Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Frumple]

Nah, PM, pretty sure that's mostly been me. Cept the nude pics thing, considering I'm pretty sure the critter's a minor. The facts bit was a direct reference to their own admittance that their opinion of clinton has little to nothing to do with evidence (up to and including outright contradiction to it), being based primarily on gut feeling. Probably call it fair to note their own evaluation of themselves, yeh?

[Powder Miner]

Absolutely voted it up. The drug war is an ongoing atrocity, and it's my opinion that marijuana doesn't particularly need more regulation than alcohol. What are people hoping for, Washington's abomination of a state-run system? The one based off of their former alcohol distribution system so bad the voters actually removed it by initiative?

Also, yeah, I guess it's fair enough, but it still seemed like a little bit of an unnecessary barb. But it's the other bit that really gets at me.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

I'm currently in the mother of all lines for what is probly Clinton's last appearance. I will relay what I here. Might take a few hours in line though.

Please do, heh.

Though checking, it looks like she's slated to be in three different states (michigan, penns, NC) today, so it actually might not be the last.

... also there's apparently a midnight rally in raleigh (NC state reynolds coliseum). Technically tomorrow, but... yeah. E: Schedule. First I noticed, heh. I don't even want to contemplate the likely amount of caffeine going through that woman's blood stream right now.

Oh god, her last appearance is here?

[Frumple]

@64, iirc most of the opposition is rooting from, well... small time growers, from what I remember of cali folks talking about it. Folks trying to avoid regulation and taxation, heh, not see more of it than the current proposition is recommending.

[smirk]

Is it just me, or has the tone of the thread become a bit more vicious since [he who shall not be named] got banned? Like, is it just that the election's finally coming up or has the martyring of [he who shall not be named] spread his salt equitably among the other patrons of the thread in a final testament?

I think you're just seeing things. I think things have definitely calmed down. But you're now maybe actually noticing the arguments of others rather than just paying attention to the spectacle that was he who shall not be named.

I like to think I've always paid at least a moderate amount of attention. Mostly referring to now nearly everyone went off on Uxie, from (jokingly) pressuring him for nude pics to talking about how they lnew that facts didn't mean anything to him etc etc...

I think everyone tended to walk on eggshells a bit more when mainiac was around, as these threads have a history of getting locked and if it was gonna happen, it was gonna involve mainiac. So a combination of imminent election and our main saltshaker getting banned has made everyone a little more likely to shake it themselves. Just my reading of it though.

Any Californian Bay12ers (or anybody else willing to give their 2 cents) want to weigh in on proposition 64 (Marijuana legalization)? I'm unsure. On one hand, it's time to end the war on drugs and do it differently than just jailing because obviously that isn't working, on the other hand, opponents are saying that it doesn't do enough to regulate it well.

Ballotpedia page on California prop 64.

Hmm. I have family out there, and according to them the marijuana farms need regulation (completely apart from the obvious fact that many are illegal and will shoot you if you get too close). They create water problems, fertilizer and chemical runoff, labor problems, etc. The normal farm stuff. Legalization would help with that, though from a quick skim of your link I can't see anything related directly to cultivation. I'd say it's a cautious yes; need to legalize things to regulate 'em properly.

[smjjames]

Yeah, I suppose smirk has a point there with regulation. After all, look at the prohibition period.

[Frumple]

Heh. I'unno about eggshells, but for all he didn't communicate things like I would, a lot of the stuff that gets under my skin got under M's, and the guy had a hell of a lot more energy than I do. Less point to getting pointed when someone's already doing it.

[smjjames]

Also, lol at Merriam-Websters (you know, dictionaries) twitter heading. XD

[Dozebôm Lolumzalìs]

We're all just hypothetical worst-case scenarios! BURN IT ALL!

(yes, that is an xkcd ref)

[smjjames]

Previously they had heart's ease (or heartsease) which means 'peace of mind' up on their twitter banner. It does sorta describe the whole wrenching 'AAAARRRRGGGGG!' sentiment of the whole election.

[misko27]

Is it just me, or has the tone of the thread become a bit more vicious since [he who shall not be named] got banned? Like, is it just that the election's finally coming up or has the martyring of [he who shall not be named] spread his salt equitably among the other patrons of the thread in a final testament?

I think you're just seeing things. I think things have definitely calmed down. But you're now maybe actually noticing the arguments of others rather than just paying attention to the spectacle that was he who shall not be named.

I like to think I've always paid at least a moderate amount of attention. Mostly referring to now nearly everyone went off on Uxie, from (jokingly) pressuring him for nude pics to talking about how they lnew that facts didn't mean anything to him etc etc...

It could be.

I know that when mainiac was around I didn't feel the need to interject as often. If others share my sentiment (which is a big if, mind), then it's possible that arguments that would have been left to Clinton's chief defender are now collective responsibility.

Heh. I'unno about eggshells, but for all he didn't communicate things like I would, a lot of the stuff that gets under my skin got under M's, and the guy had a hell of a lot more energy than I do. Less point to getting pointed when someone's already doing it.

also this.

I like how everyone else is acting worried, and here I'm just hoping the rush of people doesn't kill me. No election day media, no last-minute updates, just me, the People, and a scanner, for 16 hours.  You know the funny thing is I'm technically a Republican for tomorrow too. The city needs a certain number of Democrat and Republican Inspectors, but obviously, it's a lot harder to find Republicans working as election officials in NYC than elsewhere. So I get to go around as an official Republican Election Official - Scanner Inspector for the day. Woo. I'm so underprepared mentally for this it's mind boggling. But oh well. Scanner inspector isn't that strenuous a job.

Just remember that if you hear about a bombing tomorrow in NYC, I died for your sins, assholes.

[sluissa]

You know the funny thing is I'm technically a Republican for tomorrow too. The city needs a certain number of Democrat and Republican Inspectors, but obviously, it's a lot harder to find Republicans working as election officials in NYC than elsewhere. So I get to go around as an official Republican Election Official - Scanner Inspector for the day. Woo. I'm so underprepared mentally for this it's mind boggling. But oh well. Scanner inspector isn't that strenuous a job.

Rigged!

[Frumple]

Hey, look on the bright side, misk. It might end up being more than sixteen hours :V

Almost certainly not, but still, with the whole line thing and the extent turnout has been surprising people, being stuck until you're done and done not coming when it was scheduled might be a non-zero possibility.

[Mephansteras]

Any Californian Bay12ers (or anybody else willing to give their 2 cents) want to weigh in on proposition 64 (Marijuana legalization)? I'm unsure. On one hand, it's time to end the war on drugs and do it differently than just jailing because obviously that isn't working, on the other hand, opponents are saying that it doesn't do enough to regulate it well.

Ballotpedia page on California prop 64.

I'll probably vote yes on it, just because I think the war on drugs is stupid. Much better to regulate and tax this stuff than throw people in jail over it.

We can always change the rules of regulation better, and it'd be one more year we're not wasting money throwing people into jail for pretty much no reason.

[nenjin]

Decided to skip the circus and voted early today.

Still took almost an hour as there was a line along one wall of the building. Longest I've ever had to wait to vote. County Sheriff had to escort an older couple off the premises because they were handing out "candidate score cards" in violation of the 200 foot limit on such activities. The woman walked by and handed them out down the line. One quick glance told which side it was on. Literally seconds later a second woman from inside with a bin comes walking down the line so they people could throw them away. The woman who handed them out tried to take a place at the back of the line and keep her head down, but the crowd quickly pointed her out. Her husband was in the parking lot handing out more of the same and saw what was happening and quietly "noped" his way out of the scene.

Tomorrow gonna get weird.

(As an aside, I always feel shitty about my commitment to civics when I have to leave 80% of the ballot blank on questions like "Should soandso Judge be retained." I couldn't care less about who the treasurer of the local community college is going to be, but I always regret I didn't take the time to brush up on judicial records before these votes.)