eyrieowl
eyrieowl
eyrieowl

No one is saying not to call out racism. Well, at least I'm not. I'm just saying you should recognize that people find it a very charged word. By all means, offend people when they deserve offending. Racism is real, call it when you see it. People get VERY OFFENDED by the word, that's also real. If your goal is

It's not your problem, but it's also not honest to say it's not a big deal. Maybe it *should* be less charged, and people should be more comfortable with the term so that they can more honestly recognize it in their lives...but there's a big gulf between saying that's how things should be and recognizing that that's

Thai. Last year. But what I read was the straps failed? And that's why he went plummeting (with a reserve which then never opened). But maybe not....

I'd imagine her family (and probably his) will have some interest in the child. So, odds are it would end up with family back in the States, I'd think.

Or Wild Irish Rose. There's a lot of *great* wines available at all your finest convenience stores...

Mad Dog Love

Well, on Slashdot, yes, you know you're moderating. But I don't think Gawker would need a slavish copy. I like your idea of having moderation always available, but only random mods have an impact. My goal in bringing up the Slashdot system isn't to suggest Gawker adopts it as-is, but because I think it has some

Maybe? Probably, even. If I had to bet...Stewart didn't like that Ward was challenging him, so he didn't swing wide to avoid him. But he wasn't planning to hit him, and maybe didn't expect the rear to kick out quite the way/time it did. He just planned on driving close by, the car slid a bit, and the mutual

Lots of FUD in the comments. Let's be clear on what the bill actually says about being drunk:

I guess what I'd wonder is why you think people wouldn't simply lie about the verbal consent? It still seems like the he-said/she-said issue would need to be arbitrated. I mean, I guess there might be rapists who would also be exceedinly honest, but I think that would be a bit...odd. I'd think the value isn't that

Fwiw, although the abc news article says "drunk", the bill says "incapacitated" due to drugs, alcohol, etc. It doesn't say that you can't be intoxicated and give consent, just that you can't be so intoxicated that you are unable to be aware of what you're consenting to or what is going on. It's unfortunate that the

I definitely prefer the old system to this one...but I think there can be a better path. I think they could have modified the old system to resemble slashdot's a little bit. If you're not familiar with it, it's worth a look. In a nutshell, there's no real bar to creating an account...but you start off with no

A few crumbles short of a cookie....

They should go back to their roots, selling bathtubs and...whatever else eclectic.

Putting your subject at ease is very much the American way of doing interviews. It's pretty striking, really, having grown up with that view on interviews and then listening to the BBC interview someone. They have a tradition of being far more confrontational in their interviews which I find quite refreshing,

it's not just dog attack stories. You see the same thing on stories about kids who do terrible things, where their parents are blamed, or, if a minority, their race. And while it's absolutely true that nurture can make for a bad animal or a bad person, I think it's important that people recognize that nature can do

There are other options than normal and criminal. We don't have to criminalize bad behavior to do something about it.

Surely that must be a Welsh expression that means "beat liberally about the head with a truncheon".

Just make sure you don't "die" from something like poisoning where they might decide your organs aren't usable....

Or perhaps Nearly Headless. Don't think we don't recognize it's you, Nick.