eyeball Posted February 27, 2016 Report Posted February 27, 2016 Good luck with that. Eventually people will lose interest in this site, the owners will stop paying for the domain and web services and all the content will no longer be viewable. So there might still be a political future for some of us? A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.
eyeball Posted February 27, 2016 Report Posted February 27, 2016 Did you happen to catch this on PBS? The Human Face of Big Data With the rapid emergence of digital devices, an unstoppable, invisible force is changing human lives in incredible ways. Every two days the human race is now generating as much data as was generated from the dawn of humanity through the year 2003. The massive gathering and analyzing of data in real time is allowing us to address some of humanity's biggest challenges but as Edward Snowden and the release of NSA documents have shown, the accessibility of all this data comes at a steep price. This film captures the promise and peril of this extraordinary knowledge revolution. I bet the content we've produced here will be around a lot longer than us. A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.
Bonam Posted February 27, 2016 Report Posted February 27, 2016 Did you happen to catch this on PBS? I bet the content we've produced here will be around a lot longer than us. Keeping data around has a real cost over time. Storage media only lasts so long, and also become obsolete over time. Old CDs and DVDs are unreadable now, not to mention old floppy disks. How much information that people may have assumed would always be accessible has been lost? Only that information that people have taken the effort to continue to take care of and migrate into new forms of storage has survived. Information that people lose interest in and no one maintains or cares about or accesses becomes lost and effectively inaccessible (without heroic efforts) in about 10 years.
bush_cheney2004 Posted February 27, 2016 Report Posted February 27, 2016 Did you happen to catch this on PBS? I bet the content we've produced here will be around a lot longer than us. The PBS program on "Big Data" was informative, but a lot of the presumed glut is purposely derivative and/or the by-product of modern digital communications technology. Many firms now have internal IT staff or purchase services for business "analytics", which gather and drive more Big Data by design. Data breeds metadata....and so on. As for this site, I doubt that the archives will survive very long. Seek immortality elsewhere. Economics trumps Virtue.
bush_cheney2004 Posted February 27, 2016 Report Posted February 27, 2016 (edited) .... Information that people lose interest in and no one maintains or cares about or accesses becomes lost and effectively inaccessible (without heroic efforts) in about 10 years. For the most part true, but the Egyptians and other ancient cultures solved this problem with the properties of their recording media (i.e. stone). I learned long ago to not only preserve recorded media, but also the physical/mechanical/electrical means for "playback". Turns out that older analog technologies are more robust in that regard, at least in my experience (e.g. 78 RPM recordings, audio tape, microfiche, film, etc.). We really don't know why or how long the owner of this site will keep the forum going, but you are right...it ain't free. Edited February 27, 2016 by bush_cheney2004 Economics trumps Virtue.
Big Guy Posted February 27, 2016 Report Posted February 27, 2016 It is in fact being stored for as long as possible if not forever and if future historians and scholars mine all this content for insights into why their world is the way it is I want to leave my mark on that. For example, I regard it to be a bit of a duty to draw out the more egregious statements people make to justify some of the egregious things going on that will profoundly shape how the the world unfolds. Hopefully this will add to people's understanding and their efforts to avoid mistakes. A very noble intention but impossible to fulfill. I doubt that you will find any references for quotes which are accredited to "eyeball" and given any credence. I submit articles, columns and letters to the editor under my real name because no reputable media outlet will accept and publish any submission not attributed and verified as to attribution. For that reason I can Google my name and find my submissions on the web and see which other publications have reproduced a submission of mine to agree with or be critical of. If you do not have the confidence of associating your name with an opinion and be prepared for the consequences of having that opinion published under your real name then your opinion will never be taken seriously by anybody. Note - For those expecting a response from Big Guy: I generally do not read or respond to posts longer then 300 words nor to parsed comments.
eyeball Posted February 27, 2016 Report Posted February 27, 2016 I know what you're saying I've also written letters to editors and such but its more the tone of the times that I'm thinking about. I think anonymity may be coming back judging by the things I'm hearing from friends who engage in political discussions openly on Facebook. Maybe its different in a small town where everyone knows one another but I've seen a few friendships becoming strained over their opinions. I'm often asked why I don't join in - my answer is I don't know if I could handle the rejection of someone refusing to be my friend but the fact is I know I already waste enough time here. A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.
Big Guy Posted February 27, 2016 Report Posted February 27, 2016 (edited) I know what you're saying I've also written letters to editors and such but its more the tone of the times that I'm thinking about. I think anonymity may be coming back judging by the things I'm hearing from friends who engage in political discussions openly on Facebook. Maybe its different in a small town where everyone knows one another but I've seen a few friendships becoming strained over their opinions. I'm often asked why I don't join in - my answer is I don't know if I could handle the rejection of someone refusing to be my friend but the fact is I know I already waste enough time here. I understand about being uncomfortable with reactions. We live in a small town in Southern Ontario and a few years ago, I was expressing my disagreement with the Canadian approach to Afghanistan. I did find two anonymous messages on my telephone which were meant to intimidate me. I also had some interesting conversations with members of our local Legion (of which I am one). I also suggest that if a "friend" changed their attitude towards you because they disagreed with something you wrote then they were never your friend. My most enjoyable moments are sitting down with people with whom I share a mutual respect, who have opposing views to mine and are prepared to discuss an issue in which we both hold passionate and opposite attitudes. Edited February 28, 2016 by Big Guy Note - For those expecting a response from Big Guy: I generally do not read or respond to posts longer then 300 words nor to parsed comments.
Michael Hardner Posted February 28, 2016 Report Posted February 28, 2016 It does matter - there are clearly defined rules. The enforcement is getting less clear by the day, IMO. I have been thinking about this. Does it help if I add that the moderators sometimes let things go, perhaps because the other posters have addressed an issue on the thread ? It may seem to you that we aren't doing anything in such cases, but there is sometimes some leniency or other factors at play. Also, we miss things from time to time. We're making more efforts to explain individual actions to posters, while still keeping our actions private between us and the member in question. So please continue to report things that you feel need our attention - we do appreciate that. Also - you seem to have navigated the site pretty well and participate with little intervention from us: maybe you can share your rule of thumb with others here ? Click to learn why Climate Change is caused by HUMANS Michael Hardner
Smallc Posted February 28, 2016 Report Posted February 28, 2016 Look, it's not that I think you're doing a bad job - I don't. And I do have 10 warning points, so I have haven't done that great. My thing is with the sudden obsession with thread drift. On another forum I now frequent more than this one, thread drift is mostly ignored, and sometimes gently discouraged. It used to be like that here. Something has changed recently, and I don't think it's you Michael. It's as if the directives from above have changed.
Michael Hardner Posted February 28, 2016 Report Posted February 28, 2016 Look, it's not that I think you're doing a bad job - I don't. And I do have 10 warning points, so I have haven't done that great. Since you brought it up, it works out to about 1 warning per year which seems pretty good to me. My thing is with the sudden obsession with thread drift. On another forum I now frequent more than this one, thread drift is mostly ignored, and sometimes gently discouraged. It used to be like that here. Something has changed recently, and I don't think it's you Michael. It's as if the directives from above have changed. There are no new directives, but the extra detail you have given here is helpful, thanks. Click to learn why Climate Change is caused by HUMANS Michael Hardner
Smallc Posted February 28, 2016 Report Posted February 28, 2016 (edited) To me, most thread drift is just part of a healthy and evolving discussion. There is some thread drift, like the over and over again F-35 saga, that is not. I would say that unless someone has a problem with the drift, and reports it, it should be left alone. Edited February 28, 2016 by Smallc
Big Guy Posted February 29, 2016 Report Posted February 29, 2016 It may be constructive for the moderators to decide on their roles and their priorities. Is the role to be a referee, an applicator of the "rules", a catalyst to encourage and promote discussion and/or a censor to maintain a level of decorum and civilized communication? An anonymous venue for individuals to post their views anonymously has the potential for very good thing that come from anonymity and some very bad things that allow people to state things for which they would never accept the responsibility. Some experienced posters consider these boards to be: "A Message board is a rag-tag collection of pretentious douchebags. Any type of social reject will be found on an message board. For instance, 1. Nerdy Crybabies.2. Internet Tough-guys.3. Racists.4. Passive-Aggressive Assholes.5. Aggressive Assholes.6. Tools/Try-Hards.7. Perverts.8. Misogynists.9. Dorks.10. Basically anyone who the world is a better place without Any kind of normal person will eventually be driven away by the circle-jerk of a cluster**** of nerds stroking each others egos." I suggest that the moderators decide just what are to be the parameters of the communications medium to which they are volunteering to spend spending a lot of their free time to "control". That process may assist in reviewing the conditions of participation and the expected and imposed standards of posting. Note - For those expecting a response from Big Guy: I generally do not read or respond to posts longer then 300 words nor to parsed comments.
Spiderfish Posted February 29, 2016 Report Posted February 29, 2016 (edited) . Edited February 29, 2016 by Spiderfish
bush_cheney2004 Posted February 29, 2016 Report Posted February 29, 2016 (edited) Another piece of the moderation puzzle is revealed....warning points for "rehashing"...nobody ever does that, right ? Not for climate change, or bitumen pipelines, or gun control, or abortion, or many other topics. While the moderators have moved to understand that bringing the topic of Canada to any thread that criticizes other countries CAN be valid, we do not support reposting the EXACT same thing over and over again. There are limits.So for this post:"Did you ask yourself these same questions when Canada/NATO was bombing Serbia or Libya or Iraq ? Or does it only apply to Israel ?"There are limits, and you have hit one: you made almost the exact same post at the top of the SAME page. Please find another angle, or post something altogether original rather than rehashing.Thanks for posting at MLW, your contributions here are sincerely appreciated. So there you have it folks....proof positive that Canada's honour is sometimes protected from the evil BC2004. Edited February 29, 2016 by bush_cheney2004 Economics trumps Virtue.
The_Squid Posted February 29, 2016 Report Posted February 29, 2016 They're finally getting sick of you littering the threads with your silliness. You made this bed....
bush_cheney2004 Posted February 29, 2016 Report Posted February 29, 2016 They're finally getting sick of you littering the threads with your silliness. You made this bed.... Maybe....they are Canadian after all, and pointing out Canada's complicity in "war crimes" is just too silly. Economics trumps Virtue.
bush_cheney2004 Posted February 29, 2016 Report Posted February 29, 2016 (edited) He'll be here all night. True..."here" is in the United States don'tcha know ? Ooops...that might be a "rehash"...we'll see. Edited February 29, 2016 by bush_cheney2004 Economics trumps Virtue.
Smallc Posted February 29, 2016 Report Posted February 29, 2016 True..."here" is in the United States don'tcha know ? Ooops...that might be a "rehash" No might about it - you've said that same like about 50 times.
bush_cheney2004 Posted February 29, 2016 Report Posted February 29, 2016 No might about it - you've said that same like about 50 times. Yes...some members don't like that. The truth can hurt...many times. Looks like re-posting facts may no longer be safe. But there is much inconsistency in "rehash" enforcement. Economics trumps Virtue.
The_Squid Posted February 29, 2016 Report Posted February 29, 2016 lol and on and on and on he goes.... Good luck with your old schtick now that the Mods are tired of it....
bush_cheney2004 Posted February 29, 2016 Report Posted February 29, 2016 (edited) Could be....rehashed facts can be relentless that way. Maybe Trudeau can change Canadian foreign bombicy, but I doubt it. I complied with the mod request...let's see if the new post stands. This is a test. Edited February 29, 2016 by bush_cheney2004 Economics trumps Virtue.
On Guard for Thee Posted February 29, 2016 Report Posted February 29, 2016 lol and on and on and on he goes.... Good luck with your old schtick now that the Mods are tired of it.... Finally!
GostHacked Posted February 29, 2016 Report Posted February 29, 2016 (edited) I have been thinking about this. Does it help if I add that the moderators sometimes let things go, perhaps because the other posters have addressed an issue on the thread ? It may seem to you that we aren't doing anything in such cases, but there is sometimes some leniency or other factors at play. Also, we miss things from time to time. That's running counter to the 'ignore and report' CA keeps putting forth. This is the kind of mixed message that is sent out via moderation. OH, and Canada. Edited February 29, 2016 by GostHacked
Recommended Posts