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

http://jezebel.com/why-do-men-think-everything-is-a-sign-you-want-to-fuck-1720905862

ok

http://www.theonion.com/blogpost/why-do-all-these-homosexuals-keep-sucking-my-cock-10861

hahaa

http://gawker.com/call-donald-trumps-cell-phone-and-ask-him-about-his-imp-1720472577

i like imagining they did this out of respect to lindsey graham

http://lifehacker.com/5901898/take-a-break-and-play-some-video-games-this-weekend

I try to be love to all, but I really think that if you can't make it through an article about playing video games without 10 different ways to insert your lifehacking skills into the narrative there is something that heads healing in you.

can someone lifehack that sentence for me

xp- i mean... the guy writes for a website called lifehacker.com? probably not his fault

i don't even know what the punis but seeing "dick wet with chickenshit" makes me want to vomit

punis

LOL

Cloaca fucka flume

Oh no I meant the readers. Also 'needs' rather than 'heads'

How can I spare time for gaming when I have all this lifehacking to do?

http://gawker.com/everything-is-not-a-hack-1723431741

imagine if you could hack an entire life

classic material:

OMG I totally cut the top off of this juice bottle and now it can store my colored pencils there, what do you guys think of my SWEET JUICE BOTTLE HACK.

-- elmo argonaut, Thursday, 30 August 2007

i remember that post.

every time I cut the top off a bottle

ahem:

much later in the game, but:

[man alive]
December 16, 2014 ·
.
I feel like a lot of "lifehacks" are the same thing as Hints From Heloise, but rebranded.

10 Likes 2 Comments

Not everything is a gawk

lol h/t to the comment thread:

http://lifehacker.com/

who is kristin and why are there 500 days of here

her*

you never her

just read the 204 updates so far and you'll be right up to speed

bwaha gawker staff discovers brand guidelines

http://io9.com/here-is-adobes-attempt-to-stop-people-from-using-the-te-1726724005

gawker posted a giant photo of the ny daily news' front page and invoked 9/11 as some kind of defense idk

have they moved on from preventing another iraq war to preventing another 9/11?

i thought Brian Beutler was pretty persuasive on this, despite the fact that I've not seen the video yet:

http://www.newrepublic.com/article/122622/more-people-should-see-vester-flanagan-kill-his-coworkers-live-tv

the most hilarious argument ever. "we do this...because at some point it will effect public policy! sure, people've been looking at images and videos like this since Daniel Pearl and nothing's changed, but give us the time to harvest more clicks and surely the public will stop looking and start demanding action!"

it remains amazing and a point of some disgust that showing a woman's nipple of saying the word motherfucker is condemned as illegal both day and night on any basic cable/network television network or radio station in the land but as long as you put it behind the fig leaf of "this footage may be disturbing to some viewers", you can screen killings at 5pm in the name of truth and ratings

yeah i get the impulse but a president who'd just won reelection made gun control a priority following an elementary school being shot up and the issue got zero traction. just getting the issue back to where it was when the brady bill passed will take a long, slow effort.

http://lifehacker.com/5901898/take-a-break-and-play-some-video-games-this-weekend

― dick wet with chickenshit (Whiney G. Weingarten), Friday, August 7, 2015 9:50 PM (3 weeks ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

lmao

they should do a masturbation one with tips on how to hack lube

"Skip the lube and use coconut oil." Duh.

the most hilarious argument ever. "we do this...because at some point it will effect public policy! sure, people've been looking at images and videos like this since Daniel Pearl and nothing's changed, but give us the time to harvest more clicks and surely the public will stop looking and start demanding action!"

― tremendous crime wave and killing wave (Joan Crawford Loves Chachi), Thursday, August 27, 2015 8:15 PM (54 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

what about vegetarians showing us gruesome slaughterhouse carnage?

I don't watch that stuff, I'm not sure it does any good - except that its goal is largely "stop people, one viewer at a time, from eating meat" which anecdotally anyhow it maybe does? not sure the analogy holds -- most people, every day, are somehow connected to what goes down in a slaughterhouse, that's kind of the point of that footage -- "this is a daily occurrence that you fund if you eat meat, you may not know that this is going on." the message of a shooting video is not "you have actually shot somebody today or helped this person shoot somebody, here, watch this and stop shooting people"

people've been looking at images and videos like this since Daniel Pearl and nothing's changed

― tremendous crime wave and killing wave (Joan Crawford Loves Chachi), Thursday, August 27, 2015 8:15 PM (54 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

ppl (americans) generally as a group have not been looking at images like this, which is why showing them on the cover of a newspaper was controversial, maybe u wld like to argue that it will have no effect but to say its been tried is incorrect

fwiw non stop tv coverage of the veitnam war is widely credited as being key in turning public opinion against it which is why our government has worked hard to sanitize war reporting ever since

i think i'm actually at the point where i'm desensitized. like i used to w/ any tragedy on any kind of relatable scale just really dwell on the sadness, imagining being in those ppl's places, what there families were going thru, it would occupy my thoughts consistently for awhile, way beyond a normal emotional or rational reaction and probably just a manifestation of ever present depression. i mean i can get shook up by roadkill. and now w/ this i'm not even doing the 'how did this become normal?' thing anymore.

i certainly do not at all want to see the videos of this shit but im sympathetic to the argument that its newsworthy and has value

i'm sympathetic to that argument, i'm skeptical that a ny tabloid or a millennial bear blog possess the tact or skills to be doing it

i mean if just the right piece of journalism turns the tide on gun control it won't come in the form of gawker figuring out the precise reddit thread to plagiarize

sorry "aggregate" /fatjewish

gawker publish it cause they think thats what other journalists should do not cause they will single handedly turn the tide on gun control

i mean what all journalists

fwiw non stop tv coverage of the veitnam war is widely credited as being key in turning public opinion against it which is why our government has worked hard to sanitize war reporting ever since

this is totally true, but it's a pretty different world now, also war vs. gun legislation p. different issues. there was an editorial making the rounds, forget who by, that said look -- if we didn't do anything after sandy hook, that's it, that's the end, we'll never do anything, what we are is a people who're willing to pay whatever cost to have guns. I think that's true. if a classroom full of kindergarteners being murdered doesn't result in any legislative effort to do....anything as far as I know?, then i don't think footage of murders will tip the balance.

dude... you think someone wasn't like, "well we're clearly a nation of slave-owners, that's it, that's the end, we'll never do anything, what we are is a people who're willing to pay whatever cost to have slaves" ???

someone was exasperated at one point in time with every worthwhile movement ever