just made a mistake. Filming it was disastrous.
That’s the underlying theme of this whole thing.
CFA and tons of other companies have been giving to anti-gay groups. Some folks knew and cared, some folks knew and didn’t care, some folks didn’t know and/or cared. It’s been a low-key thing for years. Then suddenly Cathy wakes up, spouts some well-publicized bullshit, and everyone’s up in arms, because a lot of people feel that they just can’t ignore it any more.
In the same vein, there have always been insane asshole customers. NotAlwaysRight is filled with stories which, if even a fraction of them are true, are simply mind-boggling. But once you record one of those asshole customers and put it on Youtube, the people responsible for him feel that action has to be taken; they can’t just ignore it.
In other words, it’s another consequence of our increasingly media-driven and video-recorded society. Things we don’t know about can be ignored, but in general there’s a good deal fewer things we don’t know about than in the past.
It was, I had quoted his post above.
If you’re referring to me calling out Nzinga’s name, it was a toung 'n cheek reference to a little squabble we had up thread. NBD.
Anyhow, see how b84 will now take the most tangential aspect of an issue, inflate to the size of Everest, fill it with ambiguous minutia, until he will ultimately accuse you of weaseling and building up brazil84 shaped strawmen. He’ll then put you on his “ignore” list due to a set of rules of internet debate of his own invention of which only he sticks to, and doesn’t apply to himself.
According to these rules, he should be first on his own list. Seriously, the guy’s eff’d in the head.
All have been now adequately warned by VT and myself. Here there be dragons.
You have to show up for a boycott?
Of course. How else are you going to get credit?
Yes. Yes you did. I’m done with him.
Maybe if i’m lucky, he’ll put me on his banned debaters list.
Apparently, I’m not. Must be my charm.
I got my card punched.
(Yes, that a euphemism. No, I’m not going to tell you what for.)
Or the free water.
Lucky!
Perhaps you mean the protest, the “Kiss-In,” which I think is fair to say fizzled. I don’t think one can fairly measure a boycott by counting the people that show up.
No, the person you’re punishing should know what they did wrong!
Heh, sorry, that’s a girlcott.
Ok, then it seems there’s more at issue than a simple exchange of money for services.
If you continue to weasel, strawman and evade reasonable questions about your position, then I surely will. Perhaps it gives you pleasure to pretend to disagree with me, but I have no interest in engaging with people who insist on using these types of tactics.
Something I have not denied, and never would have.
My apologies, I must have misunderstood your position.
Please answer my questions from Post #149:
- Under what circumstances does an employee of an evil corporation or institution deserve criticism for voluntarily serving as an employee of an evil corporation or institution?
Please tell me your general principle as best you can. Or are you saying that the question is impossible to answer?
- Ok, so if a person is knowingly working for an evil corporation and has some degree of choice about it, then they deserve criticism?
Adam, Adam Smith?