A Supreme Yahoo

All things outside of Burning Man.
Post Reply
User avatar
DE FACTO
Posts: 1263
Joined: Fri Oct 10, 2003 12:02 am

Post by DE FACTO » Tue Nov 25, 2003 1:42 pm

Rob the Wop wrote:
technopatra wrote:
It's not like he's going to go "Man, that girl is really mad at me. She must be really hurt. I should take more care to consider other's feelings".
Bingo. The "frat boy" mentality gets off on upsetting the hippies/ravers/women/etc.. They then "grow up" (and I'm using the term very hesitantly) to get plugged into the "good old boy" network in upper management of larger corporations. I see it all over Intel, people advancing in divisions that just happen to have attended the same school and/or fraternity as upper management. Maybe callousness is a requisite for being a general manager. It helps to have no discernable human emotions when the layoffs hit.
what TP, Rob and I said;
The more I think about it the more I belive something should be done about them. The way I see it , if nothing is done about them it would be the same as doing nothing about dumb dumbs that affiliate themselves with orgs such as "skull & bones" only to have these dumb dumbs years later become President of the united states.

Do you really want to live another G.W.B. nightmare again.
These are the same type of bratty dumb nitwits that cheat on thier tests and bully people. they are punks.

blyslv
Posts: 1555
Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2003 2:22 pm
Location: Fanta Se NM

Post by blyslv » Tue Nov 25, 2003 1:53 pm

TawnyGnosis wrote:Oh wah Technopatra,

this is called a discussion, and he didn't send me anything procative to respond to at all. I brought it up myself because I don't like bullshit spreaders.

I wanted a discussion, is that ok with you dear?
Golden Knowledge -- Are you a conflict junkie? I ask because it sometimes seems that way.
Fight for the fifth freedom!

technopatra
Posts: 727
Joined: Mon Jun 16, 2003 3:04 pm
Location: SF, CA
Contact:

Post by technopatra » Tue Nov 25, 2003 1:55 pm

TawnyGnosis wrote:Oh wah Technopatra,

this is called a discussion, and he didn't send me anything procative to respond to at all. I brought it up myself because I don't like bullshit spreaders.

I wanted a discussion, is that ok with you dear?
I don't think you do want a discussion. If you did, you would be able to listen to what others say and respond in a more measured, considerate fashion. If you did, you would see that I and others are suggesting that there is a better way to resolve an issue you specifically asked for help with.

Based on your current tone, I think you just want people to feel bad for you, and join you in your righteous indignation.

User avatar
DE FACTO
Posts: 1263
Joined: Fri Oct 10, 2003 12:02 am

Post by DE FACTO » Tue Nov 25, 2003 1:59 pm

:lol:

And people here say I do that.

User avatar
TawnyGnosis
Posts: 126
Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2003 7:31 am
Location: Los Angeles
Contact:

Post by TawnyGnosis » Tue Nov 25, 2003 4:09 pm

blank post..
Last edited by TawnyGnosis on Tue Nov 25, 2003 4:16 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Heaven's going to burn your eyes

User avatar
TawnyGnosis
Posts: 126
Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2003 7:31 am
Location: Los Angeles
Contact:

Post by TawnyGnosis » Tue Nov 25, 2003 4:12 pm

I took a tone to you Techno, because your response annoyed me. I just disagree with you on this.

We disagree on whether or not to take action and say something back to the yahoo, I think I should have and did. I'm not really sure what you are saying is wrong to do, whether bringing up the issue at all is "wrong" to you. I don't think it is, and no I'm not asking for sympathy and am not a conflict junkie. Plus I already told you, that he did not attempt to incite some reaction in me, it was me who read his article with a more critical eye and told him what I thought about the group he was involved in. Given the fact that I think it was wrong to publish a naked picture of someone he obviously didn't know( not to mention illegal) , and his dumbass attitude I still maintain that it was fine to say something back about that opinion. I blocked him, so it was done after that.

Maybe if more people werent apathetic, this kind of thing wouldn't be readily accepted.

your tone is pretty damn self-righteous as well, that's what we do on the e-playa.
Heaven's going to burn your eyes

User avatar
DE FACTO
Posts: 1263
Joined: Fri Oct 10, 2003 12:02 am

Post by DE FACTO » Tue Nov 25, 2003 4:16 pm

TawnyGnosis, please excuse me. I totally overestimated you.

User avatar
ramen
Posts: 154
Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2003 8:33 pm
Contact:

Post by ramen » Tue Nov 25, 2003 4:17 pm

I see that the magazine is full of homophobia, racism, and execrable humor. The burning man party description is one of the least repellent things about the whole thing. It seems to be a frat boy's description of a burner party with the usual cliched attitudes in place. In and of itself, I don't find it all that objectionable.

I wonder what would happen to these chumps if this garbage was mailed to their parents who apparently fund these ethically-challenged cretins' education. The imposition of a man's penis on the face of a woman dean's face was incredible. I find it hard to believe that ANY administration, liberal or conservative would put up with that kind of blatantly offensive attack by students on a member of the administration.

I attended this school for a year and can't believe this stuff emanated from the same place, or that the school itself hasn't ejected these total assholes out on their ears.
Short Attention Span Theatre

User avatar
TawnyGnosis
Posts: 126
Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2003 7:31 am
Location: Los Angeles
Contact:

Post by TawnyGnosis » Tue Nov 25, 2003 4:21 pm

"TawnyGnosis, please excuse me. I totally overestimated you."

Care to elaborate? I never estimated you at all in fact. But as someone who is not a conflict junkie, I can laugh about this "keen" observation of yours.

If you disagree with something I said, please feel free to explain how.
Heaven's going to burn your eyes

User avatar
DE FACTO
Posts: 1263
Joined: Fri Oct 10, 2003 12:02 am

I'm glad you understand my hideously subtle sense of humor!

Post by DE FACTO » Tue Nov 25, 2003 4:44 pm

TawnyGnosis wrote:"TawnyGnosis, please excuse me. I totally overestimated you."

Care to elaborate? I never estimated you at all in fact. But as someone who is not a conflict junkie, I can laugh about this "keen" observation of yours.

If you disagree with something I said, please feel free to explain how.
All anyone is saying here I think is that to egg these dumb dumbs on is futile. They are brainless and enjoy insulting everyone on the planet with thier ignorance.
So much so that when they graduate they stick together later in life to accomplish thier mission; to further fuck up the world with thier stupidity. As in i.e. G.W.B..
They dont really give 2 flying fucks about anybody. They are the types that no matter what positive conclusions/advise indivisuals give them on thier distructive ways, they will still do what they do just because.

There usually is no reason why they do what they do. They just do. and do it more when you respond to them.

Telling them how you feel does not help. It does egg them on.

The best thing to do is not say anything to them but do something to them. Not necessarily physically (even though that is what I prefer.) but in ways that would rid them of thier evil ways or provoke them to do something so stupid it would cause them to make a serious mistake that effects them in ways they could not have imagined.

I agree with you in the sense that something does need to be done about these guys.

Now you are making me type too much. I hope you understand what I mean or if what I say makes any sense.

I still like you anyway.

User avatar
DE FACTO
Posts: 1263
Joined: Fri Oct 10, 2003 12:02 am

Post by DE FACTO » Tue Nov 25, 2003 5:25 pm

So I guess I now am the thread killer of this thread huh?

:lol:


Oh and what Ramen said.

User avatar
DE FACTO
Posts: 1263
Joined: Fri Oct 10, 2003 12:02 am

Post by DE FACTO » Tue Nov 25, 2003 8:19 pm

Rob the Wop wrote: Bingo. The "frat boy" mentality gets off on upsetting the hippies/ravers/women/etc.. They then "grow up" (and I'm using the term very hesitantly) to get plugged into the "good old boy" network in upper management of larger corporations. I see it all over Intel, people advancing in divisions that just happen to have attended the same school and/or fraternity as upper management. Maybe callousness is a requisite for being a general manager. It helps to have no discernable human emotions when the layoffs hit.
Intel huh? I knew there was something special about you. And your right about some at Intel.

I know someone at Intel that would have never gotten work there if I had'nt hired him. He just happened to have the resume I was looking for at the time and I thought he was ok. and for awhile he was. Needless to say.....

Yep they are all over.

User avatar
Badger
Posts: 3322
Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2003 2:43 pm
Location: San Francisco

Post by Badger » Tue Nov 25, 2003 10:44 pm

Must........

............resist.....
Desert dogs drink deep.

User avatar
DE FACTO
Posts: 1263
Joined: Fri Oct 10, 2003 12:02 am

Post by DE FACTO » Tue Nov 25, 2003 10:47 pm

Badger wrote:Must........

............resist.....
Hey go for it. You might be suprised.

SED
Posts: 1359
Joined: Thu Oct 09, 2003 10:26 pm

Post by SED » Tue Nov 25, 2003 11:36 pm

WANKERS!
It ain't the hanging, it's the drop.

User avatar
DE FACTO
Posts: 1263
Joined: Fri Oct 10, 2003 12:02 am

Aint America grand?

Post by DE FACTO » Tue Nov 25, 2003 11:47 pm


Guest

Post by Guest » Wed Nov 26, 2003 6:11 am

I like Burning Man.

I don't like what those students at UTexas did, and I don't like what those students at UC San Diego did.

But I like Burning Man, and I like the eplaya.

I especially like when the eplaya has topics that interest me, and not "look at how horrible these persons thousands of miles away are acting". I read the Nation when I want that.

I also like when there are posts about how to responsibly be a member of an online community.

User avatar
tzimisce1313
Posts: 118
Joined: Sun Oct 19, 2003 11:10 pm
Location: san francisco bay area
Contact:

Post by tzimisce1313 » Wed Nov 26, 2003 9:02 am

ok, let me get this straight... it's ok to label someone who's political views vastly differ from your own?

Kinetic II

Post by Kinetic II » Wed Nov 26, 2003 9:49 am

Welcome to general discussion on the eplaya.
The eplaya has many sections that are related to the event.
This section is known for being a free for all, and all topics can be on the table for discussion.
The board is vast, I hope people look around at all the threads it offers.

But general discussion is just that, and I hope it doesn't change much from it's current format.

Beer, the board can't be everything to everyone at all times but there's a lot of good info here. Take another look, there's plenty of what your looking for on here.

actiongrl
Posts: 643
Joined: Fri Sep 05, 2003 12:22 pm

Post by actiongrl » Wed Nov 26, 2003 10:14 am

Maybe she is / would be similarly outraged, and willing to file a lawsuit against the author / editor / publisher?
She was at an event to which the public was invited but no parameters for film or video were established at the gate (AFAIK.) Ergo, again AFAIK, she doesn't have too much of a leg to stand on legally, unless they're selling her image for commercial gain.

One example of why we at the office want to lend our assistance to regional groups who are planning events...and why I was in NYC this weekend tagging cameras at the Decom.

Although I appreciate that it's parody, indeed, I feel for the girl's potential embarassment. Trey, is she on the SD list and contributing to the discussion?

User avatar
Ivy
Posts: 979
Joined: Tue Sep 02, 2003 8:20 pm
Location: Long Beach, CA
Contact:

Post by Ivy » Wed Nov 26, 2003 10:50 am

I don't think she case a case for a lawsiut, and I said as much on the SD list.

I do think that she has a right to take it up with the school that her (topless) picture was published without her consent (if that is the case). Especially if the paper is funded by the school. I worked on a similar paper and we could never have gotten away with that. if it's really underground (i.e., a bunch of students printing it on their own and passing it around), the school would do well to know about it, too, as usually that is against policy at many schools.

No offense, AG, and while I think tagging cameras certianly helps a great deal and is far better than doing nothing, it doesn't always work.

User avatar
BlueBirdPoof
Posts: 627
Joined: Tue Sep 23, 2003 11:44 am
Location: SF Bay Area

Re: A Supreme Yahoo

Post by BlueBirdPoof » Wed Nov 26, 2003 10:57 am

TawnyGnosis wrote:
4) I'm creeped out because the yahoo located me in some odd search in his false belief that the girl was me.
I read over this thread, not too carefully i'll admit, and am surprised that no one picked up on this, because this is what seemed most frightening to me. It's really scarey to suddenly get this sort of attention, and realize how little control you have over certain parts of your life. And I think that his behavior is just a couple of notches under stalking. I don't know if it's worth going to the dean over, but I won't dismiss that. I'd certainly talk to someone who knows more about ridding oneself of unwanted attention. Also, that sort of vulnerability is likely to provoke strong reactions, so I can see why Tawny did things that others find reckless. I don't think it's the same as the kid who killed a girl after posting that he was going to on a website--but it's a degree thing, not a diffference of kind.

User avatar
drowned_saved
Posts: 135
Joined: Tue Sep 02, 2003 1:15 pm
Location: SoCal

Post by drowned_saved » Wed Nov 26, 2003 11:09 am

Ivy wrote:if it's really underground (i.e., a bunch of students printing it on their own and passing it around), the school would do well to know about it, too, as usually that is against policy at many schools.
because one forfeits the right to free expression when she is affiliated with a state funded university?

i don't think so...

but sticking to the facts, the koala does enjoy some kind of ambiguous connection to UCSD. it says as much in the editorial banner inside the rag. this obviously gives schools officials added leverage over the pigs who think what they write and print is hilarious. i'd hate to see the university abuse its position, though. while there are clearly "journalistic ethics" to consider and legal protections (albeit weak) for people who don't want their pictures circulated, i'm disappointed that the defense of free speech hasn't been louder here.

i mentioned rushdie in an earlier post. this time i'll include a quotation. remember, this guy was the object of a terrorist threat; the stakes in his case were, i venture to say, somewhat higher than a titty shot in some college rag:

"Democracy can only advance through the clash of ideas, can only fluorish in the rough-and-tumble bazaar of disagreement. The law must never be used to stifle such disagreements, no matter how profound" (Step Across This Line, 288).

User avatar
drowned_saved
Posts: 135
Joined: Tue Sep 02, 2003 1:15 pm
Location: SoCal

Post by drowned_saved » Wed Nov 26, 2003 11:17 am

and one more from the same collection of rushdie non-fiction:

"Free societies are societies in motion, and with motion comes friction. Free people strike sparks, and those sparks are the best evidence of freedom's existence. Totalitarian societies seek to replace the many truths of freedom by the one truth of power, be it secular or religious; to halt the motion of society, to snuff out its spark. Unfreedom's primary purpose is invariably to shackle the mind" (Step Across This Line, 215).

User avatar
Ivy
Posts: 979
Joined: Tue Sep 02, 2003 8:20 pm
Location: Long Beach, CA
Contact:

Post by Ivy » Wed Nov 26, 2003 11:26 am

because one forfeits the right to free expression when she is affiliated with a state funded university?

i don't think so...
I don't think so either. But as a former student of several state universities, I can attest that you did have to have permission from the school to pass out flyers and what not on the campus, at least when I was there, which wasn't too terribly long ago.
Not that they overly enforced this statute nor did they ever really give more than a cursory once over to the things they did approve for distribution.

I'm not here to argue whether it's right or wrong. Merely to inform that it may be an option to investigate.

User avatar
drowned_saved
Posts: 135
Joined: Tue Sep 02, 2003 1:15 pm
Location: SoCal

Post by drowned_saved » Wed Nov 26, 2003 11:40 am

Ivy wrote:But as a former student of several state universities, I can attest that you did have to have permission from the school to pass out flyers and what not on the campus, at least when I was there, which wasn't too terribly long ago.
on campus, you're right. and especially right about the arbitrary and often unjust process of screening that takes place.
Ivy wrote:I'm not here to argue whether it's right or wrong. Merely to inform that it may be an option to investigate.
oh...how terribly embarssing for me then, since i AM here to argue that one takes the first steps toward the kind of totalitarian society rushdie describes by siccing the university administration on these "unshackled minds" simply because of the putrid stuff they think and write.[/quote]

User avatar
Ivy
Posts: 979
Joined: Tue Sep 02, 2003 8:20 pm
Location: Long Beach, CA
Contact:

Post by Ivy » Wed Nov 26, 2003 11:47 am

I didn't say I wasn't interested in arguing that in general, I meant that here, in the relevance of this thread, I am concered with helping the woman in the photo if she wants and/or needs it. That's what my post was regarding and I wanted to make that clear without having to delve into a lengthy debate.

User avatar
Tiara
Posts: 376
Joined: Mon Aug 11, 2003 2:07 pm
Location: Richmond CA
Contact:

Post by Tiara » Wed Nov 26, 2003 2:17 pm

Punishment of students for exercising their First Amendment rights is not appropriate. But their right to host racist/homophobic "hate speech" and unauthorized topless photos on the web server of a public university is questionable.

User avatar
Tiara
Posts: 376
Joined: Mon Aug 11, 2003 2:07 pm
Location: Richmond CA
Contact:

Post by Tiara » Wed Nov 26, 2003 2:22 pm

Did anyone else go to Koala's website?

The Disclaimer below can be found at http://koala.ucsd.edu/disclaimer.htm (emphasis in bold added by me)

Disclaimer

The views expressed on this website are solely those of The Koala and its members. Many times the views expressed on this website aren't even those of The Koala and its members; rather, they are the views of real live UCSD students who anonymously submit material to us. We simply provide a forum for (hopefully) humorous (and sometimes unpopular) ideas. While the producers of this website are recognized as a campus student media organization at the University of California, San Diego, the views expressed herein do not represent those of Associated Students UCSD (ASUCSD), the University of California, the Regents, their officers, or their employees. Each campus student media organization bears the full legal responsibility for its content.

Now on a serious note: if you have a real problem with something we publish, we encourage you to contact us about it.
We're almost all adults here, and contrary to popular belief, we're really not out to harm anyone. It's all in fun. So relax.

Most complaints on articles written and printed by the staff will be acknowledged and if we find that we have been insensitive to our readers, we will issue an apology to those offended. However, in the case of the infamous personals, readers must understand that they are written by their fellow students. We cannot express this enough - WE DO NOT WRITE THE PERSONALS. The personals are an open forum for students to express their opinions and frustrations and do not reflect the views expressed by the Koala.

And if you're under 18 years of age, we're sure you know how important it is to get your parent or guardian's approval before you look at anything that might corrupt you. You don't want to be corrupted, do you? No, of course not. We don't want that either.

User avatar
drowned_saved
Posts: 135
Joined: Tue Sep 02, 2003 1:15 pm
Location: SoCal

Post by drowned_saved » Wed Nov 26, 2003 2:24 pm

Tiara wrote:Punishment of students for exercising their First Amendment rights is not appropriate. But their right to host racist/homophobic "hate speech" and unauthorized topless photos on the web server of a public university is questionable.
EXACTLY.
now proceed to crush this.

Post Reply

Return to “Open Discussion”