WAR ROOM LOUNGE V21: ♫♪ Tom Lehrer Awareness Week ♪♫

[Fawlty]

It seems FUCKING INSANE.

I get they are ran by a company that has a large/deep bank account but a 9 figure deal for 11 fights and 5 years in a sport where 1 bad fight can derail a career?

I know he's not the first guy they've signed but he IS the first one they've signed on this side of the Atlantic.

It's also going to be hard for them on the technical side. It's not like big-time streaming is easy to pull off. Look at all the problems UFC has had with their service. Not to mention the years and years it has taken Youtube and Twitch to build their service from a technical POV.

 

[Gregolian]

It's also going to be hard for them on the technical side. It's not like big-time streaming is easy to pull off. Look at all the problems UFC has had with their service. Not to mention the years and years it has taken Youtube and Twitch to build their service from a technical POV.

Like I get that Canelo is a huge name and you'd expect if all goes well to more than make the money back on people like me that will buy the service just to see Canelo fight but with boxing it's so goddamn risky. The second GGG fight got put off because of PED issues that cropped up and then the fucking controversy in the scoring of both fights. All my friends that are boxers felt GGG did enough to win the first fight (which was scored a draw) and the second fight was a draw (which the judges scored as a Canelo win) so... yeah.

 

[JDragon]

It's also going to be hard for them on the technical side. It's not like big-time streaming is easy to pull off. Look at all the problems UFC has had with their service. Not to mention the years and years it has taken Youtube and Twitch to build their service from a technical POV.

IMO the strategy here is the same as for many other tech companies and start-ups these days: Grow, grow, grow, achieve lock-in for the platform, then think about how to get profitable.

 

[Fawlty]

IMO the strategy here is the same as for many other tech companies and start-ups these days: Grow, grow, grow, achieve lock-in for the platform, then think about how to get profitable.

Nevermind little details like 'How to deliver the service' lol

 

[Quipling]

So, who wants to take me out for lunch?

Wow. Not going there when I had the chance was a missed steak.

 

[Cubo de Sangre]

The thing she didn't say that the validity of your argument relies upon is that she had more than a distant NA ancestor. I'm not confused at all. She said that she'd heard she had a distant NA ancestor and based her listing on that fact.

Never said she said that. And yes, she based her listing on the stories she was told about having this one distant ancestor. With that out of the way, let's boil this back down. The claim you made originally (that I'm disputing) is that she never claimed anything more than having this one distant ancestor. So all that really matters is this. Did she in fact claim in places to be of minority status, and is it a stronger claim to say you are of a certain heritage than it is to say you have one distant relative of that certain heritage?

The answer to the first one is that she did. The answer to the second one, as someone fluent in the English language, seems pretty obvious. But go ahead and convince us readers that folks would be unreasonable to infer more from on claim than the other.

 

[Gregolian]

Wow. Not going there when I had the chance was a missed steak.

 

[Jack V Savage]

Never said she said that.

But the validity of your claim rests on believing it even though she didn't say it. Hence my point.

And yes, she based her listing on the stories she was told about having this one distant ancestor. With that out of the way, let's boil this back down. The claim you made originally (that I'm disputing) is that she never claimed anything more than having this one distant ancestor. So all that really matters is this. Did she in fact claim in places to be of minority status, and is it a stronger claim to say you are of a certain heritage than it is to say you have one distant relative of that certain heritage?

If it's accompanied by the claim that the basis of the designation is having a distant ancestor, it's the exact same claim.

 

[HomerThompson]

I wouldn't tolerate people using sexual innuendos around my kids.

@Lead
@Ruprecht

Can we please get a fucking moratorium on this bullshit?

I'm fucking sick of it. Somebody needs to actually enforce the fucking rules around here.

 

[Sketch]

@Lead
@Ruprecht

Can we please get a fucking moratorium on this bullshit?

I'm fucking sick of it. Somebody needs to actually enforce the fucking rules around here.

Those times are far gone. It's all about traffic now.

 

[HomerThompson]

Those times are far gone. It's all about traffic now.

It sure seems that way. The current troll burden is outrageous.

 

[Lord Coke]

Pending in the Ninth Circuit

Man who is 4% black wants minority benefits.
From the trial court order
https://www.leagle.com/decision/infdco20170808g21
C. PLAINTIFF TAYLOR LEARNS OF HIS RACIAL HERITAGE
On August 25, 2010, Plaintiff Ralph Taylor received results from a genetic ancestry test that estimated that he was 90% European, 6% Indigenous American, and 4% Sub-Saharan African. Dkt. 50-1, at 27. The test has an error rate of 3.3%. Dkt. 50-1, at 55.

Mr. Taylor acknowledges that he grew up thinking of himself as Caucasian, but asserts that in his late 40s, when he realized he had Black ancestry, he "embraced his Black culture." Dkt. 59-2, at 8.

news article


https://www.thenewstribune.com/news/business/article218754000.html
Ralph Taylor says it doesn’t matter what he looks like. Having lived most of his life as a white man, the 55-year-old now considers himself to be multiracial based on DNA test results.

The owner of Orion Insurance Group in Lynnwood also wants the U.S. Department of Transportation to recognize him as a minority so he can gain more deals providing liability insurance to contractors.

Taylor is suing state and the federal government because he was denied a minority-business certification under a program created more than two decades ago to help level the playing field for minority business owners seeking contracts in the transportation industry.

He provided no evidence he has suffered socially or economically because of race.

 

[Jack V Savage]

Shoutout to JVS who reminded me this guy existed. I had heard "Masochism Tango" on one of those old HBO Real Sex shows when I was a teenager with nothing but an old gym sock and a dream. But the song stuck in my head permanently. I never put it together that it was a Tom Lehrer song until last year.

Another one I like in the genre is John Wesley Harding. Not as cutting (not really cutting at all) but some good stuff:

 

[curryjunkie]

@Lead
@Ruprecht

Can we please get a fucking moratorium on this bullshit?

I'm fucking sick of it. Somebody needs to actually enforce the fucking rules around here.

i believe he has you mixed up with Bloodworth ...

 

[Cubo de Sangre]

If it's accompanied by the claim that the basis of the designation is having a distant ancestor, it's the exact same claim.

These are the exact same claims?

• I have a distant relative who was Native American.
• Because I have a distant relative who was Native American I am Native American.

Ignoring how ridiculous that is, where's the evidence that in these places where she claimed to be a minority that the basis of that designation was stipulated? We have to deal with her actual claims here, dude. Not some hypothetical shit that could change things if they were actually true. The screenshot of her cookbook entry said she claimed to be Cherokee. Not relative of Cherokee from multiple generations prior. Hard to believe UPenn, Harvard, and the law directory included any such further information either. Unless you can show she wasn't responsible for the claim of being Cherokee in the cookbook it's already shown that she made a stronger claim than what you're admitting to.



@IngaVovchanchyn, @Anung Un Rama, @Madmick

You three I regularly see being accused of dishonesty by Jack. Thought y'all might enjoy watching him do the same stuff he denigrates others for. He claimed Warren never claimed anything more than she had a distant relative who was Native American. I'm saying that's not correct because it's a much stronger claim to say one is Native American (which is what her listing herself as a minority amounts to). Please set me straight if you think my understanding of linguistic nuance here is off base.

 

[SBJJ]

These are the exact same claims?

• I have a distant relative who was Native American.
• Because I have a distant relative who was Native American I am Native American.

Ignoring how ridiculous that is, where's the evidence that in these places where she claimed to be a minority that the basis of that designation was stipulated? We have to deal with her actual claims here, dude. Not some hypothetical shit that could change things if they were actually true. The screenshot of her cookbook entry said she claimed to be Cherokee. Not relative of Cherokee from multiple generations prior. Hard to believe UPenn, Harvard, and the law directory included any such further information either. Unless you can show she wasn't responsible for the claim of being Cherokee in the cookbook it's already shown that she made a stronger claim than what you're admitting to.



@IngaVovchanchyn, @Anung Un Rama, @Madmick

You three I regularly see being accused of dishonesty by Jack. Thought y'all might enjoy watching him do the same stuff he denigrates others for. He claimed Warren never claimed anything more than she had a distant relative who was Native American. I'm saying that's not correct because it's a much stronger claim to say one is Native American (which is what her listing herself as a minority amounts to). Please set me straight if you think my understanding of linguistic nuance here is off base.

He accuses half the WR of lying.

 

[Cubo de Sangre]

He accuses half the WR of lying.

That's why I said "regularly".

 

[Jack V Savage]

These are the exact same claims?

• I have a distant relative who was Native American.
• Because I have a distant relative who was Native American I am Native American.

In terms of substance, how are they not?

Ignoring how ridiculous that is, where's the evidence that in these places where she claimed to be a minority that the basis of that designation was stipulated? We have to deal with her actual claims here, dude. Not some hypothetical shit that could change things if they were actually true.

Remember, I'm the one dealing with her actual claims. You're reading into her claims something that was never said.

@IngaVovchanchyn, @Anung Un Rama, @Madmick

You three I regularly see being accused of dishonesty by Jack. Thought y'all might enjoy watching him do the same stuff he denigrates others for.

There's zero dishonesty from me, unless you just use the definition of "not believing GOP party lines." Seriously, other than not blindly swallowing your party line here, where do you see me saying something I know to be false?

Also, I'm not impressed with Mick's posting, but I haven't found him to be unusually dishonest and don't recall saying he was. I think his reasoning skills are weak, is mostly the thing. And obviously he's very biased.

 

[Cubo de Sangre]

In terms of substance, how are they not?



Remember, I'm the one dealing with her actual claims. You're reading into her claims something that was never said.



There's zero dishonesty from me, unless you just use the definition of "not believing GOP party lines." Seriously, other than not blindly swallowing your party line here, where do you see me saying something I know to be false?

Because language has nuance. Because any honest person filling out the "race" box on a questionnaire knows that if they're genetically/culturally 97% one thing and 3% the other that they would be misrepresenting things by checking the box associated with the 3%.

You've yet to refute any claims I've attributed to her. Are you denying she had herself listed as a minority at UPenn, even though it was in a link you entered into evidence? If not, you're making a false statement here and you probably wanna rectify that. Or you know, actually back up your denial. But we both know you won't do either and that the crux of this disagreement is not her claims, it's the implication of one claim compared to another.

And now that you're at the end of your rope here comes the partisan hackery projection. Not sure what's worse, being too small to admit to such a minor correction in your stance or actually believing that there's no difference between claiming to have a distant NA relative and claiming to be NA oneself.

 

[waiguoren]

I forgot that no allegations against a Republican can be credible.

Do you see how, with this comment, you just degraded the discourse in a a perfectly healthy conversation?

MBS is getting railroaded too, right?

Who is MBS?

At least, then, would you acknowledge that people made a distinction based on the perceived credibility of the accusers?

Yes, some people did. Many people also took all accusers at face value. My view is that most of the "believe Ford" people would never believe Ford if she were accusing a man in their lives who they knew well and thought to be upstanding.