Liberals are the new Tea PartyABOUT 6 HOURS AGO
vox.com: a list of ideas you threw away a week ago
― El Tomboto, Monday, 6 February 2017 00:46 (seven years ago) link
https://twitter.com/ashleyfeinberg/status/828992942207594496
the verge is for people who like SCOOPLETS
― mh π, Tuesday, 7 February 2017 16:30 (seven years ago) link
I think I've grown to like The Verge more over the last year, but that's probably mostly stockholm syndrome.
β The beaver is not the bad guy (El Tomboto), Saturday, January 14, 2017 8:11 PM (three weeks ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink
otm, I feel like I enjoy the occasional article and then Nilay Patel shows up and makes me shake my head
― mh π, Tuesday, 7 February 2017 16:31 (seven years ago) link
@voxdotcomA defense of Betsy DeVoshttps://t.co/MWQlI4p7Gv
― mookieproof, Tuesday, 7 February 2017 17:44 (seven years ago) link
Indeed, as the alternative schooling movement spreads, one can imagine it attempting the same kind of capture that every other large industry aims for in its relations with the federal government.
oh indeed, indeed, maybe one should try to imagine that some more
― j., Tuesday, 7 February 2017 18:02 (seven years ago) link
yo vox your corporatist roots are showing
― mh π, Tuesday, 7 February 2017 18:12 (seven years ago) link
Joel and 9 Others β@joeljohnson 3h3 hours ago@johnjcook @reckless @pkafka @benpopper I was there. Direct ad pulls and interrupted deals were about a million. More importantly: who cares
Ashley FeinbergVerified accountthe people who experienced it firsthand deny it, seems like itβs worth an update especially when youβre giving gg-ers a false sense of power
v convincing. it wasn't what u said but more importantly, who cares. also let's not say things that make gg-ers feel powerful.
― Mordy, Tuesday, 7 February 2017 18:24 (seven years ago) link
yeah, sorry, the thread got dropped and I linked to the fun potshots part
https://twitter.com/johnjcook/status/828979581923241984
John Cookβ@johnjcook@reckless @pkafka @benpopper our '14 revenue was $45 million. GG started in august and didn't become a thing until october
so there's no way, unless their total revenue was incredibly inconsistent throughout the year, that they were disrupted by gg so badly they dropped that much money
tbf yes, all of these people that are no longer employed by a company that no longer exists are not presenting a unified front
― mh π, Tuesday, 7 February 2017 18:32 (seven years ago) link
also fucking yeah, make sure a number that seems large is real when it could provide encouragement to the dickhead anti-social justice keep on trumpin' brigade
― mh π, Tuesday, 7 February 2017 18:33 (seven years ago) link
i'm just saying that the only reason why that number is wrong is because it either is or isn't wrong, not because it might embolden some anonymous online dudes and saying "who cares" is the kind of thing that sets my internal veracity bells off.
― Mordy, Tuesday, 7 February 2017 18:37 (seven years ago) link
the only reason why that number is wrong is because it either is or isn't wrong
this is actually a very reasonable thing and based in the idea the number matters
in fact, it does matter as a gauge of scale, but on the other hand, the people using it as a gauge of scale will deride any correction to the article. cook's right -- it doesn't matter, the $7 million number is out there, if anyone wanted to be emboldened by it, they have their number and they'll deny any correction
― mh π, Tuesday, 7 February 2017 18:40 (seven years ago) link
there aren't any reasonable people out there who think "gamergate was bad, but if they had a multi-million dollar effect, then maybe I will reevaluate my stance"
― mh π, Tuesday, 7 February 2017 18:41 (seven years ago) link
http://www.heartofthedreaming.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/trustnoone.jpg
― Mordy, Tuesday, 7 February 2017 18:43 (seven years ago) link
imo that's a weakness of the "facts matter" brigade I am a part of too regularly
they only matter if: - they are relevant - they're part of a reasonable argument or narrative, single facts are ignored by people - you're arguing to people who will pay any attention to you whatsoever
― mh π, Tuesday, 7 February 2017 18:48 (seven years ago) link
http://gamedesignreviews.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/dontbe.jpg
― El Tomboto, Tuesday, 7 February 2017 20:15 (seven years ago) link
imo the greatest science is recognizing biases and emotional responses, very underappreciated
― mh π, Tuesday, 7 February 2017 20:16 (seven years ago) link
that's what all these dickhole data journalists think
― j., Tuesday, 7 February 2017 20:21 (seven years ago) link
touche
― mh π, Tuesday, 7 February 2017 20:21 (seven years ago) link
https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/02/behind-the-internets-dark-anti-democracy-movement/516243/
βNo,β said Nick Steves, the pseudonym used by one NRxer well-known within the movement. βIt will only lend false credence to the misleading facts and outright errors you will inevitably print irrespective of my involvement.βAsked what he thought I would print, Steves explained that β115 IQ people are not generally well equipped to summarize 160 IQ peopleβ and that only one journalist, Voxβs Dylan Matthews, had βcome close to permitting NRx to speak for itself.β
Asked what he thought I would print, Steves explained that β115 IQ people are not generally well equipped to summarize 160 IQ peopleβ and that only one journalist, Voxβs Dylan Matthews, had βcome close to permitting NRx to speak for itself.β
― j., Sunday, 12 February 2017 04:55 (seven years ago) link
160 IQ people who reference their IQ, as if citing that number wins every argument, are too stupid to understand what a 160 IQ is.
― a little too mature to be cute (Aimless), Sunday, 12 February 2017 05:08 (seven years ago) link
"Nick Steves""Dylan Matthews"
― El Tomboto, Sunday, 12 February 2017 05:14 (seven years ago) link
xp otm
― if young satchmo don't trumpet i'm gon shoot you (m bison), Sunday, 12 February 2017 05:30 (seven years ago) link
I would say we need a eugenics program to keep anyone who goes around professing a 160 iq from reproducing, but they're doing pretty well with that on their own.
― mh π, Sunday, 12 February 2017 14:59 (seven years ago) link
I can't believe I never started a thread on what a shit show wired magazine is
― El Tomboto, Monday, 13 February 2017 17:24 (seven years ago) link
who is writing for vox media?
http://deadspin.com/leaked-data-show-vast-majority-of-sb-nation-page-views-1803138754
like no kidding SB nation is an aggregator
I just assume all those volunteers are big Jon Bois fans and are just contributing their FanPosts as a sort of sweat-equity Patreon to keep the Jon Bois Content Dream alive.I mean who would not support this guy: https://www.sbnation.com/2017/7/24/16003968/17776-questions-and-answers
― El Tomboto, Wednesday, 13 September 2017 14:32 (six years ago) link
Suggest Ban Nation?
― President Keyes, Wednesday, 13 September 2017 14:37 (six years ago) link
it is boggling to me that there is still any audience for the verge or re/code since they are both terrible, overly earnest tech / nerd verticals that cover almost nothing that their competition doesn't, and the UX is still shit whether you're on mobile or desktop, etc etc.
I guess I still keep loading the verge in a tab from time to time because I hope one day it will improve despite knowing that the vox media house style is always going to grate and only 1 out of 40 times am I going to see anything I'm remotely interested in actually reading. It would be nice to see the whole farm pivot away from being so fucking watery and ditch the pretentiously neutered prose, but that seems highly unlikely. If it ain't broke don't fix it, I guess.
― El Tomboto, Sunday, 3 December 2017 01:50 (six years ago) link
went back to the verge again, they're asking what people would want in a membership / premium version (?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!!?!?!?!?!??!??!!?!!?!?) and they couldn't even cover the new Star Wars trailer properly. Also, hilariously, almost none of the ads loaded in Safari on mobile. everybody loses!
The entire Vox Media enterprise makes it crystal clear that the only thing that matters is how easy it is to buy and sell ads while keeping overhead (i.e. staff writer wages) as "reasonable" as possible. Whether or not I, consumer, click on the ads clearly has no bearing on the system; whether the content is remotely interesting to anyone is the most trivial concern. It's like the iMDB model exported to news verticals. If anybody who actually understands this shit first hand would care to educate me as to why I'm wrong I'd love to learn.
― El Tomboto, Sunday, 14 April 2019 18:42 (five years ago) link