idkwcpgw
9d ago
This one isn't necessarily a conspiracy theory either depending on what we mean "control" by.
This is a motte and bailey argument done by leftists because it neutralizes smart people. "I didn't mean actual lizard men control the world, obviously they're not lizards. They just act reptilian in their lack of compassion." and then 5 minutes later, back in the bailey: "Lizard men control the world!"
The same thing is done by ostensibly smart people, blaming billionaires for every wrong in society.
idkwcpgw
1mo ago
The city leadership also intentionally and illegally deleted text messages to avoid any culpability. https://mynorthwest.com/local/judge-evidence-thousands-texts-top-seattle-officials-deleted-text-messages/3786557
idkwcpgw
2mo ago
There's a bigger problem here, and it's the perennial story of enshittification: Everybody has a price. The thing you're describing would be worth a lot of money if successful, for various reasons. I say this not as an insult to you but as a description of human nature: what would happen when someone dangled your price in front of you? What about 2x your price? 10x?
idkwcpgw
2mo ago
Of course, with Platner, the story that he got it in Croatia and had no clue what it represented seems likely.
I could potentially believe that he didn't know what it represented when he first got it, but the NYT reported that he definitely knew for years afterwards:
from https://www.nytimes.com/2026/06/04/us/politics/platner-maine-senate-girlfriends-relationships.html:
Mr. Platner, she said, knew when they were dating years ago that the tattoo was a Nazi symbol, and that he called it “my Totenkopf.” “I would never have known what that was,” she said. “He would joke about it being a Nazi tattoo.”
idkwcpgw
2mo ago
Gambling you historically don't come back from, unless you're the best pitches since Tungsten Arm O'Doyle and your best friend is willing to take the rap.
At first I assumed that it was a coverup/fall-guy situation, but is there any actual evidence anywhere? I have never found anything but pure idle speculation. Ohtani seems naïve and child-like enough that him being taken advantage of really does seem plausible.
idkwcpgw
9mo ago
For me the thing that put this more out of bounds than most of the batshit things Trump says is that he should be able to relate to it. A father being killed by his son is truly tragic, unless the father has covered for grievous crimes the son has committed. It doesn't look like that's the case here, just that Nick Reiner is a complete and utter schizophrenic nut. I don't know that he's terrorized anyone but his parents, and a parent should be able to empathize.
The reason the left's response to Charlie Kirk hit me so hard is that he was assassinated - again, the form of death matters. If he was hit by a car, the left being a bag of dicks would feel normal. When your own side extra-judiciously kills someone, you should not cheer.
When parents are killed by their mentally ill child, it's a true tragedy that you wouldn't wish on anyone.
Also, The Princess Bride is a national treasure.
idkwcpgw
10mo ago
Okay, you're correct and I am a bad reader. To my credit (and as you said), those examples are so bad that they short circuited my brain and I could not relate them to the opening thesis.
idkwcpgw
10mo ago
I might be a bad reader here and misunderstanding, but I see that article as 3 distinct pieces:
- Does the social contract even exist any more?
- Did Cheating Accusations Kill This Grandmaster?
- Twitch Can’t Protect Streamers
I don't read the latter two sections as in any way related to the former.
That Substack post is so plainly dumb that it's remarkable. From my vantage, one of EA's most controversial attributes is that they're willing to discuss letting a small number of people die in order to improve the lives of many. I approve of these discussions!
This CEO (leader? whatever he is) then makes the most childish argument I've ever seen, which is "She's smart and I like her, so I'm hiring her, damn the consequences to my organization." It's as if he's shouting at the top of his lungs that his company does nothing important!
If you read the comments on the substack post, he even acknowledges that he knows he'll lose business over this. So here's a case where someone who is supposedly an "effective altruist" is making a decision to help one convicted felon in order to damage his company's future, likely permanently. I know that the only thing I'm going to remember out of this is "Oh, Manifund? Those are the retards that hired Caroline Ellison".
The only thing to take out of this is that Manifund is a non-serious organization that doesn't believe it has an important mission. Or that this clown thinks Caroline Ellison is so, so smart that by her employment alone, Manifund can be successful beyond the bounds of any other collection of employees. Or maybe, as mentioned by @Tractatus, they're fucking and she gives extraordinary head.
Edited to add: This also reinforced my belief that Caroline Ellison, and indeed most effective altruists, are likely lying scumbags doing the mental equivalent of making jerking off motions in a closet while claiming they're getting a good workout. If Caroline was ACTUALLY AN EFFECTIVE ALTRUIST she would never do anything visible in the movement again, because she is smart enough to understand how damaging having someone like her around is. Just by virtue of being willing to do this (nobody forced her!) it shows how much of a sham it all is.
More options
Context Copy link