Objectively intelligent.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

It is a list. But not a list of undeserving victims of cancel culture. It's "A Running List of the People, Places, and Things That Have Been Toppled as the Country Reckons with Racism." Surely you are OK with the idea that some of the people, places and things toppled as the country reckons with racism *deserved* to get toppled. You don't want to defend Prof. Hubbard of Laney College -- don't you agree that he was no undeserving victim? Or do I have that wrong?

Are Hubbard and Rapoport victims of cancel culture, or not? I can't tell what you think. Take a stand, man.

I don't know as to Rapoport because I don't know how much of the decision to fire was based on discrimination and how much was based on his posts. Taking your word for it (that he was fired for poor performance and discrimination and not the posts), I would have to say no, he was not a victim.

Regarding Hubbard, his behavior was boorish and offensive. I'd have censured him for it. But would I demand his firing for it? No. If he did it a second time? Yes.

Now about the rest of the professors on that spreadsheet? The dozens or so of them?

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

Don't make me regret actually reading some of what you posted. If the first entry on that list is any indication of what else is on it, I don't wish to waste my time.

It's obvious that you don't want to make Prof. Hubbard of Laney College the poster boy for victims of cancel culture. Why not just concede that he's not a good example of anything and move on?

Because he's just the first of what appears to be a very long chronologically assembled list of professors?

When you read a menu, if the first dish is not to your liking, do you get up and leave the restaurant?

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy

Another really amusing one on the list is Jordan Peterson, of incel fame. A part time professor who gained fame by being outrageous and used it to fuel his big money makers.

Did you not ready that list before posting? Or do you actually think, oh, gee, I need to defend the honor of incels everywhere?

I detest religion, so I am no fan of Peterson. But he's only one person in a very long list. You are asserting that the Peterson drop of ink turns the whole pool orange. That's obviously untrue. What you're actually doing there is cherry picking the most lurid example in the list. I might ask if you thought that wouldn't be transparent. I mean, come on... try a little if you wish to defend this silly "call out culture" thing you and Ty seem to think is acceptable.

If you wish to defend the dumb masses who throw rhetorical rocks on a board of people who can actually think, you have to do better than use the types of arguments those dimwit rock throwers would deem persuasive. This isn't a rally or a protest where the need to observe logic can be suspended.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

I detest religion, so I am no fan of Peterson. But he's only one person in a very long list. You are asserting that the Peterson drop of ink turns the whole pool orange. That's obviously untrue. What you're actually doing there is cherry picking the most lurid example in the list. I might ask if you thought that wouldn't be transparent. I mean, come on... try a little if you wish to defend this silly "call out culture" thing you and Ty seem to think is acceptable.

If you wish to defend the dumb masses who throw rhetorical rocks on a board of people who can actually think, you have to do better than use the types of arguments those dimwit rock throwers would deem persuasive. This isn't a rally or a protest where the need to observe logic can be suspended.

Hint: maybe identify one person on the list you think is a good example, because looking down that list, it's pretty easy to find the bad examples.

My defense of whatever you want to call "call out culture" is very simple: sometimes, speech does and should have repercussions, whether those repercussions are lawsuits, firing, boycott, loss of a board seat, or just a bad reputation. There is nothing wrong with private parties looking to hold people to account for what they say, or with having discussions about what the right consequences are for different forms of speech.

Larry Summers is a good example: he was in charge of an institution that had, as an institutional priority, recruiting and promoting women to tenured positions in Science and Engineering, and he stated publicly that he thought women may well lack the "intrinsic aptitude" for high level science and engineering. He earned the widespread disdain of much of the Boston and Harvard scientific community (one friend, a department chair in Sciences at MIT, laughed about how of all people an economist was trying to pass judgement on what aptitude was needed for scientific study), and he had a board worried about what idiotic thing he'd say next. Bye-bye Larry, that's not something you can start saying as President of Harvard. At the same time, the institution gives him a professorship, where they let him make such statements at will. It all seems very appropriate and I see no reason why critics of Summers should be told to shut up or that their criticism of him is inappropriate.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

I don't know as to Rapoport because I don't know how much of the decision to fire was based on discrimination and how much was based on his posts. Taking your word for it (that he was fired for poor performance and discrimination and not the posts), I would have to say no, he was not a victim.

Regarding Hubbard, his behavior was boorish and offensive. I'd have censured him for it. But would I demand his firing for it? No. If he did it a second time? Yes.

Now about the rest of the professors on that spreadsheet? The dozens or so of them?

Dude, really, pick one on the spreadsheet you think was wronged. This isn't our list, this is YOUR list, you posted it, you own it.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

Regarding Hubbard, his behavior was boorish and offensive. I'd have censured him for it. But would I demand his firing for it? No. If he did it a second time? Yes.

Who demanded his firing? I didn't see anything to suggest that anyone asked for his firing, or that he was fired. The student involved asked for an apology.

I think you're saying that Rapoport was not a victim of cancel culture because he was canned for doing a bad job as editor, and Hubbard was not a victim of cancel culture because he wasn't fired. But if I have you wrong, feel free to set me straight.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

Because he's just the first of what appears to be a very long chronologically assembled list of professors?

When you read a menu, if the first dish is not to your liking, do you get up and leave the restaurant?

Next professor on the list is the chair of the economics department at Loyola (La.). One set of students thinks he should resign because of things he has said about slavery, and another set thinks he should get a raise. They have dueling petitions. I take it you agree he is not a victim.

As much fun as this is, I still think campus speech is different from the rest of the world, and this list of controversies seems rather, well, academic.

[Pretty Little Flower]

During the riots, there was a great deal of speculation about who the bad guys were. Trump obviously wanted to blame everything on Antifa, but there was not much evidence that Antifa had a significant presence in the Minneapolis riots. There was evidence, however, that at least some of the rioters were white nationalists who thought the riots would be a good opportunity to sow unrest, and maybe start the race war that white nationalists always seem to be dreaming about starting. One of the intriguing mysteries of the Minneapolis riots was video of an unknown agitator dubbed “Umbrella Man.” Clad entirely in black with an industrial gas mask and a black umbrella (to prevent being identified from drone footage), he smashed out the windows of an AutoZone in South Minneapolis. What was unusual was that this man did not appear to be acting out of spontaneous rage:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5KVAMZZEBzI

In fact, in a different video I saw early on in Forbes online (that video was apparently taken off of YouTube), he actually looks kind of bored, like he’s finishing up a long shift of window smashing and just wants to get these last few windows so he can call it a day and kick back with some Molotov cocktails. In the video linked in the Forbes article, protestors stop him and chase him off, accusing him of being an undercover cop. The Star Tribune is now reporting that police have identified him as a white nationalist in the Aryan Cowboy Brotherhood, which has a presence in Minnesota and Kentucky, and that he was there to try to instigate rioting.

The AutoZone he smashed was the very first building to burn on the very first night of the fires.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by Pretty Little Flower

During the riots, there was a great deal of speculation about who the bad guys were. Trump obviously wanted to blame everything on Antifa, but there was not much evidence that Antifa had a significant presence in the Minneapolis riots. There was evidence, however, that at least some of the rioters were white nationalists who thought the riots would be a good opportunity to sow unrest, and maybe start the race war that white nationalists always seem to be dreaming about starting. One of the intriguing mysteries of the Minneapolis riots was video of an unknown agitator dubbed “Umbrella Man.” Clad entirely in black with an industrial gas mask and a black umbrella (to prevent being identified from drone footage), he smashed out the windows of an AutoZone in South Minneapolis. What was unusual was that this man did not appear to be acting out of spontaneous rage:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5KVAMZZEBzI

In fact, in a different video I saw early on in Forbes online (that video was apparently taken off of YouTube), he actually looks kind of bored, like he’s finishing up a long shift of window smashing and just wants to get these last few windows so he can call it a day and kick back with some Molotov cocktails. In the video linked in the Forbes article, protestors stop him and chase him off, accusing him of being an undercover cop. The Star Tribune is now reporting that police have identified him as a white nationalist in the Aryan Cowboy Brotherhood, which has a presence in Minnesota and Kentucky, and that he was there to try to instigate rioting.

The AutoZone he smashed was the very first building to burn on the very first night of the fires.

Likewise, we all remember that the guard who was killed at the federal building in Oakland early on was shot by a right-wing nut using protests as cover.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by Pretty Little Flower

During the riots, there was a great deal of speculation about who the bad guys were. Trump obviously wanted to blame everything on Antifa, but there was not much evidence that Antifa had a significant presence in the Minneapolis riots. There was evidence, however, that at least some of the rioters were white nationalists who thought the riots would be a good opportunity to sow unrest, and maybe start the race war that white nationalists always seem to be dreaming about starting. One of the intriguing mysteries of the Minneapolis riots was video of an unknown agitator dubbed “Umbrella Man.” Clad entirely in black with an industrial gas mask and a black umbrella (to prevent being identified from drone footage), he smashed out the windows of an AutoZone in South Minneapolis. What was unusual was that this man did not appear to be acting out of spontaneous rage:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5KVAMZZEBzI

In fact, in a different video I saw early on in Forbes online (that video was apparently taken off of YouTube), he actually looks kind of bored, like he’s finishing up a long shift of window smashing and just wants to get these last few windows so he can call it a day and kick back with some Molotov cocktails. In the video linked in the Forbes article, protestors stop him and chase him off, accusing him of being an undercover cop. The Star Tribune is now reporting that police have identified him as a white nationalist in the Aryan Cowboy Brotherhood, which has a presence in Minnesota and Kentucky, and that he was there to try to instigate rioting.

The AutoZone he smashed was the very first building to burn on the very first night of the fires.

I'm old enough to remember when the FBI was concerned with violent right wing extremists.

[Adder]

Originally Posted by Pretty Little Flower

During the riots, there was a great deal of speculation about who the bad guys were. Trump obviously wanted to blame everything on Antifa, but there was not much evidence that Antifa had a significant presence in the Minneapolis riots. There was evidence, however, that at least some of the rioters were white nationalists who thought the riots would be a good opportunity to sow unrest, and maybe start the race war that white nationalists always seem to be dreaming about starting. One of the intriguing mysteries of the Minneapolis riots was video of an unknown agitator dubbed “Umbrella Man.” Clad entirely in black with an industrial gas mask and a black umbrella (to prevent being identified from drone footage), he smashed out the windows of an AutoZone in South Minneapolis. What was unusual was that this man did not appear to be acting out of spontaneous rage:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5KVAMZZEBzI

In fact, in a different video I saw early on in Forbes online (that video was apparently taken off of YouTube), he actually looks kind of bored, like he’s finishing up a long shift of window smashing and just wants to get these last few windows so he can call it a day and kick back with some Molotov cocktails. In the video linked in the Forbes article, protestors stop him and chase him off, accusing him of being an undercover cop. The Star Tribune is now reporting that police have identified him as a white nationalist in the Aryan Cowboy Brotherhood, which has a presence in Minnesota and Kentucky, and that he was there to try to instigate rioting.

The AutoZone he smashed was the very first building to burn on the very first night of the fires.

I’m so surprised. Somebody pass me a blunt.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Nisreen Alwan: What Exactly Is Mild Covid-19? https://blogs.bmj.com/bmj/2020/07/28...ild-covid-19/: ‘I went out for a 20 minute slow walk yesterday evening with my little girl who was desperate to see the flowers on the way. My exercise capacity is still terrible, and I knew that by doing that I would pay the price the day after. Indeed, I woke up with the familiar chest heaviness and utter exhaustion which gets worse by sitting at my desk to work.... I struggle to find any precise case definition for “mild” covid-19, which is what I supposedly had and still have not fully recovered from. It seems common in many countries that anyone with symptoms, but not hospitalised is counted as a “mild” case.... A Dutch survey of more than 1,600 covid-19 patients, 91% of which were not hospitalised and 85% described their health as good before the infection, found that symptoms such as fatigue (88%), shortness of breath (75%), chest pressure (45%), headache (40%), muscle pain (36%) and palpitations (32%) last for months after initial infection. Nearly half of those surveyed said they were no longer able to exercise.... I strongly think we must now clearly define and measure “recovery” from covid-19. This way we can quantify non-death health outcomes and monitor long-term implications of the virus. The definition needs to be more sophisticated than just hospital discharge or testing negative.... I am advocating for precise case definitions for covid-19 morbidity that reflect the degree of severity of infection and allow us to measure moderate and long term health and wellbeing outcomes.... We still know very little about covid-19, but we do know that we cannot fight what we do not measure… .#noted #2020-07-28

via https://www.bradford-delong.com/2020...d-19noted.html

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

Nisreen Alwan: What Exactly Is Mild Covid-19? https://blogs.bmj.com/bmj/2020/07/28...ild-covid-19/: ‘I went out for a 20 minute slow walk yesterday evening with my little girl who was desperate to see the flowers on the way. My exercise capacity is still terrible, and I knew that by doing that I would pay the price the day after. Indeed, I woke up with the familiar chest heaviness and utter exhaustion which gets worse by sitting at my desk to work.... I struggle to find any precise case definition for “mild” covid-19, which is what I supposedly had and still have not fully recovered from. It seems common in many countries that anyone with symptoms, but not hospitalised is counted as a “mild” case.... A Dutch survey of more than 1,600 covid-19 patients, 91% of which were not hospitalised and 85% described their health as good before the infection, found that symptoms such as fatigue (88%), shortness of breath (75%), chest pressure (45%), headache (40%), muscle pain (36%) and palpitations (32%) last for months after initial infection. Nearly half of those surveyed said they were no longer able to exercise.... I strongly think we must now clearly define and measure “recovery” from covid-19. This way we can quantify non-death health outcomes and monitor long-term implications of the virus. The definition needs to be more sophisticated than just hospital discharge or testing negative.... I am advocating for precise case definitions for covid-19 morbidity that reflect the degree of severity of infection and allow us to measure moderate and long term health and wellbeing outcomes.... We still know very little about covid-19, but we do know that we cannot fight what we do not measure… .#noted #2020-07-28

via https://www.bradford-delong.com/2020...d-19noted.html

This is interesting/scary: https://www.statnews.com/2020/07/27/...-heart-damage/

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

Next professor on the list is the chair of the economics department at Loyola (La.). One set of students thinks he should resign because of things he has said about slavery, and another set thinks he should get a raise. They have dueling petitions. I take it you agree he is not a victim.

As much fun as this is, I still think campus speech is different from the rest of the world, and this list of controversies seems rather, well, academic.

Agreed. It is an academic point I was making. But free speech is an academic concept.

Gervais nails it: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=L3dxMGzt5mU

Here’s Hitchens with some gravy: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=6pTbL7GYUuA

I am, however, quite in favor of scattering the teeth of these fucking jackasses who insist on refusing masks. Their right to free expression tests even my absolutism.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Pretty Little Flower

During the riots, there was a great deal of speculation about who the bad guys were. Trump obviously wanted to blame everything on Antifa, but there was not much evidence that Antifa had a significant presence in the Minneapolis riots. There was evidence, however, that at least some of the rioters were white nationalists who thought the riots would be a good opportunity to sow unrest, and maybe start the race war that white nationalists always seem to be dreaming about starting. One of the intriguing mysteries of the Minneapolis riots was video of an unknown agitator dubbed “Umbrella Man.” Clad entirely in black with an industrial gas mask and a black umbrella (to prevent being identified from drone footage), he smashed out the windows of an AutoZone in South Minneapolis. What was unusual was that this man did not appear to be acting out of spontaneous rage:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5KVAMZZEBzI

In fact, in a different video I saw early on in Forbes online (that video was apparently taken off of YouTube), he actually looks kind of bored, like he’s finishing up a long shift of window smashing and just wants to get these last few windows so he can call it a day and kick back with some Molotov cocktails. In the video linked in the Forbes article, protestors stop him and chase him off, accusing him of being an undercover cop. The Star Tribune is now reporting that police have identified him as a white nationalist in the Aryan Cowboy Brotherhood, which has a presence in Minnesota and Kentucky, and that he was there to try to instigate rioting.

The AutoZone he smashed was the very first building to burn on the very first night of the fires.

Philly offers a slightly different take. The videos are all online.

If you rob an Apple Store, you can’t complain when your arrest winds up on some sort of “Darwin Awards Lite” website. Stealing a Louis Vuitton purse? That’s funny. Scare the decrepits who’ll be offended. Stealing an iPhone? Dude... How dumb are you? It’s a fucking tracker.

Selling it to a dumbass ASAP after stealing it? All right. That’s smart.