(August 26, 2014 at 3:40 pm)Drich Wrote: have you considered that your arguement is what is off topic if infact my post and analysis of the video does not address it?

Have you considered that threads wander a bit, and that despite you having started it, it's not your position to dictate what is or is not appropriate for the thread? You are of course free to choose what to respond to, but complaining that Cato's post was off-topic makes you come across as a bit of a twat (and I'm being generous, here).

It's definitely staged and heavily edited but I think your satire detection is turned down too low Drich.

(August 26, 2014 at 4:27 pm)Cato Wrote:

(August 26, 2014 at 3:40 pm)Drich Wrote: have you considered that your arguement is what is off topic if infact my post and analysis of the video does not address it?

You posted video and commentary attempting to show that claims of racial disparity regarding criminal activity are merely propoganda. I gave you information that thoroughly refutes your claim. My contribution was on topic and deftly showed you to be full of shit. Ignoring it doesn't make you right or legitimize your claims.

This is an example of complete failure of comprehension or wishful thinking.

This whole thread was focused on the inconsistencies found in the one YouTube video that I posted. It portrayed an untruthful/falsified social experiment, and the evidence needed to determine its distorted timelines, and one sided outcome as being set up.

I did quote stats one of you posted in my fergason thread, but I make no claim to them or their authenticity. I simply said if they were accurate then nothing different should be expected. (This is known as a fainting or escape goat tactic.) escape goats are used in my more hot button issues, to keep trolls and flamers busy while the adults who don't allow emotion do their thinking for them. An opportunity so they can talk without the hassle of a semi on point trouble maker trying to stir the pot, or burdening me with a thirty page line by line analysis of whatever soap box topic they are just dying to spew. So rather than ruin my topic, and drag it where they want to go I give them what they want to hear, and put a fork in the road. This fork allows those who want to stay on topic the opportunity to do so, and it allows the lemmings to follow whatever the guy I front of them is doing, if that is where they are at.

So, again. If you are not speaking about the video, you are off topic as I only quoted what I remembered what one of you posted, and formulated some sound reasoning based off those numbers. To which I dropped the moment it was challenged. Why? Because you needed to be a hero and I was more than willing to be the bad guy. Now that you won what did you think of the video?

---

(August 26, 2014 at 4:12 pm)rexbeccarox Wrote:

(August 26, 2014 at 4:06 pm)Drich Wrote: fair enough.. I had too many carrots in my quiver anyways.

You and rexbec carroxs (pronounced carrots)

Why not just call me Becca or rex? My user name has nothing whatever to do with carrots, and like poca, I don't have a nickname for you, so...

Before we had the explain your name thread I was trying to phonetically make sense of your screen name, and rexbec carrots is what I came up with. It just stuck. Just like 'pro carrots'. I don't know why I see so many carrots here I don't even like them.

---

(August 26, 2014 at 4:50 pm)Cthulhu Dreaming Wrote:

(August 26, 2014 at 3:40 pm)Drich Wrote: have you considered that your arguement is what is off topic if infact my post and analysis of the video does not address it?

Have you considered that threads wander a bit, and that despite you having started it, it's not your position to dictate what is or is not appropriate for the thread? You are of course free to choose what to respond to, but complaining that Cato's post was off-topic makes you come across as a bit of a twat (and I'm being generous, here).

That's the op's prerogative is it not? To pick and choose the direction of his or here thread?

As generous as you think you maybe, I went a step further and gave Cato the chance he wanted to slay a dragon. He righted a Great social injustice, and provided his links and numbers to show what I had said was wrong. What more is their to discuss? Oh, wait! we still have the topic the thread is actually about don't we!

I think I just turned the T-wattage upto 11.

First of all, "drippy", it may help if you think about their avatar instead of their actual name. Only ShaMan and a handful of others change their avatars on a regular basis, so where's what I think of yours:


Also, you don't have the right to direct any sort of conversation. You may be the ORIGINAL poster, but that doesn't give you any sort of judicial rights to determine if a post is adequately "on topic". That's what the mod team is for. Being "off topic" allows for DISCUSSION to actually happen; instead of just some blase responses to a single post, we have various parties replying to various posts, which are in turn replies to various posts, et cetera until we get back to you, the one with a special status known as the OP. All you did was START the conversation, now deal with where it leads.

Hmm it's so weird how we come up with names for people in our heads that stick. It's like Metazoa Zeke in my mind I always call him Paleo because when I first met him elsewhere his name was PaleolithicFreeThinker now he will always be Paleo to me. But I don't get either carrot reference. Pocaracas is Poca in my mind and rexbeccarox is Rebecca rocks. Always. Drich is always D-rich

(August 26, 2014 at 10:37 pm)Zack Wrote: It's definitely staged and heavily edited but I think your satire detection is turned down too low Drich.

http://youtu.be/fGVywZ8MuWI

I'm not the only one who doesn't seem to understand this is not meant to be taken as 'satire'.

Looks to me the self righteous response I originally responded to on Facebook is being mirrored here on this faud-cast news show.

What is your understanding of satire? Getting caught misrepresenting something and then having the option of saying 'just kidding?' These guys who have 4million plus hits on YouTube have a responsibility of labeling their work if it is meant to be taken as fiction or a prank. They have no other issue labeling other videos they do as pranks when that applies.

If for no other reason to stop others from picking this stuff up and taking it as an accurate representation of the condition of a given situation. Just like the faud-casters did.

---

(August 27, 2014 at 12:05 am)Endo Wrote: First of all, "drippy", it may help if you think about their avatar instead of their actual name. Only ShaMan and a handful of others change their avatars on a regular basis, so where's what I think of yours:


Also, you don't have the right to direct any sort of conversation. You may be the ORIGINAL poster, but that doesn't give you any sort of judicial rights to determine if a post is adequately "on topic". That's what the mod team is for. Being "off topic" allows for DISCUSSION to actually happen; instead of just some blase responses to a single post, we have various parties replying to various posts, which are in turn replies to various posts, et cetera until we get back to you, the one with a special status known as the OP. All you did was START the conversation, now deal with where it leads.

Look sport, I have every right to direct any conversation I want that is addressed directly to me. As cato's comments were directed at me and as I have an agenda to speak about the video I posted I deemed his work invalid. Just as I have done with some of your own.

---

(August 27, 2014 at 12:11 am)Losty Wrote: Hmm it's so weird how we come up with names for people in our heads that stick. It's like Metazoa Zeke in my mind I always call him Paleo because when I first met him elsewhere his name was PaleolithicFreeThinker now he will always be Paleo to me. But I don't get either carrot reference. Pocaracas is Poca in my mind and rexbeccarox is Rebecca rocks. Always. Drich is always D-rich

I get the re the the Xing out of the re leaving becca rox now.. It was just then I could not make heads or tails of it, and I split it wrong into rexbec, carox pronounced carrots with a southern accent.

I knew paleo. (I always thought 'free thinker' was a very... Generous titled he awarded himself) but to each his own. Zeek is a good Handle for him now.

My name is just the first letter of my first name and the first four of my last. D-rich is how I and the other Drich's say it but I will answer to just about anything.

I've been told drich is a restaurant, and a rap music producer.
https://www.facebook.com/drichelite/app_168151469879028

https://mobile.twitter.com/DRICHTHE1

I may have 99 problems but being a successful restaurant own and music producer ain't one. (We are not relations)

(August 26, 2014 at 11:34 pm)Drich Wrote: This is an example of complete failure of comprehension or wishful thinking.

This whole thread was focused on the inconsistencies found in the one YouTube video that I posted. It portrayed an untruthful/falsified social experiment, and the evidence needed to determine its distorted timelines, and one sided outcome as being set up.

I did quote stats one of you posted in my fergason thread, but I make no claim to them or their authenticity. I simply said if they were accurate then nothing different should be expected. (This is known as a fainting or escape goat tactic.) escape goats are used in my more hot button issues, to keep trolls and flamers busy while the adults who don't allow emotion do their thinking for them. An opportunity so they can talk without the hassle of a semi on point trouble maker trying to stir the pot, or burdening me with a thirty page line by line analysis of whatever soap box topic they are just dying to spew. So rather than ruin my topic, and drag it where they want to go I give them what they want to hear, and put a fork in the road. This fork allows those who want to stay on topic the opportunity to do so, and it allows the lemmings to follow whatever the guy I front of them is doing, if that is where they are at.

So, again. If you are not speaking about the video, you are off topic as I only quoted what I remembered what one of you posted, and formulated some sound reasoning based off those numbers. To which I dropped the moment it was challenged. Why? Because you needed to be a hero and I was more than willing to be the bad guy. Now that you won what did you think of the video?

Bullshit Drich. Reread your comments in post #22. This is what I was responding to so please stop insinuating that I am ruining your topic. My contribution in this thread is in direct response to claims that you made.

(August 27, 2014 at 5:09 am)Cato Wrote:

(August 26, 2014 at 11:34 pm)Drich Wrote: This is an example of complete failure of comprehension or wishful thinking.

This whole thread was focused on the inconsistencies found in the one YouTube video that I posted. It portrayed an untruthful/falsified social experiment, and the evidence needed to determine its distorted timelines, and one sided outcome as being set up.

I did quote stats one of you posted in my fergason thread, but I make no claim to them or their authenticity. I simply said if they were accurate then nothing different should be expected. (This is known as a fainting or escape goat tactic.) escape goats are used in my more hot button issues, to keep trolls and flamers busy while the adults who don't allow emotion do their thinking for them. An opportunity so they can talk without the hassle of a semi on point trouble maker trying to stir the pot, or burdening me with a thirty page line by line analysis of whatever soap box topic they are just dying to spew. So rather than ruin my topic, and drag it where they want to go I give them what they want to hear, and put a fork in the road. This fork allows those who want to stay on topic the opportunity to do so, and it allows the lemmings to follow whatever the guy I front of them is doing, if that is where they are at.

So, again. If you are not speaking about the video, you are off topic as I only quoted what I remembered what one of you posted, and formulated some sound reasoning based off those numbers. To which I dropped the moment it was challenged. Why? Because you needed to be a hero and I was more than willing to be the bad guy. Now that you won what did you think of the video?

Bullshit Drich. Reread your comments in post #22. This is what I was responding to so please stop insinuating that I am ruining your topic. My contribution in this thread is in direct response to claims that you made.

I was also referring to post 22 as well, more over this part:
In my fergason thread someone posted a stat that said in the state of Mo, black people were less then 20% of the total population, but were convicted of 60% of the crime. In that light, why wouldn't black people be stopped more?

You didn't ruin anything. You behaved and responded as expected.

Drich here is a chart of Ferguson police stats.

http://ago.mo.gov/VehicleStops/2013/reports/161.pdf

Yes, there are more arrests made of black people, but it's only because more black people are stopped. (At least of contraband searches)
White people actually have a higher rate of being being found with contraband but they have a lower rate of arrests. Which makes sense considering that only 47 white people were stopped compared to the over 500 black people who were stopped.

(August 27, 2014 at 7:18 am)Drich Wrote: I was also referring to post 22 as well, more over this part:
In my fergason thread someone posted a stat that said in the state of Mo, black people were less then 20% of the total population, but were convicted of 60% of the crime. In that light, why wouldn't black people be stopped more?

You didn't ruin anything. You behaved and responded as expected.

You have cause and effect reversed. Black Americans have higher instances of incarceration precisely because of racial profiling. To then claim that the profiling is justified because of higher incarceration rates is absurd.