|
Post by Angelo on Oct 21, 2017 22:01:15 GMT -5
If you look at the "rate your own bias" section, and look at the way they want you to answer the questions you'll see it is a flawed methodology to start. It uses a left/right system without explaining what they consider to the right or left in terms of policy. Hell they gave CNN Web a Center rating... Drudge a Strong Right. They are pretty accurate it seems, but some are seriously off. The issue has to be in their methodology at determining what is actually bias as opposed to reporting.
|
|
|
Post by slaytan on Oct 22, 2017 4:03:57 GMT -5
A) very little B) very little it’s like politifact: those who use it are attempting to outsource their own critical thinking. Everyone wishes it were as easy as looking at a “truth-o-meter”
|
|
|
Post by andrewk1988 on Oct 22, 2017 10:17:01 GMT -5
A) very little B) very little it’s like politifact: those who use it are attempting to outsource their own critical thinking. Everyone wishes it were as easy as looking at a “truth-o-meter” Right, I know it's not going to be the barometer of truth. I was just curious if anyone had any opinions about the methodology. It claims that it's based on user ratings, which I don't think politifact is.
|
|
|
Post by slaytan on Oct 22, 2017 10:41:24 GMT -5
A) very little B) very little it’s like politifact: those who use it are attempting to outsource their own critical thinking. Everyone wishes it were as easy as looking at a “truth-o-meter” Right, I know it's not going to be the barometer of truth. I was just curious if anyone had any opinions about the methodology. It claims that it's based on user ratings, which I don't think politifact is. User ratings would only tell you what the largest number of people believe.
|
|
|
Post by andrewk1988 on Oct 22, 2017 16:10:48 GMT -5
Right, I know it's not going to be the barometer of truth. I was just curious if anyone had any opinions about the methodology. It claims that it's based on user ratings, which I don't think politifact is. User ratings would only tell you what the largest number of people believe. Right, but ultimately isn't that what decides what is "left, right, center"? That's why I thought it was more interesting than the other sorts of think-tank driven boards that seem to be the deciders of what's what.
|
|
|
Post by Angelo on Oct 22, 2017 16:19:18 GMT -5
User ratings would only tell you what the largest number of people believe. Right, but ultimately isn't that what decides what is "left, right, center"? That's why I thought it was more interesting than the other sorts of think-tank driven boards that seem to be the deciders of what's what. The problem is nobody can seem to agree anymore on what is right, what is left, and what is center. When it comes to news, IMO it should simply be biased or not. Forget what it is biased towards. Report the news as is, and let people make their own inferences based on their opinions and critical thinking.
|
|
|
Post by Baph on Oct 23, 2017 10:10:25 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Baph on Oct 23, 2017 15:54:04 GMT -5
800 troops in Niger, more in East Africa, members on the senate armed services committee didn't even know we were there.
The DoD, much like the prison system and LEO in this country, is completely out of control.
|
|
|
Post by andrewk1988 on Oct 23, 2017 19:07:09 GMT -5
800 troops in Niger, more in East Africa, members on the senate armed services committee didn't even know we were there. The DoD, much like the prison system and LEO in this country, is completely out of control. Wasn't one of the first things Trump did in office was give more power to Mathis and the DoD? That can't be though, because the only thing he ever does wrong is say stupid shit I thought.
|
|
|
Post by Baph on Oct 23, 2017 21:53:04 GMT -5
800 troops in Niger, more in East Africa, members on the senate armed services committee didn't even know we were there. The DoD, much like the prison system and LEO in this country, is completely out of control. Wasn't one of the first things Trump did in office was give more power to Mathis and the DoD? That can't be though, because the only thing he ever does wrong is say stupid shit I thought. What is the point of you?
|
|
|
Post by ocmmafan on Oct 23, 2017 22:58:47 GMT -5
800 troops in Niger, more in East Africa, members on the senate armed services committee didn't even know we were there. The DoD, much like the prison system and LEO in this country, is completely out of control. Wasn't one of the first things Trump did in office was give more power to Mathis and the DoD? That can't be though, because the only thing he ever does wrong is say stupid shit I thought. Yeah, the big problem we have in this country is the President. Definitely. Post some links to the power he gave Mathis and DOD. This is the first article I googled but since you're making the claim, support it with something people can read. This breaks down the money but might be something better. breakingdefense.com/2017/05/trumps-2018-budget-puts-dod-in-rebuilding-mode/
|
|
|
Post by andrewk1988 on Oct 24, 2017 5:38:30 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by andrewk1988 on Oct 24, 2017 5:42:52 GMT -5
Wasn't one of the first things Trump did in office was give more power to Mathis and the DoD? That can't be though, because the only thing he ever does wrong is say stupid shit I thought. What is the point of you? To point out intellectual dishonesty and hypocrisy across the great lands that are the od refugee camp. You seem to get awfully upset when you get even slightly rebuked by anyone about anything. But really, I was agreeing with you and expanding on your point slightly with a little dose of "oh yeah, and the OD hero is not only complicit, he's actually encouraging it".
|
|
|
Post by Baph on Oct 24, 2017 10:16:58 GMT -5
Rebukes that don't make any sense or have any merit are fairly annoying, I will grant you that point.
|
|
|
Post by andrewk1988 on Oct 24, 2017 11:42:25 GMT -5
Rebukes that don't make any sense or have any merit are fairly annoying, I will grant you that point. Look man, I've been reading your opinions on shit for a long time. Since I was like 16, I'm almost 30 now. You are too intelligent to pull the "it doesn't make any sense so I'll ignore it because I don't like what it implies" card The reason I tend to question you more in particular on inconsistencies in your lines of reasoning is because I used to really think you (and the whole band here) were more into critical thinking and criticizing where criticism was warranted towards our government especially. I would read what you posted and use some of it in my own discussions in the real world. But it's become apparent that that was just some "fuck that nigger Obama" bullshit, and it's a tad disappointing.
|
|
|
Post by Baph on Oct 24, 2017 12:16:05 GMT -5
I give up.
|
|
|
Post by andrewk1988 on Oct 24, 2017 12:19:57 GMT -5
Pussy
|
|
|
Post by Baph on Oct 24, 2017 12:22:30 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by MMAJim on Oct 24, 2017 12:55:41 GMT -5
As Water Cooler Moderator, one point of clarification here.
In the Water Cooler Thread (and I dare say in all of the OD):
Failure to rebuke ≠ Endorsement of Thought
For example, if I did not, somewhere in the history of the OD, rebuke "Fuck that nigger Obama" written by someone else, that would not mean that I endorse that statement (and likely I never actually read that post).
I just didn't want anyone to get the impression that "Fuck that nigger Obama" got a rousing endorsement here.
|
|
|
Post by johncfc on Oct 24, 2017 15:17:56 GMT -5
As Water Cooler Moderator, one point of clarification here. In the Water Cooler Thread (and I dare say in all of the OD): Failure to rebuke ≠ Endorsement of Thought For example, if I did not, somewhere in the history of the OD, rebuke "Fuck that nigger Obama" written by someone else, that would not mean that I endorse that statement (and likely I never actually read that post). I just didn't want anyone to get the impression that "Fuck that nigger Obama" got a rousing endorsement here.The fact that you have to clarify the board's sentiment kind of speaks volumes, no? I for one wouldn't be surprised if some gave the above a rousing endorsement.
|
|
|
Post by andrewk1988 on Oct 24, 2017 15:19:42 GMT -5
First of all, unless I misinterpreted something, that person is arguing for division. Differences in thought promote a strong society, in my opinion. The echo chamber culture promotes a weak, fragile one. And just so we're clear here, I agree with a lot of what you post still. My posts directed at you are about you being openly and blatantly hypocritical. You made a post over the weekend claiming that you don't care what Trump says, but you do care what he does. And then went on to imply that you don't have a problem with anything he's done. Then you just posted "The DoD is completely out of control". Now I get that the DoD has been out of control long before Trump. But, literally one of the first major things he did was give the DoD more power.
|
|
|
Post by andrewk1988 on Oct 24, 2017 15:29:40 GMT -5
As Water Cooler Moderator, one point of clarification here. In the Water Cooler Thread (and I dare say in all of the OD): Failure to rebuke ≠ Endorsement of Thought For example, if I did not, somewhere in the history of the OD, rebuke "Fuck that nigger Obama" written by someone else, that would not mean that I endorse that statement (and likely I never actually read that post). I just didn't want anyone to get the impression that "Fuck that nigger Obama" got a rousing endorsement here.The fact that you have to clarify the board's sentiment kind of speaks volumes, no? I for one wouldn't be surprised if some gave the above a rousing endorsement. There are a few here who would openly endorse it. Most though don't have the balls, despite what they actually think. They would need it white washed and a little more PC to endorse it.
|
|
|
Post by MMAJim on Oct 24, 2017 16:18:51 GMT -5
The fact that you have to clarify the board's sentiment kind of speaks volumes, no? I for one wouldn't be surprised if some gave the above a rousing endorsement. There are a few here who would openly endorse it. Most though don't have the balls, despite what they actually think. They would need it white washed and a little more PC to endorse it. I think that brush paints too widely. There is plenty of legitimate criticism of Obama to be levied, from before his election through his entire presidency. Blaming race, for the vast majority of Obama-rejection, is as impotent as blaming sex for HRC-rejection.
|
|
|
Post by andrewk1988 on Oct 24, 2017 16:25:58 GMT -5
There are a few here who would openly endorse it. Most though don't have the balls, despite what they actually think. They would need it white washed and a little more PC to endorse it. I think that brush paints too widely. There is plenty of legitimate criticism of Obama to be levied, from before his election through his entire presidency. Blaming race, for the vast majority of Obama-rejection, is as impotent as blaming sex for HRC-rejection. Race isn't the main topic with my point. I said nigger for effect. I participated in Obama criticism when he was in office. My point was more that there was a line drawn in the sand and criticism of people on one side is open season, but the other side it's not even an option. Blindly, sheepishly following and defending the other under any and all circumstances.
|
|
|
Post by ocmmafan on Oct 24, 2017 17:55:52 GMT -5
First of all, unless I misinterpreted something, that person is arguing for division. Differences in thought promote a strong society, in my opinion. The echo chamber culture promotes a weak, fragile one. And just so we're clear here, I agree with a lot of what you post still. My posts directed at you are about you being openly and blatantly hypocritical. You made a post over the weekend claiming that you don't care what Trump says, but you do care what he does. And then went on to imply that you don't have a problem with anything he's done. Then you just posted "The DoD is completely out of control". Now I get that the DoD has been out of control long before Trump. But, literally one of the first major things he did was give the DoD more power. What's your argument? What has Trump done with DOD that you can point to as negative? Delegating authority to put troops on the ground is a talking point; it is NOT an argument nor has any substance (and you know it). DoD is one of the largest employers in the world and has been for our lifetimes - so not sure where to even start. I mean fuck, we have more contractors working for them than military and fed combined. War profiteering is out of control - is that the point? He did reduce the cost of planes the military is buying so is that good or bad? If you want to be critical - be critical. Your posts come off that you despise Trump. Cool - you're not alone here and others do as well. What you lack, and others lack, and what is consistently pointed out here, is a total lack of substance. The counter to what I just said is going to be your fall back "you're sucking Trump's dick" and dude, that too lacks substance and merit. For example, since you seem focused on DOD, how about discussing how he handled Syria? Or discuss your opinion on why we should or should not spend money updating military hardware. Or, talk about his open support for Israel. Or talk about his proposed tax plan or his multiple Immigration Executive Actions (all awesome, IMO). Pick a subject and be specific in why you don't like (or like) what he is doing. If you prefer to make theoretical generalizations and observations, not sure how you expect people to reply?
|
|
|
Post by andrewk1988 on Oct 24, 2017 18:09:17 GMT -5
The point was directed at the hypocrisy of one person. You're employed by the DoD, right? It's not a talking point that he granted Mattis more power. It's a fact. You can argue about what the DoD does with that power, but the fact remains that he further empowered the department. A defense for the DoD shouldn't be "they're a big employer". The government is not meant to be a job creator. The fact that they are just increases the population that's on the government tit, one way or another. And as an aside to your further attempt to change the subject: as far as what Trump "accomplished" in Syria, well his policy has helped further weaken a weak enemy in Isis. But it's also creating a vacuum that's being filled by our biggest, most powerful enemy in the region. So maybe we should wait and see about some of these "wins". And even further, I've never accused you or anyone of sucking Trump's dick. What you fantasize about in your own time is not up for discussion here.* *
|
|
|
Post by ocmmafan on Oct 24, 2017 19:29:47 GMT -5
Let's discuss empowering DoD. I'll concede the point that Trump did. By the same token he then "weakened Department of State", right? The Sec of State won't then have the same control say to stop resources from responding to an attack in Benghazi and allow US citizens to be murdered. It may remove the departmental clusterfuck of who makes the call if Mathis has authority delegated down by the President. So by "empowering DoD" we could in turn weaken DOJ, DHS, CIA, etc. Mathis (a career General) with more delegated authority may be an incredible boon to both the efficiency and the ethical and strategic oversight of military resources. I prefer a General have authority vs other politicians. I certainly prefer a Mathis over a Hillary Clinton.
I'm not trying to change any subject - I'm forcing you to have a subject.
I work for DHS. Different bloated arm of the government.
|
|
|
Post by andrewk1988 on Oct 24, 2017 19:47:55 GMT -5
You aren't trying to debate anything other than "well I bet this will work out better than the way Hillary (or insert other democrat) did/would handle it. You're charging me to debate with facts while you use hypotheticals and opinions.
|
|
|
Post by andrewk1988 on Oct 24, 2017 19:49:06 GMT -5
And my apologies at the mix-up, and after rereading my post where I asked about who you work for, I definitely didn't intend my point to be a potshot at you. But it definitely came across that way.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 24, 2017 20:31:52 GMT -5
You aren't trying to debate anything other than "well I bet this will work out better than the way Hillary (or insert other democrat) did/would handle it. You're charging me to debate with facts while you use hypotheticals and opinions. Not to but in... But do you have this serious dislike for trump or something? I feel like the guy could have donned a superman suit, flew into fucking Puerto Rico and Houston, saved every woman and child, fed the hungry, built homes for the homeless and you would still find a reason to shit on it. My apologies if I am not spot on correct about this. But you just seem like the guy shot your dog or touched you as a young child. I feel a grudge being held. No?
|
|