domain:weirditaly.com
it could just be 'bants'. maybe he is just venting to a friend and there is some context that is snipped from the conversation that we see that makes it less bad.
It could be, but it's not.
A DM conversation "leaked" where in he has this conversation with a Republican colleage in the Virginia House I believe. So this wasn't even exactly an "in house" conversation. Just straight up telling the opposition, "Hey, I think you deserve to die" like it would never or could never come back to haunt him.
Believe it or not, you are not the first person grasping at this straw.
it could just be 'bants'. maybe he is just venting to a friend and there is some context that is snipped from the conversation that we see that makes it less bad. cancelling him has parallels to cancelling people for having misogynistic/sexist/racist comments in a whatsapp group with friends. there is an expectation of a privacy and lot of it is just people venting or memeing and not being serious.
I genuinely don't think this is AI. I just think em-dashes are best used in moderation.
Keep. Reading.
You don't get to read the first thing he says, go "Sounds benign to me", and then ignore the rest of the truly horrific and sober thoughts he put down.
I lowkey expected you to catch the reference there, but if you haven't read the Practical Guide to Evil, go do that. Best fantasy this century, strong contender for all time. There is a significant plotline that deals with that issue.
I generally don't like using the word woke because it would get me instant backlash from normies who claim it's just a bogeyman etc and only the worst chuds worry about wokeim. Not that that's likely to happen on TM, but it's my general feeling.
Look, /pol/ is /pol/. Unhinged stuff gets posted there, too. But seeing something normie coded like reddit erupt into whataboutism over something as grisly as saying that little kids need to die along with their parents? Yeah, that's bad. And again, just like with Charlie Kirk, I already see a couple people in this thread downplaying it right in front of me and telling me I'm worrying over nothing. Why? What do you get out of it? Like, this is the kind of behavior I expect from revisionists when there's a thread on anything that took place in the 1940s. Did you click on WhiningCoil's Twitter link and read what Jay Jones actually said? If you did, and you are still insisting it's just over a The Office joke edit, why?
This is essentially Adam Smith's argument for capitalism.
/pol/ is not a representative sample, they are exiled and are as marginalized as can be. I am honestly tired of the attitude that internet posters are not real people. This stuff being normal to them is not meaningless. Tyler Robinson was a product of reddit mind rot after all
... But first, we need to talk about parallel universes.
That is to say, you can also do challenge runs like speedruns, such as the here-given minimum A-press SM64 run. Those tend to be more about research than memorization/repetition.
I skimmed this and it's really boring. Literally the lamest thread on /pol/ is 300x as unhinged and you're not freaking out about that.
Even the whole thing is such a meltdown over a guy saying
"Three people, two bullets. Gilbert, hitler, and pol pot. Gilbert gets two bullets to the head"
Which is inappropriate as a public figure, but an incredibly common joke.
I'm gonna be honest, I'm fairly distressed over this. This is how Pogroms work.
I'm somewhat distressed by your distress over what, Twitter and Reddit comments? I hope you find peace.
Your link to your previous comment is about people wishing Trump would die. I am sure we could find an infinite number of comments wishing death on Hillary (or Biden, or Obama) if that would make you feel better.
Similarly, the reddit thread linked below is really boring? I did not see any calls for violence, although there was a TON of "whattaboutism".
It's also such a nothing burger, it's about a Democrat saying:
" Three people, two bullets. Gilbert, hitler, and pol pot. Gilbert gets two bullets to the head"
Which isn't tasteful, but a common joke template.
Comparing this to a Pogrom is somewhat hysterical, I genuinely hope you find some peace.
EDIT FOR FAIRNESS: After re-reading his comments, he made other gross insinuations as well. He is clearly not fit to be a public figure. He may have wished ill upon Gilbert's children, which is really bad, although given the leak doesn't involve what would otherwise be a profound smoking gun, it is not clear he did in fact do that.
It doesn't feel like AI to me, and the free AI detectors don't ping. It might help that I entered college roughly the same time as the author and what people thought was necessary to get in to a top school rings true (I didn't do it, but I went to a state school). But it also seems it wasn't written recently -- it refers to the Obama administration as the present.
In my opinion, the only distinction worth considering a difference is the degree to which our knowledge of character constraints our expectation of their future actions.
To elaborate, how would they behave if unconstrained? Would the person putting on the show of charity cease and desist the moment they had nothing to gain by it? Or does someone's internal conviction or innate "goodness" persist when they're not being forced to be "good" or not punished for being bad? Or when doing the right thing would be a costly signal (and one that isn't outweighed by the gain in prestige, as most costly signaling is)?
At the risk of reducing everything I say to commentary on AI, should you choose the model that pretends to be good because of punishment, or the one that tries to do the right thing despite risking punishment for its actions, or at least without obvious ulterior motives? That particular choice is clear to me, and I believe the analogy extends to humans.
You were talking about hoping Jennifer Gilbert's children would die.
Yes, I've told you this before. Only when people feel pain personally do they move on policy.
I mean do I think Todd and Jennifer are evil? And that they're breeding little fascist? Yes.
Such a punchline. Much LOL.
He's stone cold serious when he says these things. He's doing political calculus that dead Republicans help his policy goals because they oppose him.
This type of "hypocrisy gotcha" you see as a go-to defence mechanism is very frustrating to me. "OH, so YOU EXPECT ME to be BETTER than [my political outgroup]? Why don't you hold them to the same standard?!?!?!"
Well firstly, often people are. Not everyone is locked into a rigidly partisan mindset. Secondly if you proclaim you are better, loudly and repeatedly at all times, you have to walk the walk.
I guess I like the same spirit. Like an overarching series of interesting characters just doing their thing and growing over time. Its also kind of low stakes which is fine.
I might go and check out Hornblower or Sharpe next and see what comes of it unless I get a better suggestion.
I'm gonna be honest, I'm fairly distressed over this.
Be honest and admit that these kind of "just joking" comments come from all sides. I don't like it, I think it's probably more insidious than people think, and at its core is corrosive to an open society. But if you think this is solely a "left-wing" or "Democrat" phenomenon and one couldn't trivially produce examples of Republicans doing the exact same thing, you're lying to yourself. Hell, it's not uncommon to see this kind of sentiment on this forum, albeit typically worded more fancily.
Suppose Hornblower is the obvious next suggestion, but the question is whether you want something in the same niche or something in the same spirit. The former is easy to find, the latter is hard.
My God, you're right. Look at these comments. What the fuck? We've really been living in a country like this for this long? There's nothing that can't be sanewashed, can't be whatabout'd? There is no evil so bad that you can't blame it on Trump? I just can't believe what I'm seeing this year. I swear, the culture war is gonna go hot in a way we have never seen before.
I suspect that what you saw was a bunch of children raised to go through a bunch of hoops, one of which being community service, but this wasn't necessarily indicative of cynicism elsewhere. Many of those children likely had ideals, which they pursued as they gained independence and power.
I was one of those American Teenagers. The Key Club didn't seem to do anything useful as far as I could tell but I got a tshirt and marched in a parade. I started a Math club at my brother's middle school which was ok, maybe inspired some kids to think of math more creatively but didn't help anyone improve their math scores. I was in Varsity Swimming and Club Swimming, which was the biggest time suck of them all but it made my father happy.
I viewed all this as things to put in a portfolio that proved I could handle many things at once, that I was able to get along with a club of people, that I was able to act independently enough to start a club, etc. It was selfishly about proving what I could do. But.. that's what kids do. That's what kids are. What are your limits? And most importantly from the schools' perspective, are you going to graduate from an Ivy League school with a full course load and some extracurriculars?
This didn't stop me from being deeply concerned about many things in the world with vague plans on addressing them later. But as a child, you have very little control over your life. I did what my parents wanted me to do, and they wanted me to do this because at a young age I had taken an IQ test that had proved to them I had the ability to do this. I had some options on which clubs I joined, but some things I had very little choice at all. I swam varsity swimming because my father swam varsity swimming and coached swimming and that was what our family did.
If one believes that cynicism dominates over genuine do-gooding in everything, what's so bad about harnessing cynicism to create a bit more of do-gooding in the world? When the orphans are fed by a hypocritical heartless billionaire, does the food turn to ashes in their mouths?
Holy mother of em-dashes. I'm not accusing you of making this post with AI, but there are so many that I find it deeply distracting. Most of them could have been commas.
Yeah, I also caught that. What's with all the decade-old political references?
This shit is why if you're not from the US you should completely disregard Ivy league etc. universities and just go to Oxbridge instead, at least for your undergrad degree. While now there are some "boosts" given to disadvantaged British citizens if you're not one of them the only thing you'll be measured on and against your fellow applicants will be your aptitude for your chosen subject.
To use a London member's club analogy: going to the Ivy League is like being a member of Annabel's and all the new money connotations that gives while going to Oxbridge is like being a member of The Athenaeum (even being a member of White's is more respectable than being a member of Annabel's); for those of us who know, we know...
More options
Context Copy link