4doorsmorewhores
No bio...
User ID: 223
4doorsmorewhores
4mo ago
If you would be willing to explain where I am wrong or even lay out what your belief or thought is I would be happy to read it. Hope this helps.
4doorsmorewhores
4mo ago
Do you believe that the winner of the 2024 presidential election will only win because they were anointed by voters on November 8th? That seems like the weakest-possible stance.
4doorsmorewhores
4mo ago
This is a bait and switch argument. At first the claim was "The party has current problems because instead of healthy party politics deciding leaders, they anoint whoever has the most name recognition or seniority in the previous regime", now it's "After a somewhat rigorous and unpredictable primary process with votes and wins all over the place, eventually they coalesced around a candidate who they thought was best (And who did in fact end up winning), which proves he was anointed"
4doorsmorewhores
5mo ago
Why should we think that they are incredibly focused on their appearance? Juries typically don't have that level of spotlight, and often have the opposite - being sequestered or the subject of media bans or privacy mandates. This seems like the weakest possible version of the argument, that some of the people in Austin are progressive, so we can assert that every or anything they do is performative. This is still lacking any reason to believe it's for appearances. I find it much more convincing that voters naively believe a single municipal law will solve homelessness or will stop the big mean border guards in their tracks.
4doorsmorewhores
5mo ago
I don't think I'd describe anything he does as being the face of counter-culture. He starts half his routines with extended "Aren't black guys way better than white guys at sports/sex/whatever" (Seriously, watch any of his specials or youtube clips, he can't go 2 minutes without complimenting black guys), went back to host the show that cancelled him, and even did some bud-light grovelling after the boycott controversy.
He's a safe progressive with edgy vibes, way closer to Bill Burr than Jim Breuer
4doorsmorewhores
5mo ago
I believe you've done a motte and bailey by conflating the common public meaning of performative with a dictionary sociology meaning.
4doorsmorewhores
5mo ago
How does it not matter, and how does that make your point stronger, and how can something be sincere and also performative? My assumption is based on what you wrote, nothing is built-in.
4doorsmorewhores
5mo ago
I appreciate the dozen different irrelevant counter claims or suggestions that the opposite may be true, but I think this all demonstrates why accusing random strangers' actions of being performative is just a boo-outgroup exercise.
4doorsmorewhores
5mo ago
Yes, genuinely held beliefs probably have some philosophical or moral reasoning that has led to a broadly consistent set, rather than ones which are sharply contradictory or inconsistent.
4doorsmorewhores
5mo ago
I don't think it's clear that the causation of these issues all flow in the direction you suggest. Isn't it more likely to you that twitter (a large, lowest common denominator website) users' beliefs about these popular (the president, harvard, and the olympics) issues are reflective of the real-life happenings?
4doorsmorewhores
5mo ago
How do you know it's performative progressiveness and not the genuine beliefs of the people which act that way? Is there any way to test for this?
4doorsmorewhores
5mo ago
Wasn't that already the case? Incel as a popular phrase was coined in the 90s by some lesbian, do you remember hearing any panic or concern about it in the 90s or 00s before it became an issue for some men?
4doorsmorewhores
5mo ago
I don't understand the objection to posting and discussing hours-long interviews posted by a major journalist. Argument to moderation? But it seems proportional to me to have a bias towards sources which are disseminating the most information. You could similarly point out that 100% of themotte.org content is discussed on the internet, why not have an in-person or telephone portion? Because that's the medium that works.
4doorsmorewhores
5mo ago
How can we be certain that they didn't give those instructions? If you're resolute in that claim then I'd like to see some evidence or a strong intuition. All we know is that they tried to hire Mrs. Johansson, were unable to, made public references to the film 'Her' with respect to the AI voice, and then hired someone who subjectively the majority of people conflate the voice of with Mrs. Johansson.
If this was a more mundane dispute, say about a restaurant acquiring a hamburger recipe, all of these facts would probably lead us to believe there was an effort to get the goods without due permission. Adding in the prior of this particular company playing very loose with intellectual property rights and ownership pushes it to very likely that they did what everyone here is suspecting them of, and certainly if it was entirely innocuous, they did themselves no favours showing the contrary of our suspicions and made no effort to show anything dispositive in that respect.
4doorsmorewhores
5mo ago
We have correctly and broadly recognized that you can impersonate someone by using someone else's voice. This is the Siri equivalent of hiring a 55 year old teacher who just happens to be named Taylor Swift to endorse your brand of makeup
Here's when a snack company did the same thing to Tom Waits:
http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/communications/waits.html
I'm also confused by this. She has an onlyfans which she advertises on her twitter and instagram, which are both just full of normie talking-point debates. This seems like 99% grift.
4doorsmorewhores
6mo ago
Yes it was this. Thank you so much!
4doorsmorewhores
6mo ago
Unfortunately not, it was some shopify-looking programme endorsed by a lady-dentist that contains like 7 items.
4doorsmorewhores
6mo ago
Within the last year-6 months, someone in one of these threads posted some 50-60$ package that a dentist sells online that has a multi-step dental hygiegene and cleansing package. I lost my bookmarks recently and have been unable to find it, does anyone here remember when or by whom it was posted? Thanks
4doorsmorewhores
7mo ago
Oh so the government will make gun-style bombs but not bomb-style guns? Figures
4doorsmorewhores
7mo ago
It strikes me as very bad faith to compare a large number of well equipped and trained soldiers having a large advantage if they were to fight a smaller number of armed militiamen to a situation where the existence of large city-destroying bombs nullifies the use of individual arms. It does not contextually demonstrate the value of combined arms or tactics.
4doorsmorewhores
7mo ago
A nuclear warhead isn't a big gun, it's a big bomb. Bombs explode roughly equally in every direction. Bullets travel in a forward line. That's their main distinction.
4doorsmorewhores
8mo ago
I don't think that's anywhere near the standard to which (especially top level) comments are held. A short comment without any context or analysis, and a response of suggesting I read 2500 posts by someone to figure it out, the totally unfounded assertion that nobody else needed a summary (Based on what 7 replies? Your comment was posted at like 3 AM EST and I asked my question 8 hours later), and finally "If you don't get it, just minimize it and move on?"
4doorsmorewhores
8mo ago
who is hlynkacg? can i get a summary of who he is like any top level comment would be expected to give? this seems oddly vague given the standards we expect from people posting a link to their blog for example
are you uglier than her or about the same or is she uglier than you? also how tall are you and do you have good hygiene?
More options
Context Copy link