I can try to get us back on topic.
Our lumped friend goes full McCarthy in this thread, first asking an idiotically loaded question and then insisting that anyone correcting him is doing so because they are Marxists. I shit you not.
I was trying to think of a way to reply to him in the thread, but I realized, there’s really no point. What’s “lumpy” is the consistency of the mush inside this idiot’s braincase.
Eta: apparently I simulposted with Chronos, who closed the thread. Good riddance.
For the record, I don’t think your criticism is appropriate. You should apologize…
…to @ParallelLines (because this is the thread for criticizing people who aren’t trolls, and yet here you’re criticizing Lumpy).
And earned that OP a warning.
He’s not been much on my radar as a problem child, but that might be part of which threads I get into.
Speaking in general …
I certainly post too verbosely. Maybe I should change my name to BlahBlahTiresomeBlahGuy.
But folks asking / talking about complicated ideas with one sentence OPs and one-sentence follow-on posts pretty well prove they are either too disingenuous, too stupid, or too ignorant to participate in the conversation they’ve triggered. None of those options are a good look.
Or sometimes all three, like the poster in question.
I was old before I discovered her. Then I read everything she wrote. And got my wife to try her, and she’s done the same.
Hey, update! Cenk Uygur is still pretending to run for president!
U mad bro?
Because there’s not many faster ways to be ignored at the SDMB…
I was middle-aged by the time most of her books were published.
Sorry to say, I was in my thirties. Read two of her books, and none after.
You would have fit right in at either SAIL (Stanford AI Lab) or the MIT AI Lab (CSAIL). An excerpt from the standard manual of speech required by all members:
Peculiar nouns: MIT AI hackers love to take various words and add the
wrong endings to them to make nouns and verbs, often by extending a
standard rule to nonuniform cases. Examples:
porous => porosity
generous => generosity
Ergo: mysterious => mysteriosity
ferrous => ferocity
Other examples: winnitude, disgustitude, hackification.BOGOSITY n. The degree to which something is BOGUS (q.v.). At CMU,
bogosity is measured with a bogometer; typical use: in a seminar,
when a speaker says something bogus, a listener might raise his
hand and say, “My bogometer just triggered.” The agreed-upon unit
of bogosity is the microLenat (uL).
And Lumpy also got warned for his Marxist thread in FQ, and had it shut down.
I called Lumps-for-brains out for his McCarthyesque accusations that anyone who doesn’t froth at the mouth quite as much as he does over Communism is a “Marxist” and was told that I should take it to the Troll thread.
But I disagree. @Lumpy is a long time poster and has given no indication of a lack of sincerity. In deference to his tenure, I think we should all recognize that he really is that fucking stupid.
This is the first I’ve read that thread and I’m rather saddened that it got closed because there was some interesting discussion in it (although it was more a GD thread than an FQ one). It’s rare that the OP shits up their own thread at the expense of everyone else in it (at least outside the Pit) but there you go.
I agree that there is an interesting conversation there, but the OP’s well was poisoned from the start.
Half in jest, I assure you. But only half.
I’m totally disgusted with the views expressed by Saint Cad (Saint my ass) in his ‘why are the FEDS shipping all these immigrants all over’ thread. I think he is gross and icky. Yep, gross and icky. And he can’t fucking get his facts straight.
And Dinsdale is a judge (if I recall correctly) who doesn’t care about the legal distinctions between an immigrant or a refugee. Glad I will never have to sit before his very judgmental self.
What an ugly thread.
It’s a dumb gish gallop that might work on some clickbait news site. Just drop it in there that “the feds” are the ones shipping people around.
(Although it seems to be working here more than I would have thought.)
Though standards of beauty vary a lot, there are probably some features that are nearly universally appealing - and the Haut would find those.
Ever notice that when young children start off saying “She…” without any antecedents, the referent is always Mom? I’ve been hearing this since I was a young child myself, and the “She…” is always implicitly understood.
My kid is almost four and I don’t think he even understands gender yet. He calls objects “she” all the time but I’ve seen no indication he groks the difference between girls and boys much less gendered pronouns. This is probably typical in an autistic kid of his age. So much of what informs our gender identity is what we absorb from other people’s social expectations, and he doesn’t absorb anyone’s social expectations, ever. I think that’s kind of cool in a way. A lot of autistic people are trans also, significantly higher than the general population. So a part of trans-ness might be naturally finding these gender boxes completely irrelevant.