hey gawker dudes. what the fuck is wrong with you?

gosh it rly is

my first post in this thread was a response to this again I'm not sure what 'lols' gawker is being accused of propagating in that article that aren't an inherent part of the story where i tried to explain why people could be offended by calling someone a "horny mom" after saying they may have been assaulted. the thread then devolved to the familiar "everybody arguing with d-40 about how he's not making sense/trolling/missing the point, and vica versa" - or rather i joined in on the devolving in process, as it had already reached the place where people were calling each other names.

and while i could give myself the same "they're disingenuous/stupid, i'm on a quixotic quest to call out bullshit" vanity everyone does (and d-40 copped to), when it gets to a name-calling place clearly the participants aren't just discussing the issue but trying to give each other verbal noogies. so yeah, if you want to call that "trolling" you're not wrong. though, again, pretending "didn't you write for them" is a low blow in response to "i'm nowhere near getting a gig at gawker" is obviously dubious.

I didn't think that was a low blow I was just literally drawing a line about us discussing my resume, in part bc I don't think it bears any relevence to the argument (I wrote one piece for them 3 years ago) and in part because I simply would rather not talk about my job on ilx which I think is a very reasonable request !

nice are we going to talk about my career now? just going to flag post you now & pass out, eat shit

this reads more like the recipient of a low blow than "a reasonable request"

how about "a very straightforward and understandable request"

Are we done yet

oh i'm sure there will be a sequel

the budget on these things are very cheap and the stars clearly have nothing better on their slate

Speaking of work I should just get you to line edit my writing

only if i can charge you for the time spent debating my line edits

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aCbfMkh940Q

That's a joke btw

i'd say generally da croupier wins the overall dog with a bone prize anyday, but you both could probably keep it going forever. is it popcorn gif-worthy though? you have to think of your audience. you want repeat clicks.

Why would I pay when you can argue here for free

im sure we could have a whipround and organise you not to

might as well be here as anywhere

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5bW2Q1i5Yik

bump

there are all sorts of things that have a demand that nobody is obliged to supply

What was this argument even about to begin with?

hi, I'm back. What's going on?

http://lemasney.com/consulting/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/20111202.png

It was a great national opportunity to talk about the role of the news media and about human memory. Kidding! Mostly it was people being total jerks online.

Jesus the writing in that Choire Sicha piece

I don't remember which came first, being unable to pay attention cos it ws too annoying or not knowing what I ws even meant to be attending to cos the tone ws so mercilessly "jokey"

Gawker: a tight ship

is it a gawker thing or a US thing to report on methods of suicide?

a tabloid thing in general? maybe there are laws or something in Britain where some topics are harder to cover for reasons of privacy?

uk editors' code of practice says When reporting suicide, care should be
taken to avoid excessive detail about the method used. but the gutter press frequently ignores this

you dont even report it as suicide here. "tragically" is a codeword.

well now that wd depend who it was surely?

tragically not

The Tragically Not

Don't all newspapers report the method of suicide?

AP style on it is as follows according to the most recent updates, fwiw:

Generally, AP does not cover suicides or suicide attempts, unless the person involved is a well-known figure or the circumstances are particularly unusual or publicly disruptive. Suicide stories, when written, should not go into detail on methods used.

that said more than a few papers/publications don't observe strict AP style the most obv example being the new york times

journalistic ethics guidelines are more than a little like medieval usury laws

no really, it's like . . . hemiola

... Plz, bring it

This is the most passive aggressive thread lol

Nah I feel like the two of us have done a pretty good job making it aggressive-aggressive

aggressive-regressive

it was a fun thread to drink to, anyway

as the sun rises in the east, so must the denton-smith pissing contest rage on
http://gawker.com/vice-and-bank-of-america-are-making-overdraft-fees-cool-1699215602

xps lol there's no point in 'bringing it' -- the world doesn't need several dozen more posts of your relentless stupidity -- i was just a lil frustrated after having caught up on the thread

when you talk nonsense about music and musicians tell you you're full of shit and then you keep going anyway, it's kind of cute in a look-at-the-seven-year-old way. when whiney zings you he's just playing peekaboo with a baby! when you talk nonsense about other things it isn't cute, just dumb

that amy pascal jezebel piece whoa

http://jezebel.com/this-is-amazing-amy-pascals-cheap-crotch-intensive-bea-1698863025

that is a sterling example of the kind of blithe, pious sociopathy a pro-blogging gig can encourage, right down to the "no it's a compliment, besides who cares they're rich and famous!"

xps lol there's no point in 'bringing it' -- the world doesn't need several dozen more posts of your relentless stupidity -- i was just a lil frustrated after having caught up on the thread

when you talk nonsense about music and musicians tell you you're full of shit and then you keep going anyway, it's kind of cute in a look-at-the-seven-year-old way. when whiney zings you he's just playing peekaboo with a baby! when you talk nonsense about other things it isn't cute, just dumb

― mookieproof, Tuesday, April 21, 2015 12:55 PM (29 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

Stop beating around the bush-- I literally don't know what your problem is not what you're even talking about most of the time here-- if you have an issue stop being a vague punk and tell me wtf the problem is

"Relentless stupidity" I call bullshit ... You're clearly angry about something specific

first para here breaks it down to an extent http://www.fastcompany.com/3045297/today-in-tabs/today-in-tabs-lemon-aid

when you talk nonsense about music and musicians tell you you're full of shit and then you keep going anyway

Like wtf is this even a reference to? A three year old argument you're clearly misremembering? (I was a musician you dumb fuck)

I thought this stupid argument is over but Mookie is picking at the scab