February 21, 2012

I haven't seen this posted in a while - The Political Compass

For those DUers who've never seen this before, there is an online test that asks a series of questions designed to measure both your economic position on the political spectrum (X-axis left/right) as well as your authoritarian/libertarian position (Y-axis up/down). I remember taking this back in 2008. What surprised me is that I thought I might have moverd further toward the center. According to my chart (above) my political positions are in the same part of the ballpark as Ghandi.

http://www.politicalcompass.org/

February 19, 2012

My Fallen Star (A.K.A. Sixty Bucks??!!)

My star has fallen. Or maybe it's twinkling, as I will give some money this year to support DU, but not the $42-$60 for "star" membership.

I spend a bit of time on DU, and I enjoy the exchange of ideas, and the camaraderie of those who share many of my values. However, there's only so much I'm willing to invest in any website that's not giving me financial return (i.e. stock buying advice or horse racing tips). That amount is about $25 - $30. That's about what it costs, for example, to buy a whole season of MLB audio broadcasts. That's close to what it costs to get into "insider" chat rooms on a lot of sports websites. If it costs more than that, I generally opt to put up with the ads (as I plan to do here going forward) or do without.

There are a lot of good hearted people here, and I want to make one thing clear:
No, I'm not broke. No, I have not become suddenly unemployed. No, I'm not asking for anyone to give me a star -- please save that for someone in real need, or better yet, give that money to the DNC, DCCC, Obama For America, or Omaha Steve's city council bid.

Part of my problem is that I just don't see the value. In the past I'd get a star for giving $5-$10 per quarter. Now it's $42 up front or $5 per month (= $60 per year). In exchange, there's not a lot in it for a star member. You don't look at ads: OK, that's a plus, but is it that big a plus? I get a longer jury blacklist: no value there. I don't have anyone blacklisted from my juries, because the juries that we see are anonymous, and there's no voir dire process prior to seating a jury. "Put those on your ignore list on your jury blacklist." Nope: at the moment, I have no one on "ignore", and (surprisingly) only one star member is ignoring me. I suspect it's Skinner, but who knows?

While on the topic, the whole jury system bugs me. This is consistent, in as much as I dislike the "real" jury system as well. Casey Anthony, OJ Simpson, Robert Blake -- I could go on about my dislike of juries, but why? Bottom line: It's "Skinner's House and Skinner's Rules." Fair enough, but for $60 I'd prefer the admin and mod system. Maybe it's just me.

The "New DU" has not added features I value to justify $42-$60. What could they do? Here are some things I might be willing to pay for:

Members-Only Forums If we're going to have two classes of DUer, let's do it right and have rooms in which only the members can chat. I'd also prefer that these forums could not be seen or searched by non-members.

Live-Chat with Guests A real time chat room would be a great feature. Many "Rivals" and "Scout" sports sites offer this as a feature for premium members. It'd be excellent during debates, addresses, or election nights. That featue could be greater-still with live, members only chats with Skinner, or well-known members like David Swanson. Perhaps we could lure in someone like a Rachel Maddow or a Dennis Kucinich from time to time.

A progressive analog to the Conservative Cave's DUmpster Sure, it's juvenile. Sure, it's immature. However, our conservative counterparts have proven that there's fun to be had by just dedicating a whole forum to making fun of their counterparts on DU. Not everyone's idea of fun, but for some of us....

As it stands now, I could be convinced to go $30 for a star if I can spread it out to $7.50 a quarter, but I just don't see paying more than that.

Sorry, Skinner - it's not personal. It's business.

February 10, 2012

KETV Omaha: Tribe Demands $500M From Beer Makers

Read more: http://www.ketv.com/news/30418786/detail.html#ixzz1lwrNtGCw

If there were a place designated as "America's Skid Row", it'd be Whiteclay, NE. "Grocery" stores sell huge amounts of beer to the Native Sioux that come over the border from the Pine Ridge rez, which is officially dry. Drunks literally lay passed out in the middle of streets and sidewalks.

My personal hope is that this never reaches the courts. The beer makers and stores sell a lot of beer to folks making bad life choices, and reap profits from this misery. These choices are driven, in part, by the despair caused by 80% plus unemployment and no prospects for improvement. I'd ask the beer companies to do the right thing and give back to the community without being forced by the courts -- things like sponsoring alcohol abuse education for the youth in Pine Ridge; helping contribute to the cost of rehab; and kicking in to help local alternatives to irresponsible drinking, like the Y, Boys/Girls CLubs, and the local schools.

JMHO

January 7, 2012

I have a bone to pick with the management regarding the hate speech standards

This is from the terms of service:

"{Hate Speech}...also includes any post asserting disloyalty by Jewish Americans, claiming nefarious influence by Jews/Zionists/Israel, advocating the destruction of the state of Israel, or arguing that Holocaust deniers are just misunderstood."

I'll start with the areas of agreement:
"arguing that Holocaust deniers are just misunderstood."

The Holocaust happened, and is probably worse than the records the allies captured from the Germans indicate.

On to the areas with which I take issue:

A) "also includes any post asserting disloyalty by Jewish Americans,"

Why are we singling out Jewish Americans. Certainly, it cannot be OK to assert disloyalty because someone is a believer in Islam. I'd doubt that we'd tolerate the suggestion that Catholics place their loyalty to the Vatican above their loyalty to the nation of their birth. Why can't that be changed to "also includes any post asserting disloyalty based on an individual's faith or creed"?

B) "claiming nefarious influence by Jews/Zionists/Israel"

How are we defining "nefarious"? Israel is a nation state, and like most nation states, they have a lobby (actually, many lobby groups). Naturally, they ask the US to trade with Israel, send tourists... all of the normal nation-state stuff. However, they also ask the members of Congress to help defend Israel against its enemies. Many of those enemies are believed by many reasonable people to have legitimate grievances against Israel. Personally, I would like to see the US take a far more hands-off approach to dealing with those issues. Does my viewpoint constitute a claim that Israel is exerting a nefarious influence?

C) "advocating the destruction of the state of Israel"

I have several problems with this one.

Should anyone at DU be advocating the destruction of any nation-state with which we are not currently at war?

Is it OK to advocate for the destruction of the Vatican?

Is it OK to advocate for the destruction of Iran?

Personally, I am against faith based governance of any sort, so I'm just as opposed to the government of the Jewish state of Israel as I am to the government of the Islamic republic of Iran. I believe in Liberty for all, regardless of faith. Neither Israel nor Iran embrace granting the full spectrum of personal or property rights to those who don't share the faiths supported by their respective governments. Religious liberty is certainly an American ideal many of us hold dear. It is certainly not an ideal shared by Israel or Iran. Does my opposition to Israel's government make me "an advocate for the destruction of Israel"?

I'd like to get a response from EarlG, Elad, or Skinner. I'm hoping (but not entirely certain) that my response won't be in the form of a tombstone. If it is, it's certainly been fun chatting with all of you - GOBAMA!