Stupid Work Annoyances

bullD · Post by **bullD** » Wed Jan 19, 2005 2:50 pm

another fucking work annoyance:

I work my ass off, it's good work, honest work, most of the time I am happy with it, BUT, people are making millions off of shit like this:

33.5M Tune in for 'Idol' Debut
(AP) - TV viewers couldn't wait for their "American Idol" fix, turning out 33.5 million strong for its season debut. No other show this season has attracted so large an audience, and it represented the third-highest ratings night of entertainment programming in the Fox network's history, Nielsen Media Research said Wednesday. The 33.5 million was a preliminary estimate. More...

What fucking gives? If that is what it takes to make millions, ie, get an asshole and some other fuckers to talk shit about people in their faces, then I wouldn't have anything to do with it.

fukin hell!!!

Force · Post by **Force** » Wed Jan 19, 2005 2:51 pm

4 Women of the Apocalypse wrote:* yawn *

we are bored now...

but we'll find you later...

Look, if you can't come up with a good argument, just say so.

stuart · Post by **stuart** » Wed Jan 19, 2005 2:51 pm

Kindly explain how apologizing for something is failing to take responsibility for it.

when it appears to be more of an equivocation

4 Women of the Apocalypse · Post by **4 Women of the Apocalypse** » Wed Jan 19, 2005 2:51 pm

find the words "i'm sorry" in one of your posts - not followed by an action of ours ("i'm sorry YOU misinterpreted", "i'm sorry YOU were offended") - but only, sincerely, "i'm sorry", and we'll stop now.

GuinivereElise · Post by **GuinivereElise** » Wed Jan 19, 2005 2:53 pm

GuinivereElise wrote:
Force wrote:I wholeheartedly apologize for accidentally making people think I consider ALL women (or men or wallabies, or whatever) vindictive beasts when nothing could be farther from the truth.

If I had only had a FUCKING EDIT BUTTON, we probably all could have had a much more pleasant time.
you wonder why you're still feeling attacked:

statements like the above are all well and good, but, once again, you're not taking responsibility for your actions. It's the edit button's fault, it's our fault for not interpreting your statment properly.

you didn't MAKE ME THINK anything. You made an offensive statement, and continue to try to skirt responsibilty for it.

i'm entirely GLAD that there is no edit button. It forces you to accept the consequences for your actions.

once again (this is the third time, for some of this. force, do I need to use the really big font for you??)

stuart · Post by **stuart** » Wed Jan 19, 2005 2:53 pm

The 33.5 million was a preliminary estimate...

of the number of people going straight to hell

samtzu · Post by **samtzu** » Wed Jan 19, 2005 2:57 pm

stuart wrote:
The 33.5 million was a preliminary estimate...
of the number of people going straight to hell

Reason #425 that I disconnected my cable with an ax...

Force · Post by **Force** » Wed Jan 19, 2005 3:03 pm

4 Women of the Apocalypse wrote:find the words "i'm sorry" in one of your posts - not followed by an action of ours ("i'm sorry YOU misinterpreted", "i'm sorry YOU were offended") - but only, sincerely, "i'm sorry", and we'll stop now.

Force wrote:I wholeheartedly apologize for accidentally making people think I consider ALL women (or men or wallabies, or whatever) vindictive beasts when nothing could be farther from the truth.

I don't see the word you in my apology, and it seems pretty clear that I'm taking responsibility for not communicating what I actually feel towards women, so if that's what you're reading into it, then why don't you fucking write the apology that you want to hear and I'll put my name on it.

That seems to be about the only thing that will satisfy you, so if that's what it takes for you to let this go, then so be it.

samtzu · Post by **samtzu** » Wed Jan 19, 2005 3:07 pm

Force wrote:
4 Women of the Apocalypse wrote:find the words "i'm sorry" in one of your posts - not followed by an action of ours ("i'm sorry YOU misinterpreted", "i'm sorry YOU were offended") - but only, sincerely, "i'm sorry", and we'll stop now.

Force wrote:I wholeheartedly apologize for accidentally making people think I consider ALL women (or men or wallabies, or whatever) vindictive beasts when nothing could be farther from the truth.
I don't see the word you in my apology, and it seems pretty clear that I'm taking responsibility for not communicating what I actually feel towards women, so if that's what you're reading into it, then why don't you fucking write the apology that you want to hear and I'll put my name on it.

That seems to be about the only thing that will satisfy you, so if that's what it takes for you to let this go, then so be it.

What they (and probably most of us) are waiting for is a clear definition of how you really feel about women... which hasn't come up yet without some reference to what has been said on this post. I am curious, myself.
Because the original post you wrote was blatantly sexist. If you put "Black" in the place of the word "woman" or "women" you would be (or should be) embarassed by what you wrote... or would you?

geekster · Post by **geekster** » Wed Jan 19, 2005 3:07 pm

Want to know why network TV likes "reality television"? It's okay, I will tell you anyway.

Look at Survivor ... they pay ONE cast member 1 Million bucks. It is a very popular show. They make a MINT off of it. Looking at other conventional shows with the same popularity, they need to pay the cast members MILLIONS PER EPISODE ... not one million for the ENTIRE SERIES. Reality TV is a cash cow for the networks.

It would be funny to have an entire cast of Survivor or the singers on Americal Idol go on strike to be paid the same amount as other actors in shows of comparable popularity.

theCryptofishist · Post by **theCryptofishist** » Wed Jan 19, 2005 3:12 pm

Speaking of which, did you see the news squib about the original winner of Survivor (richard was it?) cheating on his taxes--including the million dollars he won.

Besides, they don't have to pay caterers either.

Force · Post by **Force** » Wed Jan 19, 2005 3:15 pm

As I've explained before, I never said that ALL women would discriminate.

I've agreed I didn't word it very well, AND I've gone on to explain how I feel toward women, namely, they're just like men, some good, some bad. That goes for blacks or any other color.

AND I've apologized for giving offense. Apparently not with the exact words the nitpickers want to hear.

So what the fuck more do you assholes want? Fuck you if you think I'm going to try and prove to this fucking kangaroo court that I'm a sensitive unprejudiced peach of a guy.

Given that I've explained all this NUMEROUS times already, kindly explain to me why what you're all doing now isn't just a pile-on.

DVD Burner · Post by **DVD Burner** » Wed Jan 19, 2005 3:18 pm

The cast of charcters of eplaya need to be a reality t.v. show.

1 billion viewers min. for sure.

stuart · Post by **stuart** » Wed Jan 19, 2005 3:18 pm

the motivation is not purely financial. People fucking love the shit. They get better ratings than most of the tired sitcoms. All that location shooting is pricey and difficult as well. But yeah, it's cheaper than paying the cast of friends for sure.

theCryptofishist · Post by **theCryptofishist** » Wed Jan 19, 2005 3:19 pm

Then I get the million bucks.

samtzu · Post by **samtzu** » Wed Jan 19, 2005 3:19 pm

fuckhead wrote:

So what the fuck more do you assholes want? Fuck you if you think I'm going to try and prove to this fucking kangaroo court that I'm a sensitive unprejudiced peach of a guy.

Well, that pretty much covers it for me... asshole...

DVD Burner · Post by **DVD Burner** » Wed Jan 19, 2005 3:19 pm

damn, I dont pay attention to my spelling, so Fuck it.

DVD Burner · Post by **DVD Burner** » Wed Jan 19, 2005 3:21 pm

This is just so much better than T.V.

I tell ya.

Force · Post by **Force** » Wed Jan 19, 2005 3:23 pm

samtzu wrote:Force wrote:
So what the fuck more do you assholes want? Fuck you if you think I'm going to try and prove to this fucking kangaroo court that I'm a sensitive unprejudiced peach of a guy.
Well, that pretty much covers it for me... asshole...

Actually, I didn't mean you, rather the other nitpickers.

Sorry you got caught in the blast.

But I think you see my point, that trying to prove myself would likely be a futile endeavour.

stuart · Post by **stuart** » Wed Jan 19, 2005 3:24 pm

Actually, I didn't mean you, rather the other nitpickers.

Sorry you got caught in the blast.

observe the pattern

GuinivereElise · Post by **GuinivereElise** » Wed Jan 19, 2005 3:33 pm

Force wrote:
samtzu wrote:
fuckstick wrote:So what the fuck more do you assholes want? Fuck you if you think I'm going to try and prove to this fucking kangaroo court that I'm a sensitive unprejudiced peach of a guy.
Well, that pretty much covers it for me... asshole...
Actually, I didn't mean you, rather the other nitpickers.

Sorry you got caught in the blast.

But I think you see my point, that trying to prove myself would likely be a futile endeavour.

it covers it for me, too, You're an insensitive, prejudiced piece of poo, as far as I'm concerned. That is based entirely on the evidence I've seen. You may try to prove yourself otherwise, but if it's simply more your illogical drivel, save your breath.

theCryptofishist · Post by **theCryptofishist** » Wed Jan 19, 2005 3:35 pm

Force wrote:It also helps that she lacks a penis- there are NO men at the executive level in this company.

Moral; NEVER join a company run by women unless you're prepared to bear the brunt of all the anger and resentment that women have towards men for years of oppression, discrimination and/or not desiring them despite the fact that they may be hundreds of pounds overweight, abrasive, obnoxious, stupid, etc.

There's no amount of money that's worth it.

Hm. What could have been said?

It makes a difference to me that she's a woman and that there are no men at the executive level in this company. Which means there's no translator of the cultural/sexual differences who she can have an honest one to one with and get a gut check from.

I've joined two companies run by women and in both places felt that I was recieving payback for some of the anger and resentment that these women had towards men for years of oppression, discrimination, and living in a culture where women cannot fulfill the impossible standards of desiribilty, and are doubly damned for trying to compete in the business world.

I ended up feeling underpaid both times, despite the decent paychecks.

Of course, the fishy has spent too much time hearing about "I messages" and took it too much to heart.

*splash*

bullD · Post by **bullD** » Wed Jan 19, 2005 3:36 pm

stuart wrote:the motivation is not purely financial. People fucking love the shit. They get better ratings than most of the tired sitcoms. All that location shooting is pricey and difficult as well. But yeah, it's cheaper than paying the cast of friends for sure.

True! My lordy, what does, this has been asked before and will be again, what does this say about the people that do love that fucking brainless shit?

theCryptofishist · Post by **theCryptofishist** » Wed Jan 19, 2005 3:43 pm

Oh, I could see it. I've never watched more than 5 or 10 minutes altogether, but if it were set up right, it could say a lot about human behavior. I don't think it says much about "surviving" in the social or individual context, but there's plenty of classic novels about manipulation and backstabbing.

bullD · Post by **bullD** » Wed Jan 19, 2005 3:46 pm

disclaimer: if I have offended any person by saying the above, well, sorry. But, it IS stupid fucking brainless shit.

Force · Post by **Force** » Wed Jan 19, 2005 3:50 pm

Well, thanks GE for proving my point as to how futile it would be for me to try and say ANYTHING in my defense to you.

Fishy, I do appreciate the suggestion, but all the men where I work know the score, and writing my post that way wouldn't accurately convey what I'm experiencing.

Unfortunately one can't speak truth in PC-land.

Hope you all feel just terribly superior now.

I don't hear anyone acknowleding my apology, I thought you superior people did that graciously.

Here, I'll even meet the nitpickers halfway and reword it as they seem to want it, though to me it says the same thing;

I'm sorry I accidentally (what do you expect me to say, that I did it intentionally?) made people think I consider ALL women (or men or wallabies, or whatever) vindictive beasts when nothing could be farther from the truth.

Rian Jackson · Post by **Rian Jackson** » Wed Jan 19, 2005 3:54 pm

The Wise Man wrote:Did you guys ever notice how the word 'misology' - a hatred of argument, reasoning, or enlightenment - is listed in Webster's right after the word 'misogynistic' - having a showing a hatred or distrust of women?

Weird, huh?

GuinivereElise · Post by **GuinivereElise** » Wed Jan 19, 2005 3:55 pm

Fuckstick wrote:Well, thanks GE for proving my point as to how futile it would be for me to try and say ANYTHING in my defense to you.

.

it would be futile NOW, now that you've made a complete ass of yourself by your inability to discuss rationally or critically, to acknowledge the statements of others and respond accordingly, and by your unwillingness to accept that, perhaps, you have some growing to do.

I'm finished with this.

you are dismissed.

GuinivereElise · Post by **GuinivereElise** » Wed Jan 19, 2005 3:56 pm

oh, and by the way. You're 'superior' comments really seem to be working for you. Keep those up.

*nodding*

yeah.

Rian Jackson · Post by **Rian Jackson** » Wed Jan 19, 2005 3:56 pm

GuinivereElise wrote:
Fuckstick wrote:Well, thanks GE for proving my point as to how futile it would be for me to try and say ANYTHING in my defense to you.

.
it would be futile NOW, now that you've made a complete ass of yourself by your inability to discuss rationally or critically, to acknowledge the statements of others and respond accordingly, and by your unwillingness to accept that, perhaps, you have some growing to do.

I'm finished with this.

you are dismissed.

it's ok honey.. some people never got the hang of english.
maybe we can assume that force is one of them instead of assuming that he's an ass.