HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » sibelian » Journal
Page: « Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 ... 34 Next »


Profile Information

Member since: Tue Sep 4, 2007, 07:36 AM
Number of posts: 7,794

Journal Archives

Here's how I can tell when people are wasting my time on discussion boards...

Let's say I ask a question -

"Where's the cat?"

Useful responses would consist of something like:

"The cat is over there"
"There is no cat and there never has been a cat, the cat has always been a figment of your imagination"
"I don't know where the cat is"
"It's not a cat, it's a dog"
"It would be great if we could find the cat, but we really need to talk about the hot-dog stand"
"I have found the cat"
"Ok I'll help you find the cat"
"Here's what we do in order to find the cat"
"Don't worry, the cat is fine"
"I'm sorry to say that the cat is dead"
"The cat is sitting on your head"
("I don't regard finding the cat as a priority") - EDIT - Donald Ian Rankin has pointed out that this should be different, so, instead: "The cat isn't the priority". So there you go! Even I fuck this up sometimes!

Useless responses would consist of things like this:

"You're obsessed with cats"
"Why should I care about the cat?"
"People who like cats are stupid"
" "
"What makes you think anyone here cares about the cat"
"You keep going on and on about cats"
"You want a pony"
"Why do people keep blathering on about cats"
"Why can't these Cat Derangement Syndrome people fuck off"
"Why do you hate dogs"
"So I guess you want Jeb Bush for President"


"When you say 'Where's the cat' do you realise that you are pre-supposing that the people you are talking to actually have any information about the cat? You don't seem to have considered the possibility that those on the receiving end of your concern may not have any direct involvement with the cat or any knowledge of it's whereabouts. You do realise that the word 'where' implies a location, well who's to say that the cat's location is actually useful to know? And even if it is useful to know, why would anyone feel comfortable in discussing their knowledge of the cat's location with you? I think you're making a number of ill-considered assumptions about not only the cat itself, but any who may put serious consideration into answering your question. You do realise that it was a question? That means you're putting pressure on people to answer it. Some people don't feel comfortable answering questions. And have you actually established that the cat wishes it's whereabouts to be known? I'm not sure we can assume that. You do realise that that's an assumption? And do you realise that many cats have a tendency to go out and be away from home, sometimes for extended periods? And do you realise that there may be a relationship between the cat and those whom you are aggressively interrogating which may not be any of your concern? Do you realise that? You do realise that, don't you? Don't you realise that? Please consider deleting."

So, DU, what distinguishes list 1 from list 2?


Well, it's like this.

The responses in list 1, even though in certain cases they thwart the aims of the person asking where the cat is, retain the mysterious and hypothetical cat as the subject of the communication.

The responses in the second list do not. The second list consists of people talking indirectly about the person asking the question, which is a waste of time.

And what this means, darlings, is that the person doing the responding in list 2 has no real interest in what was said and is simply stuffing the Universe with junk.

It is emo-spam.

Delete the offenders from your life. Press "ignore".

Alternatively, if you're like me, use them as a lightning conductor for pent-up working life frustrations and be FIFTY TIMES AS RUDE in return. Whyever not? It's not like they care.

Cheers, petals!

Dearest DU: An excellent way to occupy the attention of otherwise productive people

- thus disrupting the flow of useful information is to spend vast amounts of time purposefully misinterpreting what is said or refusing to address the main point made. It's possible to waste an utterly extraordinary amount of everyone's time by simply making one's "opponent" explain thesemselves over and over again.

One is then in a marvellous position to say things like: "You're repeating yourself" or "You're going on and on a about this." It's a simple, manipulative trick.

Disruption is clearly observable. Anyone who finds fault with some perfectly trivial aspect of the main thrust of an argument is wasting everyone's time.


Vaccination is a process with COLLECTIVE benefits.

It's nothing to do how individuals feel about it.

"But what if I WANT to leave pools of gasoline lying all over my front yard? Since the ordinance prohibiting gasoline pools, figures are DOWN, so gasoline's obviously safe. Hardly anyone in my neighbourhood has had a gasoline instigated housefire for years. What about my personal, individual, American, oppression-resisting FREEDOM? People doing all stuff together.... EEEEEEEW, COMMUNISM!"

THIS is the level of debate, now.



£20K!!!! Voluntary Sector!


Starting this morning I will be Policy Officer for a Voluntary Sector oversight group!

An American uses the British NHS

I know youse guys know all this stuff already but here's yet another article on the subject to plague your conservative relatives with...



The context here is that the NHS just released its most recent stats on accident and emergency room waiting times. The headline number is that 84% of patients are seen within four hours. In the UK, this is regarded as a huge failure — the standard the NHS is supposed to meet is 95% of patients in four hours. The UK media went into a fury about it, and some hospitals have begun postponing and rescheduling some non-emergency procedures in order to get those waiting times down.

In the US, having sat in many an ER waiting room for hours at a stretch, the idea of a hospital seeing nearly 9 out of 10 patients in four hours would be regarded as a miracle. Bear in mind that within that four-hour period the NHS doctors are triaging patients: If you get hit by a bus, you're going to see someone instantly. If you broke a finger because you fell over while drunk at the pub, you're probably going to wait at the back of the line. It's not like people are literally bleeding to death while they wait for attention (although the British media loves it when it finds individual cases where that has happened).

So my overall impression is that currently, the Brits' complaints that the NHS isn't hitting that 95% mark is akin to saying, "This Rolls Royce isn't moving fast enough!"

Read more: http://uk.businessinsider.com/an-american-uses-britain-nhs-2015-1#ixzz3QYgmiIA6

World's humblest president stops to pick up hitchhiker


It’s not often that a world leader stops to give you a lift.

But a hitchhiker in Uruguay found himself in a car with the country’s president and first lady when they stopped to help him.

Gerhald Acosta was walking the 100 miles between his place of work and hometown as dozens of cars went past without stopping...

Right. I'm doing this. I've been drunk enough to have woken up in bed with another guy

with my clothes all over the floor in the living room after having got outstandingly drunk on my birthday without the faintest memory of what happened the night before. He said "YOU were very compliant last night" and giggled and wouldn't tell me what happened.

So. Rape?

After kpete's thread (thanks kpete)... "Fear Not the Path of Truth", a Marine's take on Iraq...

I have to say I am deeply disheartened by the boldness with which liars and fools have taken to remoulding the story of Iraq. We need to make it understood that the truth cannot be destroyed, no matter what they attempt.

Please watch, and please redistribute. We've got to stop being shy about these things.

Many thanks and KR,


from kpete:


Why is THIS sniper not standing tall on America's movie screens?


I sit through boring VA circles listening to horror stories about pain and guilt, fear and shame. Bathed in sanitary white light sitting on folding chairs are my brothers and sisters, they are in my dreams and memories wearing browns and tans and dirt. They are all there because a loved one gave them an ultimatum, get help or get out. They look tired, annoyed, hopeless. When it is my turn to talk I explain the illegal nature of the occupation and how the causes were fraudulent, the conduct despicable and the consequences critical. I get the look. The “you know you aren’t allowed to go there” look. I have nothing else to say.

Compare and contrast...

"Add faithophobia to my crimes: I have no respect for religions that have little respect for me"


Voltaire is being quoted everywhere at the moment, although some say his words were different to what we are being told. He actually wrote in a letter in 1770 to Abbot le Riche: “I detest what you write but I would give my life to make it possible for you to continue to write.” And of course lives have been taken rather than given for writing what many detest.

The arguments go back and forth between those who think Charlie Hebdo should not have published its latest cover image of Muhammad and those – and I am one – who think that they are publishing anything at all is amazing and heartening. The image of a crying man does not offend me. I am not a Muslim but I see that the cover has been read as yet more provocation, even an undoing of the unity of the marches in Paris and other cities. To certain scumbag preachers it is “an act of war”.

Equally disturbing is this talk of blasphemy. Jesus H Christ, remind me what year this is. At one end of the spectrum we have talk of blasphemy, then at the other a kind of liberal anxiety about bad manners – as if showing images was akin to bringing the wrong wine to a dinner party. To all of this, I must say I am pretty gobsmacked. There is a kind of faux respect floating around that I do not trust at all. For it is fearful.
Go to Page: « Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 ... 34 Next »