Print

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

[Duke 2.0]

 I figure so long as I don't specifically say the term "Slippery Slope" I have a freebie. Although i should try to fit a camel in there if possible.

[nenjin]

Can we substitute other alternate phrases? Like, greasy incline?

[Aqizzar]

Although i should try to fit a camel in there if possible.

Just remember, anywhere you fit part of a camel you can get a whole camel.  They must be quite easy to fit into places.

[Duke 2.0]

Can we substitute other alternate phrases? Like, greasy incline?

Lubed Slant?

[Bauglir]

Can we substitute other alternate phrases? Like, greasy incline?

Lubed Slant?

Unlevel Slip'n'slide?

[nenjin]

Anti-stick retrograde.

[Aklyon]

Slick Camel?

[ChairmanPoo]

I can understand the need for some secrets to stay secret. EG: the names of people who would be at risk if they came out

That being said, I don't really think it's wrong that our dear politician's crap has burst in their faces. In fact I think that if it happened more often they might spend less time being assholes and more doing constructive, decent stuff.

The problem with wikileaks is that they do little discrimination, it seems to me. They have released thousands of papers, most with irrelevant stuff, some with interesting tidbits, and a few which might or might not contain sensitive stuff (AFAIK they do censor names. But I might be wrong). One possible problem with this approach is that important stuff can stay drowned in a sea of inane memorandums. The other is that someone might orchestrate a "leak" in order to make their competition (national, corporative, or otherwise) look bad.

[Aklyon]

I can understand the need for some secrets to stay secret. EG: the names of people who would be at risk if they came out

That being said, I don't really think it's wrong that our dear politician's crap has burst in their faces. In fact I think that if it happened more often they might spend less time being assholes and more doing constructive, decent stuff.

The problem with wikileaks is that they do little discrimination, it seems to me. They have released thousands of papers, most with irrelevant stuff, some with interesting tidbits, and a few which might or might not contain sensitive stuff (AFAIK they do censor names. But I might be wrong). One possible problem with this approach is that important stuff can stay drowned in a sea of inane memorandums. The other is that someone might orchestrate a "leak" in order to make their competition (national, corporative, or otherwise) look bad.

so, we need more crap balloons to pop and less useless crap? (I'm probably way oversimplifing this, aren't I?)

[Tyg13]

This whole case against Assange was only brought up by Interpol trying to appease various governments across the world. The democratic cables released obviously struck a nerve, and they're trying to take Wikileaks' figurehead. Wikileaks has revealed some very interesting things in the past, and I think the governments of the world have finally gotten fed up with it (in particular the US and UK governments.)

I find it almost comical that they're attacking Assange. He's just the scapegoat, it's not like arresting him is going to affect Wikileaks' operations.

[GlyphGryph]

The problem with wikileaks is that they do little discrimination, it seems to me. They have released thousands of papers, most with irrelevant stuff, some with interesting tidbits, and a few which might or might not contain sensitive stuff (AFAIK they do censor names. But I might be wrong). One possible problem with this approach is that important stuff can stay drowned in a sea of inane memorandums. The other is that someone might orchestrate a "leak" in order to make their competition (national, corporative, or otherwise) look bad.

Personally, I think the amount of useless stuff IS what's important! Its the biggest sign the government is keeping way to many secrets, and it bothers me that most everyone ignores this.

[Renault]

The problem with wikileaks is that they do little discrimination, it seems to me. They have released thousands of papers, most with irrelevant stuff, some with interesting tidbits, and a few which might or might not contain sensitive stuff (AFAIK they do censor names. But I might be wrong). One possible problem with this approach is that important stuff can stay drowned in a sea of inane memorandums. The other is that someone might orchestrate a "leak" in order to make their competition (national, corporative, or otherwise) look bad.

Personally, I think the amount of useless stuff IS what's important! Its the biggest sign the government is keeping way to many secrets, and it bothers me that most everyone ignores this.

Eh, but they're not really secrets in any meaningful way, is the thing. It's sort of like when you have a private conversation with someone. You don't necessarily want your words to be rebroadcast publicly or it can make it difficult to speak honestly. Most of the diplomatic cables are just that: not exactly useful to know, just sort of embarrassing. Its just sort of hard to find too much good in any of the revelations this latest round has made.

[Qmarx]

The whole point of diplomacy is being able to speak candidly without worrying about the subject listening in.

[atomicwinter]

Funny how everyone will so easily trample over someone else freedom of speech and right just because they don't like what he says.

I love how he has all you people so freaked out.

[Renault]

I don't think this is so much a freedom of speech issue, though. It's sort of an anomalous zone, and I think that where a lot of the controversy comes from. They're clearly not the Pentagon Papers, and yet they're not exactly secret missile codes, either. Its sort of a gray area, and that invites a lot of opinions. I wouldn't rush to accusing people of trampling over rights because of it; I think this is a more nuanced issue than that.