I don’t doubt your experiences, but with so many people on the internet, all given a voice, it seems very easy for a small fraction of them to distort how big of a backlash it actually was, or at least muddle it. The habit that media sites have of lazily compiling half a dozen toxic tweets into an article further…

That’s completely false. The scores want to see that you have the *ability* to rack up debt (i.e. access to credit) but don’t really give you bonus for having lots. In fact, low credit utilization is a factor in raising your credit score. I have a few credit cards that I pay off completely every month, never incurring…

Why do they make things with artificial sweeteners? Just eat something that isn’t sweet if you want to avoid sugar. Why make gluten free pasta when Celiacs can just eat something other than pasta instead?

Question for Mr. Psychopath: is every single person who’s opposed to the death penalty also a sex offender or sex offender sympathizer?

Are you suggesting that anyone who’s ever had a photo op with a famous film producer is somehow implicated in his crimes? Because we can judge so many more people that way. Michael Moore! Peter Jackson! Uma Thurman! Countless others! All rapists, I guess?

It’s a weirdly conservative (and shitty!) viewpoint to declare a teenager’s tweets make him irredeemable for life.

Equating a (possibly half joking) statement about not liking new music with being a racist Trump supporter is maybe the dumbest leap in logic ever seen on the avclub.

At the very least, why do you lump in “faces labor complaints” and “doesn’t think public transportation is important” with completely innocuous things like the sex joke and him liking the 50s? It doesn’t make any sense.

“Anyone who pretends that they are, those who get on the highest possible horse when someone else is accused of something, I automatically assume they’re the ones who have done the worst shit. “

As quoted by another commenter:

This, exactly. It’s so absurdly clear and easy I can’t believe people aren’t getting this. It’s also funny that their responses to people politely (more or less) making this point are “Fuck you” and “greeeeys!” If there’s a toxic element on this site, it’s these guys. Kinja really has ruined this site.

Who knew that some former Gawker writer would recycle some old shit and that avclub, newly christened into the kinjaverse, would subsequently run with it?

What’s pictured isn’t a rifle.

For fucks sake, he hit an opposite field home run off a 22 year old lefty with solid minor league numbers. Doesn’t mean he’s going to sniff the majors but give credit where it’s due.

I’m at least happy that NJM Punk’s comment has about 7 times as many stars as this.

Won’t someone PLEASE think of the front offices!?

I feel like people who say this about the host segments primarily remember the sci-fi channel years. The host segments during the Joel/Dr. Forrester years were often some of the most brilliant sketch comedy bits ever. (That’s nothing against Mike and more against the weak plots/villains sci-fi insisted on)

He said nothing of any substance, but it really is bizarre to hear him being this... diplomatic? Coherent?

Burneko’s 8,000 word epic on Wile E. Coyote (conveniently linked at the top of the page today) is probably the single worst thing I’ve ever read. I thought it was a very dry parody of worthless longform until about the halfway mark (and even then I had to scroll all the way down to confirm there wasn’t a punchline)

This is why Tom’s assertion that “The Cubs were just too damn good to let that happen” is dumb. By the 9th inning the game was a coin toss, could have easily gone the other way, in which case Tom is instead writing an article about how the Indians were just too good lose or whatever.