Landlord

4 hours ago, knapplc said:

It's weird that everyone pushing this story has to keep editing and deleting and clarifying and reminding.

It's not that weird. Clear communication with clarity that can't be misrepresented is difficult and takes a lot of work and finesse. 

I've been seeing ads for this lately and it has peaked my interest, although I've also been skeptical because I think I saw it was either in part produced by PureFlix or was on their platform, which is too religiously family friendly and milque toast for me to consider interesting.

But it does look good. Does the depiction of Jesus and the world butt up against Rome, much? Or is he just a really really really nice loving awesome guy? My main criticisms of portrayals or perspectives of Jesus are usually that they don't ever really go anywhere in showing his aggressive, though non-violent, political subversiveness against empire.

1 hour ago, BigRedBuster said:

Like was said in the posts above, acting in a movie in blackface needs to be looked at in context.  Why isn't it the same for me dressing up on Halloween?

I think you nailed it here. There is no context to passersby or glancers that would see you. 

It's "wrong" because it's easiest and perhaps even necessary for culture to have a vague low resolution picture, and simply for the sake of efficiency and protection say blackface = bad. It's not actually that simple, but it is to a lot of people exactly that simple, so if you really really want to do it, it's not "wrong" par se, but you've gotta deal with the consequences and social cost to your reputation.

Wisconsin would be the better win, but Iowa would be a worse loss, which in some way makes it a better win?

59 minutes ago, BlitzFirst said:

BTW, everyone seems to be OK with Biden hitting on a 14 year old.  I've not seen a single reply from all of you who keep saying Tara Reade is lying.  Anyone think that this is starting to fit a pattern of behavior?  No opinions?

 

I figured someone would weigh in...

Do I like it or think it's fine, if true? No. Am I okay with it? Yes I am 100% okay with it. It's inappropriate and creepy, but all in all a minor offense of a nature that we are already accustomed to seeing from Biden, including many times with video and audio. 

I'm even OK with him sexually assaulting Reade, if the definition of being OK with it is that I'm still voting for him over Trump.

10 minutes ago, commando said:

they said we have never quarantined the healthy.

A straw man argument from the start.

We haven't quarantined the healthy during COVID-19 either. This whole time you were still able to exercise, go get take out, go grocery shopping, so on and so forth.

I've never been a fan of or cared about wrestling either, but I understand it now. Fake isn't the right word for it, and presumes that it's an actual sport, which it isn't. It's more akin to performance theater. Calling wrestling fake is like calling action movies with stuntmen fake. Technically kind of true but sort of misses the point and diminishes the amount of talent and skill involved in what they're actually doing.

29 minutes ago, RedDenver said:

At some point people are just going to ignore the stay at home orders because they can't survive. 

That point is already right now for some, and will be for more, and turning them into a condescending meme of "I NEED TO GET MY NAILS DONE" isn't helpful.

3 minutes ago, BigRedBuster said:

Who is DDP?

5 minutes ago, BigRedBuster said:

What @teachercd said.

 

Do you have any knowledge that there was any indication before Frost signed them that they had this type of character?

No, I don't, and I'm not making any assertions about Frost's "culture".

But toxic or dangerous culture isn't made by fat cats in cigars saying, "let's bring this potential rapist to campus." It's much more subtle than that. It's deciding to take a chance on players you have small lingering doubts about, one too many times. It's rolling the dice on 5% more uncertainty than you would if you were winning or had gotten here sooner. 

26 minutes ago, BigRedBuster said:

I fail to see how this is a problem of Frost's culture.  When he found out about it, he dismissed the players.  Do you have knowledge that Frost knew these players would do such a thing?  Do you know that he welcomed them to campus knowing they would do such a thing and turned a blind eye?

Do you think there's any chance that Frost and some staff sat down and asked the question, "Are these guys worth it? You think they'll stay out of trouble? Are they safe?"

59 minutes ago, Danny Bateman said:

 

So you're saying you get the buddy discount?

 

Have you actually gotten around to trying it yourself, though?

I've done 2 or 3 sessions. It's a hell of a workout, makes total sense why/how I've seen people lose hundreds of pounds right in front of me. 

8 hours ago, commando said:

i posted this in another thread this morning...but it probably belongs here

 

As detestable as the current events like these are, these cartoons are stupid.

People aren't protesting because they can't go to the nail salon or get their hair done. It's because A) they're losing their livelihoods and ability to provide for their famiilies, and B) they are increasingly nervous of and committed to resist tyranny, unchecked power of the state and a reality stripped of freedoms. Right or wrong in their conclusions, it's nothing close to this characterization.

4 of my 6 roommates now work for DDP Yoga  

9 hours ago, knapplc said:

 

 

TO THEM. Hence why they keep posting about it.

Okay so it means more than Trump's allegations to you too.

5 minutes ago, knapplc said:

That for the last couple dozen pages two people have been the primary drivers of this conversation, posting about it over and over and over.

So two people (who are voting for Biden, and not for Trump) talking about Biden's allegations on a messageboard is proof or evidence that the Reade allegation is "more important". Ok.

5 minutes ago, knapplc said:

Yet neither of them have mentioned a word about Trump's allegations, even with active news happening around them in the past few weeks.

Here you go with this again. You also are not talking about Trump's allegations. Biden's allegation must also be more important to you?

2 hours ago, knapplc said:

One naturally wonders why this allegation is more important than those against Trump.

What's the evidence that it is more important? That we're talking about it? Half of the conversation is about how she doesn't seem credible, and another 30% is about why we're having the conversation.

I'm not sure it is more important than allegations against Trump. It's not getting covered much. There's no charges filed, Trump is currently in litigation. We all (on HB and across the nation) talked a lot more about Trump's Access Hollywood tape than we are about Reade.

54 minutes ago, BlitzFirst said:

Wanting her to be perfect with perfect recall and follow an ordered, logical string of behavior is really ignorant to sexual assault survivors and people who experience trauma.

Yeah, you're making a caricature of the argument here. There's a lot of space between "she's lying because she doesn't have perfect recall" and "It's weird and possibly important that her behavior has been pretty notably inconsistent without a compelling reason"

Which game is more important between

A) the first game of the season against a conference and division opponent

B) a next-to-meaningless non-con game against a G5 team

That's the question? If so, I'll take A. Also why would we be a favorite in a game against a top 15 team???

3 hours ago, 84HuskerLaw said:

Guess I dont get It! 

Finally you got something right.

4 hours ago, knapplc said:

 

Uhhhh... so by this logic cops posting tips about bank robbers are encouraging... bank robbing?

 

Be real.

 

There's an agenda behind this Reade thing. Look who keeps pushing it. Talking about who is pushing it isn't pushing it.

 

You want to be an edgelord hero, change the conversation. Don't post this nonsense.

I'm not trying to change the conversation. You are. You've posted at least half a dozen times about, "Why is nobody talking about Trump's accusers but is talking so much about Reade?", when you, in fact, aren't talking about the former and are talking plenty about the latter.

There was an agenda behind the Blasey Ford thing too. The left was trying to use her to keep Kavanaugh out of the SC. There was an agenda behind the Access Hollywood tape too. There's always an agenda behind all of it. 

And no, the Barbara Streisand Effect, in sort, doesn't apply to all situations in the same way. 

1 hour ago, 84HuskerLaw said:

What do the “insiders” say about Vedral leaving the program.  

Very disappointing.  Somethng is just not quite right in Huskerville with all the QBs leaving.  I know kids want to start but Noah got playing ops at times.  If Frost has “pets” or faves, he really needs some friendly advice in avoiding even the appearance of such.   This is a morale killer.  He can lose entire team if this is reality.  Kids need to feel confident they are being given a fair chance and not just being “practice dummies” 

Dude.

Over, and over, and over, and over, and over, and over again, you prove yourself to be wildly out of touch with how things work in the modern era. Not just at Nebraska. Everywhere.

There is nothing wrong with our QB room that isn't also wrong with every other successful P5 quarterback room in the nation.

1 hour ago, knapplc said:

We're how many dozen pages into this one allegation in this thread? And nary a word about Trump's?

 

Let's stop pretending this is true concern over Reade's accusation(s) and not political bias from Bernie's supporters, at least.

You keep bringing up this point all the time.

Not sure if you are aware of this, but you also aren't talking about Trump's accusers, and ARE talking about Reade. You are contributing to this nonstop conversation, and you are having no conversation about the many women Trump allegedly sexually assaulted, while you criticize others for not talking about them.

In fact, by weirdly doing this over and over you continue to make everyone talk about one and not the other even more.

4 hours ago, ZRod said:

That's exactly what I did. Take the deaths divide by total population then multiply by 100k. That gives you a normalized reference of deaths per 100k people.

How does that tell me anything about population density?