Print

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

[Andir]

Problem with graduate rates is that the simplest form I could come up with is something like 1.5-0.5*exp(-x/10.000). Try explaining that one to a plumber

That's not the only problem either.  At some point it would be cheaper to buy 10,000 somethings on their own invoices instead of 1 pallet of somethings (which is composed of 10,000 pieces).  The only way to avoid that is just a flat sales tax which people seem to dislike because of it's impact on the lower class.

Apparently, it is. I tried to suggest that if he's not going to stop, and it really is going nowhere, you be the bigger person.

Nope, I totally understand and am really trying to just let it pass.  I won't let it prevent me from expressing my opinion though.  (Even though it may feel like comment sniping.  [ie: drop in a reply, ignore responses... it feels dirty and underhanded to me.])

[Phmcw]

If VAT is fine, but it reduce economic grow. There is no consequences free taxes.
From the few I know of economics, each country have it's strength and weakness, and like all component of a capitalist economy, must play it's assets right or die.
Also, simple reasoning are tempting but near always wrong. There are simply a lot of factors intrinsically connected.

No, my concern is not the nature of our economic system, or it's general shape, even though it is in crisis and must be renewed, because I simply know I'm completely incompetent and don't grasp even the fundamentals, it's the very obvious abuse we are seeing.

The bail out of the banks look like one, and from a lot of economists, is one. Handing out foodstamp to wall mart employee is another. France have very obvious ones like the fact that some politician lived in luxurious and huge "social housing" in the center of Paris. In Belgium, the bankrupt of our national airline was more than shady, and a lot of our system is designed to milk votes from people who benefits from social aids improperly.
That I can understand : we lack from transparency, politicians are way too immune from the consequences of their action and influence from corporation in the government must be kept at minimum.
I can also understand when people try to bullshit me : no matter how much you cut spending, it's VERY obvious that the US won't find financial equilibrium without raising taxes, the UMP is trying to pass it's "regle d'or" to make the next president (who will very likely be socialist) unable to make a budget,while they have spent like mad.

[Truean]

(personal attack removed)

[Vector]

I'm going to say this once, and only once, because I feel that it is rude.  The next time I say it will be said more rudely.

Whether you ascribe everything as Andir's fault or not, and whether or not it is his fault, repeatedly implying, or stating, that every blowup was his fault is not helpful.  It takes two people to cause an argument, or at least two conflicting voices.

I do not care what you think, or what is true.  This is about rhetorical structure.

In this thread, appealing to the opinions and statements of the thread moderator to increase your ethos and support your argument will get you nowhere.  Both of you are being too argumentative and too inflammatory.  I say this as someone who has watched most of the thread regulars critique both sides, and seen activity fade as it moves to the side to make way for this caustic argument.

Therefore, no matter who started it, ended it, was most annoying, or held the "correct" position, or held the position I liked the most, or who I like the most, or argued with the most destructive rhetoric, you are both problems right now.

This finger-pointing needs to stop.

I don't care if you disagree with each other's positions or not.  Do so politely, give each other second chances, give each other opportunities to be gracefully wrong, and constantly ask yourself if you are correct or not--if your opponent has a point you can learn from.  This is not a place to win or prove that you know more.  This is not a place in which one's education and vocation gives one the right to trample on others.

I am certain there are "primitive" tribes who could teach me about mathematics.  I know this because I have heard about anthropological studies of different conceptions of number, and I was entirely amazed.  It was a vision both beautiful and wise.

I'm sure everyone understands this analogy, so let's move on.

This is a place to learn.  Bring what you have to the table, but be aware that someone else may tell you you are completely wrong.  That person may be right; that person may be wrong.

But you know what?

Each of us only has the absolute power to create one decent person in our lives, and that's us, ourselves.  Each of us only has the power to educate one person in our lives, and that is, again, us.

So put the focus on learning rather than fighting.  Ask questions rather than making edicts, and work to understand rather than convince.  Become the best person you can be.

That is the most progress we can be guaranteed to make, and it is enough.

[Vector]

As promised last time, this thread will be locked for a week.  I suggest strongly that everyone reflect on the last post I made.  I have faith that everyone will be able to comply.

The next gap will be twelve days.  You have been warned.

[Vector]

This thread is unlocked for now.

I will probably keep locking it periodically, in order to keep myself emotionally level and a happy girl.  I don't lock it in order to punish anyone.  I lock it in order to give myself a breather.


But for now, have a blog post.

[JoshuaFH]

I liked that Blog post. That woman is very charismatic.

[Andir]

Oh boy, how do I phrase this without sounding like a ass...

It's not purely a woman thing.  I know she went on for about four paragraphs (but you aren't listening to me...[keep reading]) on how she feels treated by those men she keeps in her life, but she pointed out a very real case with her boyfriend and dismissed it (while laughing about it... something she claims hurts her feelings later when "the guys" laugh about issues) just as she says men dismiss her concerns.  People dismiss other people's concerns because we are all arrogant, self preserving, egotistic humans.  Your concerns can never be as big to me as they are to you.  Ever.  If you try to say they are, you are lying to yourself.  You may be sympathetic to the concern, but you cannot understand it unless you have played out the exact scenario and I'd argue that that's a statistical impossibility.  You can have situations like someone else, but you can only be so close.

It's not purely about sexual innuendo and sexist rhetoric... it's about all human interaction.  It's being defensive, protective, and not being called a troll by someone and having your past drug out of the closet and put on display for all to laugh and point at...  People can be vindictive little bastards when it comes to interacting with other people because both sides lack understanding.  You can take that lack of understanding and learn from it or you can go the route of easiness and ad hominem.  Discredit the messenger and the message seems less relevant to you (and in our egotistical mindset, what's good for me is good for everyone....)  It's not purely a "man hates woman" issue.  It's person doesn't understand person.  On both sides this misunderstanding isn't about the sex of the person.  This type of misunderstanding occurs male-male and female-female. (Edit:  It just so happens that it's easier for guys to be sympathetic to other guys [and girls to girls] because we have lived in similar circumstances...)

Now, as far as listening:  It's not about "listening".  You can listen for the rest of your life and if the message isn't understood there's no amount of listening that will help that.  One could argue that truly understanding (not simply saying you understand to play sympathy) could be impossible.  You simply can't put yourself in everyone's shoes.  On one had she wants her boyfriend to understand that she could be attacked by any person at any time simply for being female, but on the other hand she dismisses a post of information about her boyfriend that berates his honor/being/persona (that's probably still out there somewhere...) simply because he's a man and his concerns are dwarfed by some woman hating Internet.  It's not a woman hating internet.  It's a difference hating Internet.  The caveat to that is that she thinks outside the norm and just happens to be a woman. People will hate that and they will call her all kinds of hateful names.  How she deals with that is how she will be treated in kind.  If she's going to go off and call those attackers "assholes" and "misogynist" (even if it's true) she's no better than the person calling her any name... except that she feels that it's alright for her to do it, because she's simply defending herself by taking the easy way out and attacking the person.

Guys categorize(call names) women when they feel threatened, just as women categorize guys when they are threatened.  We feel threatened by difference and we categorize people to help ourselves deal with indifference.  Categories hurt at times.  You can try to defy that label, but if you do and you put so much of your time into trying to defy that that your life becomes that defiance... you've lost.  At some point you need to accept your differences and that's probably the hardest part.  People strive to be accepted, acceptance means conformity, people don't like conformity because it's usually not their preferred conformity.

[Heron TSG]

I am confused. Her boyfriend went through something incredibly traumatic, and then in the next few paragraphs she says that (paraphrase) "It wasn't so bad, women have it far worse!"

I am undecided on the validity of this argument. This is what I shall ponder today.

[Rose]

It's not for us to understand. We're guys.

[Bauglir]

Being harassed for being a woman is a women's issue, and there's no analogue for being a man on the Internet, as far as I can tell. So yeah, there's a women's issue here; there's a cultural problem that uniquely affects women. I wouldn't go so far as to say that Internet harassment as a whole is about women, but it is true that there is a subset of it that is, and (in my experience) is more widely accepted as okay.

I am not sure, exactly, how to respond to the post, since it seems like the arguments it presents are great support for what I just said, but not for the thesis the author seems to be going for.

[Andir]

Being harassed for being a woman is a women's issue, and there's no analogue for being a man on the Internet, as far as I can tell.

http://www.geekstudies.org/2011/08/sexism-misogyny-misandry-in-geek-cultures

It's about geek culture, but this one stood out... simply because I believe it's not just geeks that have this issue:

...sexism against men manifests as an expectation to fulfill the stereotypes of manliness: being physically strong and capable of violence when need be; not feeling allowed to cry or express emotion; happy with promiscuity and treating women as sex objects; and, perhaps most of all, not feeling allowed to be attracted to other men. These are stupid, unfair, and sexist things expected of men.

One thing the author failed to mention is that men are expected to be capable of technical achievement.  Changing the oil in their car, fixing a flat tire... while you think this has little to do with the Internet, it's perceived that when a male does something it must work while slack is given for female.  That may sound like someone is giving way to the female simply because she's female, but we are all human and mistakes are to be made.  I would argue the opposite in that case.  You are placing an over-expectation on the man to have flawless execution.

What this does is breed hatred in men/boys.  They see this imbalance and project it upon women improperly.  They attack as if a woman could not do the same job... because they are forgiven for mistakes.  I personally feel that if men were forgiven and not expected to meet all deadlines and achieve some predetermined (self imposed) guideline you would not see (e)just such backlash.

Some introspection for you:  If Toady was female, would you donate more/less?  Expect more/less?  (Don't answer these in the thread.  Answer them to yourself and ponder why.)

[RedKing]

That's funny. Where I work, men are given free license to blow deadlines and screw stuff up all the time.

Plus, female tech support tend to encounter more hostility from end-users, because there's a preconception of the part of some that a female tech doesn't know what she's doing. They're not more forgiving, they're LESS forgiving. We have a few female end-users that are downright abusive to the female techs, but cooperates just fine with the male techs.

Gender stereotypes and interactions aren't monolithic across a gender group, on either end.

[sluissa]

Being harassed for being a woman is a women's issue, and there's no analogue for being a man on the Internet, as far as I can tell. So yeah, there's a women's issue here; there's a cultural problem that uniquely affects women. I wouldn't go so far as to say that Internet harassment as a whole is about women, but it is true that there is a subset of it that is, and (in my experience) is more widely accepted as okay.

I am not sure, exactly, how to respond to the post, since it seems like the arguments it presents are great support for what I just said, but not for the thesis the author seems to be going for.

Just because harassment against women tends to take a specific form does not mean that it hurts any more or less than harassment against a man or gender neutral entity would. Harassment is not simply a women's issue.

It's an issue for everyone and honestly, I'm sick of being told, "You're in x group, suck it up, you don't have it nearly as hard as y group, so just deal with it while group y deals with it first." when this is a problem for everyone, and should be dealt with by everyone to solve it for everyone instead of group y taking it upon themselves to try to fix the problem for themselves while leaving everyone else with the same problem.

I'd be happy to work along side other genders to try to make the world a nicer place, but not if some people decide that the world deserves to be nicer to them first, when the true goal is for the world to be  nicer to everyone.

I acknowledge there are womens' issues out there that just don't have an adequate analogue on the male side, but this isn't one of them and trying to make it one isn't helping anyone.

[Bauglir]

Also, it's kind of irrelevant to the point, Andir. What I was pointing out is that you don't see men attacked for being men. They'll be attacked for other things, and that is actually important because it illustrates that it's not just about women's rights with a few men happening to be collateral. One of those things is not living up to whatever ideals about men people might have, yes, but "manly" is not considered an insult - that, I think, illustrates what I was getting at.

I suppose you might argue that women on the Internet are attacked because being on the Internet doesn't fit with people's opinions of what "womanly" is, making the situation analagous that way. It seems like a nigh-tautological dodge, somehow. Perhaps I'm wrong, but it seems like a significant root here is that it's perceived as "ok" to attack women socially.

@sluissa
Yes, that's what I said.