On 12/28/2017 07:42 AM, Cecilia Tanaka wrote:

Who will cry for your death, James?  Who will miss you?  Nobody. Social Justice Warriors always project. I hear the voice of a woman who has cats instead of children.

When you die, no one will notice, and your cats will eat you. I have children, I have grandchildren. You think you have friends, but observe how progressives treat their "friends". When progs die, their cats eat them.

On Sun, Dec 31, 2017 at 09:20:46AM +1000, jamesd@echeque.com wrote:

...

observe how progressives treat their "friends".

On 12/31/2017 9:54 AM, Zenaan Harkness wrote:

Indeed. Like Jacob Applebaum was treated by his "progressive" Tor Inc "friends"

Ah, yes, lovely, lovely. He worked for Greenpeace etc. Greenpeace needs to be hung from the yardarm for piracy on the high seas, but, though we are not allowed to take effective measures against piracy on the high seas, we see the left devouring its own, which is some small amount of justice, just as Saint Paul the Apostle observed that homosexuality brought its own punishment in this world. Jacob also worked for Kink.com, which has recently been devoured by social justice warriors. Probably he was one of those who devoured it, and now he himself is devoured.

On Sun, Apr 29, 2018 at 06:30:38PM +1000, Zenaan Harkness wrote:

was Subject: Re: USA: National Security Strategy, Juan's Wet Dream -- OFF-TOPIC (James Donald is a creep) On Sun, Dec 31, 2017 at 10:54:35AM +1100, Zenaan Harkness wrote:

...

On Sun, Dec 31, 2017 at 09:20:46AM +1000, jamesd@echeque.com wrote:

...

On 12/28/2017 07:42 AM, Cecilia Tanaka wrote:

...

Who will cry for your death, James?  Who will miss you?  Nobody. Social Justice Warriors always project. I hear the voice of a woman who has cats instead of children.

When you die, no one will notice, and your cats will eat you.

I have children, I have grandchildren. You think you have friends, but observe how progressives treat their "friends".

Indeed. Like Jacob Applebaum was treated by his "progressive" Tor Inc "friends" ...

...

When progs die, their cats eat them.

When an "SJW" cry bully becomes a psychopath predating on the world dishing out benefits for being "offended".

Yes, being offended is the "new black" manipulation of those with weak minds - which is ironically in some sense a service in the vein of "a fool and 'is money are easily separated, and to fail to do so is to fail to teach an important life lesson to one in dire need"...

Still, predatory behaviour is predatory behaviour, so how might you turn the tables?

Are Social Justice Warriors Snowflakes? Or Just Cold… https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-04-28/are-social-justice-warriors-snowfl... …In other words, this is predatory behavior. The easily offended may “sincerely” believe that they are wronged. But that doesn’t prove anything. It is possible to “sincerely” believe slavery is a humane institution, just as many did long ago. And who says Paul doesn’t sincerely believe in his own “victimhood”?

…It is greed and power lust that makes people predisposed to feeling offended.

…If a woman dies, the reproductive power of the group is diminished. Our ancestors, hence, did everything they could to protect women. If you weren’t biased in favor of women, you didn’t leave descendants. Feminism isn’t modern, as they say.

…We all are descended from ancestors who were biased in favor of women. Men were, and still are, seen as disposable. This has nothing to do with genuine compassion, fragility or sensitivity. This is politically motivated behavior.

…The “easily offended” are not too attached to principals, as their critics assume.

…If you think it is “human” to feel offended, think about this: Why are you tempted to feeloffended, instead of, say, debating your opponents?

…It is strange we find it unacceptable to question how reasonable someone’s “feelings” are. It is strange we find it acceptable to say, “I am offended.”

…There is something more important that social justice warriors and their critics miss. There is a huge difference between feeling oppressed by cruelty and feeling oppressed by disagreement. These impulses are not just different, but stem from opposing motives and values. People who feel more oppressed by cruelty are less likely to feel oppressed by disagreement, and people who feel more oppressed by disagreement are less likely to feel oppressed by cruelty.

…The solution, of course, is to stop subsidizing bad behavior.

Those who would subsidize bad behaviour, create safe spaces for the melting snowflakes, remove the need for "trigger warnings" and otherwise subsidize the cry bullies, are rife within the ranks of our "modern" "Western" "culture": https://lwn.net/Articles/753646/ Sad days...

On Thu, May 10, 2018 at 06:54:11PM +1000, Zenaan Harkness wrote:

On Thu, May 10, 2018 at 06:34:23PM +1000, Zenaan Harkness wrote:

...

...

…The solution, of course, is to stop subsidizing bad behavior.

Those who would subsidize bad behaviour, create safe spaces for the melting snowflakes, remove the need for "trigger warnings" and otherwise subsidize the cry bullies, are rife within the ranks of our "modern" "Western" "culture":

https://lwn.net/Articles/753646/

Sad days...

...

Wait a second. You are saying you can assume someone is agreeing with you, if they don't respond?

It's called "tacit agreement" - yes, it's agreement by default - it is an effective (whether intentional or not) surrender to the "vocal majority" even though that vocal majority may be an absolute or relative minority.

But, in a public forum (or "modern democracy") tacit consent also implies a high likelihood of the tyranny of the minority - i.e. those who squawk the loudest get to "win" (or get the government benefits, etc).

Those who seek "safe spaces" (whatever the hell they are) are also called cry-bullies.

The SJWs or "social justice warriors" who actively "create safe spaces" by for example (to pick a totally random example) removing a short yet politically incorrect joke from documentation, are often engaged in some level of "white knighting" or virtue signaling and in any case are subsidizing bad behaviour.

Now, what could also arguably be alleged as the "bad behaviour" of a politically incorrect joke, is also a healthy poke in the ribs of the cry bullies, those trigger-ready snowflakes who self proclaim to melt at the sight of any of a million trigger words - and by publishing their melting quality far and wide, publicly and loudly, they are bullying the rest of us.

We owe it to our dignity to NOT surrender our freedom of speech or our "freedom to trigger" in our public, work and play spaces, to the dictates of the covert passive aggressive cry bullies.

And remember folks, EVERYTHING we say, all our speech, is effectively political in some way. Those who remove a short yet politically-incorrect joke from documentation are making a political statement, doing a political action, saying "this is a safe space for cry bullies, you will not pollute our safe space with politically incorrect jokes", even though it is (usually) in the guise of "we want no politics in our docs".

See also:

https://lists.cpunks.org/pipermail/cypherpunks/2018-May/0...

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-04-28/are-social-just...

Good luck,

Both. RMS should not make political decisions for glibc anymore, and it is not right for him to seek “integrity of the prose he wrote” (where said “prose” is a bad joke completely disconnected from the rest of the manual).

Yes, many seek to remove any concept of morals (or even ethics), to remove any hint of the founder's original intentions, to remove all politically incorrect prose and the ever-expanding menagerie of trigger words and phrases from all "upstanding and upright" technical material such as documentation. Let us all submit to the passive aggressive, cry bully trigger-melting "unique snowflakes" by making the entire public world a safe space. Or, let's not‼ Let's honour the intentions, ethics, vision and grace of the founders on whose shoulders we stand (such as Richard Stallman). Let's admit that we are above submission to an endless march of passive aggressive cry bullies demanding the entire world become their safe space. Let's admit that everything we say and do is in some way, on some level political, and at the very least honour the intentions of the founders of those projects we benefit so handsomely from. Do. Not. Subsidize. Bad. Behaviour. https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-04-28/are-social-justice-warriors-snowfl... And do not subsidize the passive aggressive safe-space demanding cry bullies. ... To paraphrase you: "The work to avoid offending the various categories of snowflake safe-space-junkies, can be a real cost, can be significant, is a detriment, and the chilling effect this all has is real." THAT is the reason this particular joke (by RMS) should stay in the glibc manual. "The triggered" and "the oppressed" are redefining permissible speech - which is ironically apropos RMS' original joke. The redefinition of allowed speech is dangerous and literally tyrannical in the underlying intent of doing so (whether conscious, or unconscious) - refer Dr Jordan Peterson who puts this exact point so succinctly. Create your world,