[NotarySojac]

It literally proves nothing. It's a disagreement over what word has a tougher feel, Agency or Organization. You can pretend, but that's sad.

[lordofduct]

Notary your strong attraction to emotional interpretations of plain English is hilarious.

I'm sorry but because a phrase uses objective words as opposed to words that instill fear does not make the author racist himself. It makes them objective and attempting to avoid strong bias (which is difficult to do). It's actually insisting the use of such 'power' words that is prejudicial (note I'm using the word prejudicial in its proper objective definition).


And no it's not an argument over which word has a tougher feel. It's an argument that your insistence that one has a stronger emotional feel is subjective or not.

This post has been edited by lordofduct: 16 August 2011 - 03:26 PM

[dorknexus]

Quote

It literally proves nothing. It's a disagreement over what word has a tougher feel, Agency or Organization. You can pretend, but that's sad.

Agency and organization are not synonyms so in fact the disagreement is based on the fact that they mean two separate fucking things.

This post has been edited by Dark_Nexus: 16 August 2011 - 03:28 PM

[lordofduct]

They aren't synonyms, very true. But two words, even if not synonyms, can still be compared.



That and it's hilarious.

This post has been edited by lordofduct: 16 August 2011 - 03:27 PM

[NotarySojac]

lol, the direction of this thread is what's hilarious.

[dorknexus]

It's not a thread, it's an initial topic and a collection of replies.
it's not a direction, it's a focus of the topic at hand.
it's not hilarious, it's chortle worthy.

terrorist racist.

This post has been edited by Dark_Nexus: 16 August 2011 - 03:33 PM

[lordofduct]

Sorry if you can't create a strong enough topic that could keep our interest and stay on topic.

[Sergio Tapia]

Lot of hostility these days here bro's. Relax, payday's coming soon. Only a week to go before we get our fat programmer's checks!

[supersloth]

i got paid yesterday, it's two weeks before i am paid again. SO MUCH HOSTILITY COMING BRO.

[Sergio Tapia]

AW SHIT BRO LETS FLEX

[modi123_1]

NotarySojac, on 16 August 2011 - 05:03 PM, said:

modi123_1, on 16 August 2011 - 02:52 PM, said:

I am still confused how distrupted their ability to assemble is linked in.

Really? The motivation for disabling the communications was to interfere with the protest. The motivation, not the failure/success of the duck-like agency, is what's salient here.

See I would be willing to buy this if you had some larger issue at hand - a collection of points made to highlight a larger slide into the abyss as it were. Alas no. You focused on one non-unique incident that amounted to Officer Barbrady telling folks to "move it along".

If you were to point to the Philly "flash mob" curfew, or even jumped to how China is patting the Brits on the back for social media crackdowns in the time of unrest (cite), but alas no.

So what exactly was your point? To collect enough like minded thinkers to "rabble rabble rabble"?

[alias120]

I can understand why BART reacted the way they did, regardless of it being "right" or "wrong". As modi123 mentioned, there has been a great deal of recent unrest with the Philly flash mobs and the situation in Britain. A majority of the flash mobs that have been beating random people on the streets and robbing local stores were organized via social media. BART, surely being aware of recent news, was no doubt worried that the situation would quickly escalate to the point of being violent and destructive. So, if you want to blame someone it should be the idiots who decided it was fun to terrorize the streets in mobs.

[NotarySojac]

modi123_1, on 16 August 2011 - 05:17 PM, said:

NotarySojac, on 16 August 2011 - 05:03 PM, said:

modi123_1, on 16 August 2011 - 02:52 PM, said:

I am still confused how distrupted their ability to assemble is linked in.

Really? The motivation for disabling the communications was to interfere with the protest. The motivation, not the failure/success of the duck-like agency, is what's salient here.

See I would be willing to buy this if you had some larger issue at hand - a collection of points made to highlight a larger slide into the abyss as it were. Alas no. You focused on one non-unique incident that amounted to Officer Barbrady telling folks to "move it along".

If you were to point to the Philly "flash mob" curfew, or even jumped to how China is patting the Brits on the back for social media crackdowns in the time of unrest (cite), but alas no.

Hey, why don't you toss some links out about it then? We can use a internet forum to discuss it; that's the point right? Do you think I'd rather carry on with the something like 7 post run of off-top trolling regarding the semantics of the post title?

[lordofduct]

Ummm...

modi wasn't part of the off-topic tangent that your title created with the rest of us yanking your chain

and he did toss out a link... that's what 'cite' means.

[BenignDesign]

I'd look up a definition for 'cite', but the whole noun-verb thing will just confuse you again anyway.

This post has been edited by BenignDesign: 17 August 2011 - 11:09 AM