Skripal: Theresa May set to hit back Russia over spy attack

[seemslikeadream]

@Mac

no

[JackRiddler]

The copy-paste of aggressively wrong corporate media headlines as RI thread titles instead of bothering to use proper subject headings is another one of the bad posting practices that give such a displeasing and misleading aesthetic to the board, but those who do it are stubborn about not understanding this. Of course the title here should be something neutral like "Skripal Affair." It is nothing personal to point this out and should not be taken that way.

[Elvis]

Good thread but yeah, the headline title always struck me as presuming an unproven conclusion.

[Iamwhomiam]

A great many of our thread headlines presume unproven conclusions, but I do think a change of title would be appropriate. If it turns out to be proven they were poisoned, and were not ill from food poisoning, the present thread title could then be reinstituted.

[Belligerent Savant]

Rory » Fri May 04, 2018 3:38 pm

By the way - I also don't know how you can see the posts of someone you put on ignore. very ostentatiously, and self righteously. But there's another mystery for another thread.

Perhaps you could discuss this matter with Belligerent Savage; he seems to know how it's done: http://rigorousintuition.ca/board2/viewtopic.php?p=656956#p656956

Can a member take someone off ignore? IF yes, how would you know? Can a member view this forum and ALL of its contents when NOT logged in?

Will await your response so that we can put this insipid query to rest.

[Burnt Hill]

It is literally the title of the article presented in the original post.
Any other title would be a display of bias.
You guys get awful petty sometimes.

[Iamwhomiam]

If you're asking me, Belligerent Savant, I have no idea. I've never felt the need to apply an external filter to censor my reading. As I wrote to Rory, you seem to know how it's done. Discuss it with him.

I seem to have been just fine, ignoring almost all of AD's contributions because most are of no interest to me at all. As you know, my son was killed by someone with extremist views.

I'm far more concerned with dangers facing my immediate family, like micro-plastics in our municipal water supplies, than I am of any radical's personal agenda. It would be a mistake to call AD a radical, either, without knowing him personally.

[Elvis]

Any other title would be a display of bias.

but but but... the existing title itself displays bias, that of a premature conclusion.

"The Skripal Affair" is pretty neutral.

[Belligerent Savant]

If you're asking me, Belligerent Savant, I have no idea. I've never felt the need to apply an external filter to censor my reading. As I wrote to Rory, you seem to know how it's done. Discuss it with him.

I seem to have been just fine, ignoring almost all of AD's contributions because most are of no interest to me at all. As you know, my son was killed by someone with extremist views.

I'm far more concerned with dangers facing my immediate family, like micro-plastics in our municipal water supplies, than I am of any radical's personal agenda. It would be a mistake to call AD a radical, either, without knowing him personally.

Iam: I understand your position, and agree. Immediate family concerns are absolutely important, more so than whatever words are typed in an f'ing forum.

Edited to add: Yours was a tragic, senseless loss, and as a father, I can only begin to imagine the pain it has caused you (and continues to cause you).

However, with respect to the content posted here:

I never called AD a 'radical'. I have stated, however, that he spreads questionable material here -- some of which is straight-up pro-imperialist propaganda -- for years, and doesn't even have the courtesy to defend the REAMS of content he dumps here (the few instances when he does respond -- only to those he deems are 'worthy' of a response -- he resorts to slippery/vague/cryptic language). I assure you that I tire of discussing this topic (this may seem shocking to some, but it is true). I simply can not allow bullshit content to sit here unchallenged. I'm clearly not the only one that feels this way.

Questionable content with hints (or overt representations) of pro-imperialist propaganda will get f'ing challenged in this forum, as it damn well should be. Period. If anyone disagrees with the content of a given challenge, they are absolutely welcome and entitled to respond with their own comments/refutations, SO LONG AS it EXCLUDES another f'ing round of comments about "bullying" and "badgering", etc. We have mods here for a reason. When a thread or comment crosses a line, you can trust that a mod will chime in and handle it accordingly.

No need for additional online "nannies".

[Burnt Hill]

Any other title would be a display of bias.

but but but... the existing title itself displays bias, that of a premature conclusion.

"The Skripal Affair" is pretty neutral.

That's right. And that is exactly why I can appreciate it.
I know the bias is the authors, not the posters.
Considering that the article inspired the thread, it is appropriate to title it the same.
That bias is also being considered repeatedly and discussed.
Also consider thread derailment - perhaps the title is part if what the OP wants us to consider continuously. We do respect the op's intent, right? Even when divining it?

We recently had a moderator go so far as to apologize for derailing a thread by an op that was no longer tending the thread. That's real respect for the op's intent. We should afford the same here.

[seemslikeadream]

I think The Socialist Response thread should be renamed and the Bill Cosby abuse allegations thread also...The build-up to war on Russia ....yea let's change that one too ....how far are we going back?

guess what I'm not changing the title of this thread...next time whoever would like a different title should get to the OP subject first


this title should be changed because it is not what the thread turned out to be but I'm not changing that one either

NSA Chief Russia Hacked '16 Election Congress Must Investigate




maybe I will start a poll on which thread titles should be changed

[Iamwhomiam]

Here's my true unblemished opinion. I really don't give a damn! It's not my blog, It's Jeff's. AD and Jeff came to terms and if Jeff wanted AD gone, he'd be gone.

What I do care about is the incessant complaining, because that is annoying. Please, take issue with the poster via PM, or if that avenue doesn't pan out, ask for moderator intervention, but for the sake of all past, present and future contributors, bite your friggin tongue and control your emotions.

Enough with the screed. Your issue is with board management. Take it up with the managers; write a letter to the owner.

[JackRiddler]

It is literally the title of the article presented in the original post.

Which is a lazy and annoying way to do it. This is not Facebook. The threads continue, there is supposed to be a discussion. I would prefer the OP's explicit bias to some corporate media headline that then lives on for years.

[Burnt Hill]

"There is something you should understand about the way I work. When you need me but do not want me, then I must stay. When you want me but no longer need me, then I have to go. It's rather sad, really, but there it is."

No need for additional online "nannies".

[seemslikeadream]

There should be an official review of all thread titles to make sure they are in compliance and then there should be a vote on what the title should be if it needs to be changed