Admin

subject has come up lately, so going to put down some notes about that: I shall begin by saying - personally - I find it no fun at all, nor do I find it enlightening or enriching in any real way, to attempt to control people, what they think, or what they say. On the other hand, reading what people say, I do find fun, sometimes enlightening or enriching in some way or other. So basically, our aim is not to remove any content or ban any users if possible (though clearly there are potentially situations where that may be required, see the board guidelines in this very folder for more information on that). In pursuit of that, we're going to attempt instead to spoiler mark with content warnings for individual posts. What does that accomplish? Basically, it leaves the content on the board for anybody who is interested. But if somebody doesn't want to get smacked in the face with it, they don't have to be. It's their choice whether or not they wish to view it. Users even sometimes spoiler/content warning mark their own posts just as a public service which is cool of them. If a thread is too full of stuff like that such that there's soooo many posts that need marked that it would just be too time consuming to do so, or a thread gets reported tons of times for different stuff etc, it gets moved to the "Dumpster Fires" folder. Dumpster Fires is a folder for stuff that you don't want to see. But if you want to see it, it's there still. Therefor, people who don't want, don't have to. People that like, can go do. The idea is - it's sort of an attempt to let people say/do what they want. But also allows for people to opt out of stuff they might not enjoy running into. It's actually kind of experimental and the moderation, like anything else, will be an ongoing and evolving thing as the needs of the place change. I do like the idea of how it is right now, and hope that we can maintain that. It seems to be working more or less. But things may change over time. As they do, I will post and let you know.

JESUS CHRIST SANTA DIED??

yeah as if 2016 wasn't rough enough.

They have good shows, but - there's only like five of them. And they run those over and over and over and over. so it starts to feel like kind of a dump of a channel even though - they have good shows/content. Just not enough, and the good content they do have they just run to death.

first season of Supermansion just finished up on Crackle I do believe. so there's at least an entire season in the can for AS already. which is not a bad thing.

this thread is for the proboard of this place. cuz proboards doesn't allow data to transfer without $$$. so once you got a proboard, if you want to shift to something else, you gotta go through this elaborate thing where you have to first pay them for a period of time and then they'll give you your data. so instead of that we just made a new place, left the old place up as an archive, and adjusted the ranks on this place to reflect the additional post count of the other board so nobody lost any rankground.

I'm not cool enough to know what - any of that means.

or just a plain ol christmas miracle.

The Adult Swim pilot Ubermansion, which they passed on, and then got picked up by Crackle as "Supermansion" has now been picked up by Adult Swim. or something. so - they basically picked up the show they passed on. This is I think the first time that's happened? where a show was pitched to AS, they passed, somebody else picked it up, and then AS changed their minds.

sure why not. do you have a color preference?

this is ... an outrage...

sent

I will have to take care of it tomorrow if I get a chance. might not be til Tuesday cuz holidays and such.

so is the staging board completely gone too now?

I think if anything, she was hurt more by her inability to address the things that came up. And to be fair - that's a pretty daunting mountain to climb. I can see it from that perspective of - how paralyzing it can be when - it feels like no matter what you do, you're fucked. But I think she just never really stood up. For a political wonk, she really didn't even stay "on message" that well. She just - I don't think any single controversy that came up during the campaign for Clinton was 1/10th as damning as anything that came up for Trump. But every time Trump was confronted with something, he stood up and said "Fuck you". And sometimes he lied to get out of it, obfuscated, whatever else. But the main point I think is - he stood up and did something. Clinton just kind of waited and wondered if she should or shouldn't do something, or how much of this she should or shouldn't do and how much of that is too much? and - all that kind of stuff and it just sank her. So I think in a way, Wikileaks did hurt the Clinton campaign, but only in so much as their responses were always weak. And part of the issue with that is - it's a fairly weak controversy to begin with. So - if you can't stand up to a weak controversy, even as your opponent is standing up very strongly to much worse controversies, I think that could have had an effect on voters. It wasn't Wikileaks so much as the campaigns fairly weak and inconsistent response to Wikileaks. And Wikileaks in and of itself was basically nothing. There wasn't really anything in there substantively that should have caused a candidate to stumble that badly. The only reason Clinton campaign opponents were able to leverage the issue is because the Clinton campaign did a terrible job of handling it.

The reason for that: I don't want somebody to be like "here's five dollars!" and then have the board still be slow and them be like "hey wait a minute..."

I'm gonna set up a contributing type thing, but waiting for server issues to settle first.

sent

https://www.privacypop.com/shop/tent/privacy-pop-bed-tent/

http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/nation-now/2016/12/15/you-can-get-mcdonalds-delivered-your-door-january/95480618/

hmmmm... https://mcphee.com/collections/candy-canes/products/bacon-candy-canes http://www.countryliving.com/food-drinks/a40642/pickle-candy-canes/