Journal of Other Forum Analysis

[Besticus Maximus]

listen up chuds, the only woman you're allowed to worship is Kyuuji

[Snoopy]

Uh oh ree entitlement has arrived at the airport

The plane maintenance crew won't be here until 8 central. The flight was supposed to leave at 5:15. If the crew gets here, takes a casual glance at the plane, and that magically fixes is, boarding would take over 15 minutes. That means this is a delay longer than three hours. But they keep changing the departure time in 30 minute intervals so the plane is never officially at a 3+ hour delay. I'm about to go for the meal voucher I'm owed, but I fully expect them to try and claim I'm not owed it.

They're being paid to have a shitty day, I am paying to have a shitty day. I am responsible for remaining polite and level headed, but there is no good reason not to get what I am legally entitled to. Especially when my 10 hour shitty day has, best case scenario, become a 16 hour shitty day.

They are saying they can't give it to me until 8. Which is nonsense

If the flight is not leaving until after 8:15 (and it's factually not) then that is a 3 hour delay. Waiting until the time passes does nothing but give them the opportunity to deny as many people as possible that legally required compensation. What good is a meal voucher if I have to get on the plane 20 minutes after.

This is putting aside the fact that even if this plane had only been delayed two hours I'd still be missing my connecting flight and have to wait until 3 PM EST instead of 8 AM EST, which is, again, greater than 3 hours caused by controllable delay.

I woke up at 2 this morning. I am hungry. I won't be getting the meal I was supposed to get around 9 or 10 through no fault of my own and will have to wait until 4 or 5. I want to buy food and I am owed compensation for doing so.

Always love it when Karen gets legal




https://www.resetera.com/threads/pretty-sure-this-airline-intends-to-try-to-stiff-me-a-meal-voucher.801471/

[Tycoon Padre]

Uh oh ree entitlement has arrived at the airport

The plane maintenance crew won't be here until 8 central. The flight was supposed to leave at 5:15. If the crew gets here, takes a casual glance at the plane, and that magically fixes is, boarding would take over 15 minutes. That means this is a delay longer than three hours. But they keep changing the departure time in 30 minute intervals so the plane is never officially at a 3+ hour delay. I'm about to go for the meal voucher I'm owed, but I fully expect them to try and claim I'm not owed it.

They're being paid to have a shitty day, I am paying to have a shitty day. I am responsible for remaining polite and level headed, but there is no good reason not to get what I am legally entitled to. Especially when my 10 hour shitty day has, best case scenario, become a 16 hour shitty day.

They are saying they can't give it to me until 8. Which is nonsense

If the flight is not leaving until after 8:15 (and it's factually not) then that is a 3 hour delay. Waiting until the time passes does nothing but give them the opportunity to deny as many people as possible that legally required compensation. What good is a meal voucher if I have to get on the plane 20 minutes after.

This is putting aside the fact that even if this plane had only been delayed two hours I'd still be missing my connecting flight and have to wait until 3 PM EST instead of 8 AM EST, which is, again, greater than 3 hours caused by controllable delay.

I woke up at 2 this morning. I am hungry. I won't be getting the meal I was supposed to get around 9 or 10 through no fault of my own and will have to wait until 4 or 5. I want to buy food and I am owed compensation for doing so.

Always love it when Karen gets legal




https://www.resetera.com/threads/pretty-sure-this-airline-intends-to-try-to-stiff-me-a-meal-voucher.801471/

Fuck airlines, get that compo 

[booomer]

https://www.resetera.com/threads/federal-judge-orders-documents-naming-jeffrey-epsteins-associates-to-be-unsealed.797136/

Times Trump is mentioned in the replies = 14
Times Musk is mentioned = 7
Times Clinton is mentioned = 3

Jimmy Kimmel and Aaron Rogers were mentioned more than Clinton. Not a hivemind, not one bit.

[Eric Cartman]

Still in the process of reading. There is definitely a de-centering that happens when you talk about a "pre-Colonial Africa," wherein the history of the innumerable groups, nations, and empires within the continent can only really exist in relation to European colonialism, which in itself is a colonial framing within a more white supremacist sense. It also flattens these cultures' histories to the point of erasure and dehumanization: significant power reigned all over Africa for many millenia, and you don't build up a kingdom only through rousing debates in the marketplace of ideas. My issue thus far though has been on kind of a timeline front; European contact and subsequently the gears of the kind of modern, capitalistic colonialism we see today weren't really 19th century inventions. That shit had been going on since like the 14 and 1500s, and the moment you learn that you inevitably have to learn about Europe's hilariously tepid origins of continental contact because- again- Africa was full of different kingdoms and large polities who a lot of times weren't interested in the prospects Europe was trying to do business on. I imagine though that there is a more layman view of the time scale that the author is arguing against, one that I'm just not really aware of having done the little bit of reading and deprogramming I've done.

oooooOOOOOHHHHHhhhhhhhh, okay I get it now.

Nepenthe joined a cult.

[Eric Cartman]

but not being prepared to answer a question like is calling for Jewish Genocide hate speech with something better than it depends on the context is catastrophically incompetent.

That's not what the question was, or what they replied. If the media and internet commentators repeat the misrepresentation of what was stated in the hearing, then how is that incompetence on them?

            gaslighting?
              /




~1,25s if its not autotimestamped

[Eric Cartman]

Kasumin didn't even think the accusations were real on the previous page:

Is there actual evidence of her plagiarizing anyone? I see this repeated as fact but with no actual confirmation, which I find really disturbing. This is an example of misinformation triumphing in addition to the right using Gamer Gate tactics on major public figures

Okay, they had sex with a minor, but is there any actual evidence of them raping anyone?

[Eric Cartman]

God, thats a really fucking depressing slate of upcoming movies.

[Eric Cartman]

I know if I started calling my wife "my partner", she would want a divorce too.

MY WIFE

[Eric Cartman]

Checking back in to see if Nepenthe dropped any more pearls of pre-cum, I enjoyed reading these posts in succession:

I think that the article has some justification in eliding over "Pre-Columbian" Americas because the pre-Columbian political units (especially the mesoamerican empires) aren't really erased by the term. Maybe this is because of the interplay between those units (or their legacies) and European colonizers themselves. It's also not nearly so cleanly applied to North America as it is to Central and South America, since significant native nation-states survived more or less intact for a much longer period in the inter-colonial era.

I also think that the author is on to something, because the northern African empires that interacted most with Europe (Egypt and various Moorish dynasties) are never included in Colonial-Africa-Writ-Large. The crux of whether something gets binned in the "colonial eras" category is lack of the political units' - often colonialist and imperialist units themselves - interaction with Europe.

This tracks with the relative ignorance of the Mali Empire, which from what I gather is only really understood by Europe and the Americas through Sid Meier's Civilization memes about Mansa Musa. It was a long-lived empire and one of the most socially and economically consequential on the continent, through construction of great works, spread and establishment of Islam in sub-saharan Africa, and creation of a vast trade network between other African regions. But it's reduced to kind of a melange because the defining characteristic of most of Africa, both from a historical and present-day analytical perspective, is European colonialism.

I get why; colonialism is bad. But I strongly agree with the author that this erases a lot of important (and consequential for the "post-colonial era") history in favor of talking more about Europe and infantilizing the current crop of successor, "post-colonial" states.

And given the scale is continental frameworks of history, there's only a handful to go around anyway, and that 'almost' feels very much like it's not trying to imply another example of said scale exists in said handful

This. There is 7 continents and 6 when you cycle out Antarctica. To not consider this for both North/South America as well as Australia/Oceana seems disingenuous.

I'm not sure about the premise, the term is meant to just be used as a taxonomic shorthand for the most significant and most common historical event in world history. The purpose of it isn't to erase history but to make it easier for people to comprehend it, as individually stating the "pre-Spanish", "pre-Dutch", "pre-English" etc. states of hundreds of countries is exhausting and confusing. It's not meant to be accurate per se, it's meant to reflect a watershed series of moments in order to make the complexity of our past understandable and easily discussed. There was a paradigm shift and it's hard to imagine how you could easily discuss that change without having to go into way more detail than is typically desirable.

Yeah, isn't pre-colonial applied to Australia as well? Looking on Wikipedia I see Pre-history which sounds terrible(implying Indigenous Australians had no history), and pre-invasion which I think is much more descriptive.

I feel like those stuck on the second paragraph of the essay are missing the point. It's not the thesis for the argument either.

He's not saying this is uniquely degrading to the continent of Africa, but that defining all of African history before the Atlantic Slave trade is a distortion. It "misdescribes the evolution of different African polities over time" (his words). Yes, it's done with other nations because at it's core, the term is Eurocentric.

This is one of those things I've always loved about the "leftists" on ResetERA.com, and before it on NeoGAF.com, that they're so ignorant of what are supposed to be their own arguments. People, like Nepenthe, came rushing into this thread off the title as they often do to dispute with the author and accuse him of bad faith simply because he was attacking one of their cherished terms and its related implications so they assumed he was attacking their "leftist" position overall and so they needed to reject it, when in reality he was to their "left" actually challenging the systemic ideological premises they hold and refuse to challenge.

Thread also has another of my favorites:

That was (and remains) my general mindset before reading the article : continental generalities are fucking useless overall. They can be useful for a sense of a shared culture but they're generally useless when it comes to any serious historiography or assessing the current world. It's hard to not view them as an ethnocentric tool generally wielded to dehumanize and wholly erase entire populations and their cultures.
Like when 20 years ago the whole American military industrial complex made up the notion of a Greater Middle East that ranges from Morocco to Pakistan to designate the faceless brown people it was okay bomb to shit.

Where the members think that when they learned of something was when it started. The "military-industrial-complex" didn't make up that notion, they stole it from "left" academia that had been insisting on it since the 1970's to help justify their insistence that the Third World/Global South/whatever the fuck/etc. needed (and was destined) to rise in solidarity to overthrow capitalism and establish global revolutionary communism. They're deliberately ignorant so they never see why their theoretical and ideological constructs always wind up as useful and co-opted by forces they consider anti-leftist and think they oppose no matter how many times they build the superstructure and base for these systemic forces interested in power.

If the "military-industrial-complex" made it up after 9/11 then why did Edward Said write this book in 1978 and essentially create the fields of "Middle East studies" and "post-colonial studies"? Where did the "military-industrial-complex" get all those academics who willingly wrote them all kinds of papers on the "Greater Middle East" after it started throwing money at them as the Cold War diminished and who saw their fields explode in popularity after 9/11? Were the people who wanted a restored Caliphate that unified all Muslim territories part of this "military-industrial-complex" that made up the idea after 9/11? Did they fund bin Laden because his goal was this idea and they wanted to make it up to bomb brown people? See where simple questions take us yet again into hilarious absurdity going off just one post from the self-proclaimed "experts" on ResetERA.com who are never in doubt that they aren't ignorant nor wrong about any topic. (And if they are it just means they need to watch more four hour YouTube videos from somebody who looked at a couple entries on Wikipedia and has also never questioned their own ideological premises or belief in their own lacking of any form of ignorance.)

[Snoopy]

1704295493[/url]']

Fuck airlines, get that compo 

You know who else demanded compo from airlines when their meal was late? That’s right. Mitzi Hitler. The worst Hitler of all

[Echelon]

Which one of the troonies got asspained over not having real titties? 

[DocWager]

1704299019[/url]']

1704272139[/url]']
Checking back in to see if Nepenthe dropped any more pearls of pre-cum, I enjoyed reading these posts in succession:

I think that the article has some justification in eliding over "Pre-Columbian" Americas because the pre-Columbian political units (especially the mesoamerican empires) aren't really erased by the term. Maybe this is because of the interplay between those units (or their legacies) and European colonizers themselves. It's also not nearly so cleanly applied to North America as it is to Central and South America, since significant native nation-states survived more or less intact for a much longer period in the inter-colonial era.

I also think that the author is on to something, because the northern African empires that interacted most with Europe (Egypt and various Moorish dynasties) are never included in Colonial-Africa-Writ-Large. The crux of whether something gets binned in the "colonial eras" category is lack of the political units' - often colonialist and imperialist units themselves - interaction with Europe.

This tracks with the relative ignorance of the Mali Empire, which from what I gather is only really understood by Europe and the Americas through Sid Meier's Civilization memes about Mansa Musa. It was a long-lived empire and one of the most socially and economically consequential on the continent, through construction of great works, spread and establishment of Islam in sub-saharan Africa, and creation of a vast trade network between other African regions. But it's reduced to kind of a melange because the defining characteristic of most of Africa, both from a historical and present-day analytical perspective, is European colonialism.

I get why; colonialism is bad. But I strongly agree with the author that this erases a lot of important (and consequential for the "post-colonial era") history in favor of talking more about Europe and infantilizing the current crop of successor, "post-colonial" states.

This. There is 7 continents and 6 when you cycle out Antarctica. To not consider this for both North/South America as well as Australia/Oceana seems disingenuous.

I'm not sure about the premise, the term is meant to just be used as a taxonomic shorthand for the most significant and most common historical event in world history. The purpose of it isn't to erase history but to make it easier for people to comprehend it, as individually stating the "pre-Spanish", "pre-Dutch", "pre-English" etc. states of hundreds of countries is exhausting and confusing. It's not meant to be accurate per se, it's meant to reflect a watershed series of moments in order to make the complexity of our past understandable and easily discussed. There was a paradigm shift and it's hard to imagine how you could easily discuss that change without having to go into way more detail than is typically desirable.

Yeah, isn't pre-colonial applied to Australia as well? Looking on Wikipedia I see Pre-history which sounds terrible(implying Indigenous Australians had no history), and pre-invasion which I think is much more descriptive.

I feel like those stuck on the second paragraph of the essay are missing the point. It's not the thesis for the argument either.

He's not saying this is uniquely degrading to the continent of Africa, but that defining all of African history before the Atlantic Slave trade is a distortion. It "misdescribes the evolution of different African polities over time" (his words). Yes, it's done with other nations because at it's core, the term is Eurocentric.

This is one of those things I've always loved about the "leftists" on ResetERA.com, and before it on NeoGAF.com, that they're so ignorant of what are supposed to be their own arguments. People, like Nepenthe, came rushing into this thread off the title as they often do to dispute with the author and accuse him of bad faith simply because he was attacking one of their cherished terms and its related implications so they assumed he was attacking their "leftist" position overall and so they needed to reject it, when in reality he was to their "left" actually challenging the systemic ideological premises they hold and refuse to challenge.

Thread also has another of my favorites:

That was (and remains) my general mindset before reading the article : continental generalities are fucking useless overall. They can be useful for a sense of a shared culture but they're generally useless when it comes to any serious historiography or assessing the current world. It's hard to not view them as an ethnocentric tool generally wielded to dehumanize and wholly erase entire populations and their cultures.
Like when 20 years ago the whole American military industrial complex made up the notion of a Greater Middle East that ranges from Morocco to Pakistan to designate the faceless brown people it was okay bomb to shit.

Where the members think that when they learned of something was when it started. The "military-industrial-complex" didn't make up that notion, they stole it from "left" academia that had been insisting on it since the 1970's to help justify their insistence that the Third World/Global South/whatever the fuck/etc. needed (and was destined) to rise in solidarity to overthrow capitalism and establish global revolutionary communism. They're deliberately ignorant so they never see why their theoretical and ideological constructs always wind up as useful and co-opted by forces they consider anti-leftist and think they oppose no matter how many times they build the superstructure and base for these systemic forces interested in power.

If the "military-industrial-complex" made it up after 9/11 then why did Edward Said write this book in 1978 and essentially create the fields of "Middle East studies" and "post-colonial studies"? Where did the "military-industrial-complex" get all those academics who willingly wrote them all kinds of papers on the "Greater Middle East" after it started throwing money at them as the Cold War diminished and who saw their fields explode in popularity after 9/11? Were the people who wanted a restored Caliphate that unified all Muslim territories part of this "military-industrial-complex" that made up the idea after 9/11? Did they fund bin Laden because his goal was this idea and they wanted to make it up to bomb brown people? See where simple questions take us yet again into hilarious absurdity going off just one post from the self-proclaimed "experts" on ResetERA.com who are never in doubt that they aren't ignorant nor wrong about any topic. (And if they are it just means they need to watch more four hour YouTube videos from somebody who looked at a couple entries on Wikipedia and has also never questioned their own ideological premises or belief in their own lacking of any form of ignorance.)

But wait… Isn’t her gimmick “I read”? 

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

[Boredfrom]

Was reading an entire New York Times comment section and the most highly voted comments were total nobodies claiming that Dr. Gay didn't have enough publications to be a university president despite having no fucking clue what the actual credentials are.

People outside of universities have no idea that many of the best administrators devote more time to administration and less time on scholarship. While some of the best, most productive scholars made terrible administrators.

I'm trying to keep my head above water because my anxiety around the upcoming election is seriously dragging me back down into major depression, but this whole event just makes me wonder if the rise of fascism is inevitable in the US.

People, especially white moderates and supposed liberals are so willing to jump when right wing propagandists tell them to. So easy for them to decide that Dr. Gay is an unqualified diversity hire based on one Congressional appearance and some trumped up allegations of plagiarism by people outside of academia who do not give a shit about academic integrity. Chris Rufo telegraphed his bad faith strategy and people in this thread, in the NYT comments, and the NYT editors and writers themselves are so happy go along with it.

Our PhD gal at RE, gentlemen.

[HaughtyFrank]

Interesting that they talk about the evil white moderates (weird how no one cares about the Jews who were extremely upset by her terrible responses at the congress testimonial) meanwhile not all Black people seem to care for Claudine Gay

https://www.theroot.com/why-isn-t-the-ouster-of-harvards-first-black-president-1851134477

But hear Winkfield Twyman, Jr. — a Black author and Harvard grad – tell it, Gay shouldn’t even garner sympathy among the Black elite: Twyman penned a letter for Newsweek last week alleging that Gay targeted two high-ranking Black professors at the university, terminating Ronald Sullivan, the first Black faculty dean at the university, and suspending economics professor Roland Fryer, Jr., though Fryer was accused of sexual harassment and has since made a controversial return to Harvard.

[Boredfrom]

Everyone going on about plagiarism... I can guarantee if you went through the dissertations or published papers of all the Ivy League presidents you would find most if not all guilty of imperfect citations. But no one is going to do that for the others. Truly a mystery why.

Maybe they should do that. Specially since you are so sure about it. 

I'm pretty sure everyone who has ever written a paper forget a citation at least once, that's just something that happens.

And they still tell you to iron clad it because it can get you in problems, just like this one.

[Boredfrom]

Big part of how I feel. Black folk always gotta be above reproach while others get away with just about anything. If white folks commonly received the same punishment for the same actions, I wouldn't have shit to say. Like no doubt I don't agree with plagiarism, but I'm also not trying to hear it from chuds who get away with everything. Black folks want equality and we get called victims while those who have things much easier pretend like they've got it bad while finding success in their mediocrity. Fuck em imo.

 

Dude, plagiarism was always a big deal in most colleges, this was not invented yesterday. 

You want the same mediocrity that you perceive white people are allowed to have.

[Besticus Maximus]

I heard Nepenthe plagiarises everything she ever posted

[D3RANG3D]

Spoiler:  (click to show)(click to hide)

Read? Plagiarize, it's more like this.

[Hap Shaughnessy]

https://www.resetera.com/threads/claudine-gay-resigns-as-president-of-harvard-shortest-tenure-ever-chris-rufo-rejoices-in-another-propaganda-victory.801264/page-4?post=117129036#post-117129036

Now you know I haven't been looking at this thread with anything less than disdain. Allies, my ass.

This. Fuck y'all.

https://www.resetera.com/threads/claudine-gay-resigns-as-president-of-harvard-shortest-tenure-ever-chris-rufo-rejoices-in-another-propaganda-victory.801264/page-4?post=117131145#post-117131145

Every single day it gets harder for me to justify staying on this site.

[HaughtyFrank]

These dumbasses would let a murderer go because some MAGA hat happened to be the one to record it

[Uncle]

you know, for example, the horrible people who keep spreading that dossier of B-Dubs' racists posts, which can be completely dismissed because the only people who post it are bad people

[Hap Shaughnessy]

https://www.resetera.com/threads/claudine-gay-resigns-as-president-of-harvard-shortest-tenure-ever-chris-rufo-rejoices-in-another-propaganda-victory.801264/page-4?post=117131097#post-117131097

Right-wingers being happy about it doesn't mean it wasn't justified for other reasons.

It's amazing how a fascist in a room somewhere thought about how to get you to post something this ridiculous, and succeeded.

The "plagiarism" scandal was a big nothingburger, and looking into it even slightly shows how little there was to these allegations.

[Potato]

Everyone going on about plagiarism... I can guarantee if you went through the dissertations or published papers of all the Ivy League presidents you would find most if not all guilty of imperfect citations. But no one is going to do that for the others. Truly a mystery why.

Maybe they should do that. Specially since you are so sure about it. 

I'm pretty sure everyone who has ever written a paper forget a citation at least once, that's just something that happens.

And they still tell you to iron clad it because it can get you in problems, just like this one.

Sure, but did those professors and PhDs stand in front of a congressional hearing and fail to say calling for Jewish genocide was unacceptable at the University?

[books]

This is like them siding with Jussie, the trans teacher with the torpedo tits, and Hamas. And will smith too. Nonsensical but determined.

[Boredfrom]

It's not a mistake when it is a regular occurrence. I've worked at a university for 16 years myself -- I know how thorough my boss is when publishing papers and ensuring that any other person's work is credited. Maybe citing is more lax with social sciences vs hard science? The concept of plagiarizing is not something that is viewed as something that is easy to have happen.

I wouldn't say lax, but certainly a bit different.

If you're talking hard science, I'm imagining you're referencing data and discovery.

The majority of instances of plagiarism being leveraged against Dr. Gay, from what I read this morning, come down to not citing quotes and language choice. That's not excusing it, but it is the exact type of thing that can slip through the cracks if you're not careful

That is still plagiarism and shouldn't gave come to pass peer review.

Again, they drill this in you even in colleges in Mexico.

[Boredfrom]

Look, I get how strict the plagiarism threshold is and that slips happens. But many at RE are (supposedly) college educated people and they should also understand how all this have been implemented and the mechanisms that made this more unlikely to be an accident. She was the dean the Harvard, so I imagine is a little humiliating that the dean of your big prestigious college is not held at the same standards of the rest of the students and staff. Is not difficult to understand why she didn’t have another option but quit after this and the political shitstorm that was the hearing.

And yes, this happens in other places and because both political and academic reasons.

[Taco Bell Tower]

https://www.resetera.com/threads/what%E2%80%99s-going-on-with-people-using-mobile-phones-at-museums.801564/

I went to the Holocaust museum in DC last week and the amount of people using their phones to take shitty videos or pictures of everything soured my experienced.

This a chronological museum so you start at the 4th floor with Hitler raise of power to the second floor with the camps liberation by the allies.

I could barely look a the displays in the 4th floor because people were taking videos and pictures of every single display. The line wouldn't move for minutes and it was due to people standing there with their goddam phones instead of appreciating what was on display. It was super frustrating.

[ComeAgain]

If you runback 25 years of someones academic history through modern day plagiarism detectors you'd probably find sus things for pretty much anyone. Doing that act in the first place is a sign of targeted harassment

are the following 25 years of accomplishments completely invalidated?

Oh suddenly all the good someone has done in the past shouldn’t be thrown out because of one thing? Funny how that suddenly matters.

[Nintex]

what happened, why is this all suddenly not important anymore

B-Dumbs met with the MOBA board