[xpatplayer]

(05-29-2014 03:14 PM)InternationalPlayboy Wrote:  

Any responsible fraternity gentleman knows not use listserve. BBM back in the day, upgraded to imessenger. So this shit doesn't happen.

These emails are pretty tame compared to the stuff that goes down regularly.

Racial jokes, gay jokes, whale jokes, anything not PC pretty much is thrown down. Drug use was so common, although I never dabbled in it. Our top floor was the weed floor, a certain wing of our 2nd floor was notorious doing cocaine. Underage drinking is amazing.

Ah college, freshman pussy was easy as hell. Hey, do you want some shots in my room?

This girl looks like the type who is just butt hurt no sorority would ever consider bidding her. Even bottom tier.

Sounds just like my chapter. Only we use Groupme. The listserv is great for logistics and inside jokes but anything even remotely illegal (including underage drinking) is off limits.

The Stanford Kappa Sigs must have been a bunch of dumbasses to keep a listserv detailing their illegal activities. Their E-board could have been arrested for condoning that shit.

[germanico]

So, Eric Stoltz found out some successful tech guy was a dick when in college (aka: "being a man in college") and now has a moral obligation to burn him.

Oh... please. Ill go get some popcorn.

[RawGod]

Hilarious that it's so hard to tell the sex of this person.

The sad thing is that I can walk down the street and everyone still looks either male or female. I mean 999 out of 1000 of people look pretty normal. But the one out of 1000 sad adrogyne becomes a journalist, congregates with all of the other weirdos and we have to read their bitchy shit.

[Blunt]

(05-29-2014 01:55 PM)Handsome Creepy Eel Wrote:  

We have actually already seen such a news report a few centuries ago...

[quote="Tomas de Torquemada"]I’ve known Juan de Siegel....

Epic response. These journalists have a complete lack of self-awareness.

Do they not remember what it was like to be 18?

[Foolsgo1d]

Looks like she/it felt left out when he didn't piss on her.

[El Chinito loco]

(05-29-2014 07:38 PM)Foolsgo1d Wrote:  

Looks like she/it felt left out when he didn't piss on her.

Maybe she/it doesn't have sex the conventional way and is able to fuck itself by possessing a set of genitalia from both genders. Kind of like one of those self replicating sea sponges.

[Jukes]

Prime example of what happen when a "chick" don' t like someone on first impression. Instead of hating the person and still show respect, they monitor that person to collect evidence. Numerous evidence until they get the gold. Haha! He is guilty. She is nothing but a hater who gave out sly comments to undermine him. " Feigning confidence..., " "tone of our conversation..., " and "tried to like him.... " If you are going to dress like a male at least perfect male traits.

[iknowexactly]

Ummm... does anyone else think it's unethical for her to publish someone's personal emails without their permission? Is it OK just because he's going to be a centimillioniare? Or OK because some other hater gossip got hold of his emails and did it first?

I don't see how I would publish someone's personal emails unless I thought it was a matter of public safety.

I think it was called the "Golden Rule"-- treat others like you'd like to be treated?

Would she like all her personal emails published for the world to see?

I see this as just inconsiderate and rude of her/it. If I'm old-fashioned, then good-- I want to stay that way and respect people's privacy unless there's an overriding reason not to.

[WestIndianArchie]

(05-29-2014 10:46 PM)iknowexactly Wrote:  

Ummm... does anyone else think it's unethical for her to publish someone's personal emails without their permission? Is it OK just because he's going to be a centimillioniare? Or OK because some other hater gossip got hold of his emails and did it first?

I don't see how I would publish someone's personal emails unless I thought it was a matter of public safety.

I think it was called the "Golden Rule"-- treat others like you'd like to be treated?

Would she like all her personal emails published for the world to see?

I see this as just inconsiderate and rude of her/it. If I'm old-fashioned, then good-- I want to stay that way and respect people's privacy unless there's an overriding reason not to.

Those are journalistic ethics.

Like the chick who tried to out the Bitcoin guy
The folks @ Business Insider who hunted down secret philanthropists.

The public has a "right" to know "everything", whether they were asking for it or not.
(unless it's a rape accuser)

As long as she and her editors deem it "newsworthy" it is, no matter what the motives or collateral damage.

WIA

[Emancipator]

Too bad he apologized. He should have used this to his advantage and agree and amplify.

"Yes I said those things, I created snapchat, so androgynous lesboes and the NSA won't bite you in the ass for things you've said in this always connected internet age".


American tech dominance is going to be threatened if we keep giving in to mentally ill freaks that dominate online journalism.

[iknowexactly]

(05-30-2014 12:37 AM)WestIndianArchie Wrote:  

(05-29-2014 10:46 PM)iknowexactly Wrote:  

Ummm... does anyone else think it's unethical for her to publish someone's personal emails without their permission? I

Those are journalistic ethics.

As long as she and her editors deem it "newsworthy" it is, no matter what the motives or collateral damage.

WIA

wait, you mean THAT is accepted journalistic ethics, among, like people with journalism degrees? EVERYONE'S private life, obtained presumably by violating some security provision is money to be made....?

And I don't mean the news that the NSA is monitoring everyone, THAT _SHOULD_ be publicized because it's a moral wrong and Constitutional violation, but this guy's personal opinions on sex etc, it's basically no one's business in my view.

This is one of the rare times I'm glad I'm older than everyone else here, and am still shocked when the basic respect of people's private communication is considered irrelevant.

[Lufty]

I'm really happy this sort of stuff came to light. I personally commit to only using products/inventions/applications made by women and nice guys. I think we need a "certified made chauvinism free sticker" on products to promote better consumer habits.

No but seriously the reason that tech is a such a male dominated sector is because no women want to code. I go to school in silicon valley and the number of female computer engineers is close to 0. I wonder when a reporter will mention that fact next time they write about gender in tech.

[WestIndianArchie]

(05-30-2014 12:54 AM)iknowexactly Wrote:  

(05-30-2014 12:37 AM)WestIndianArchie Wrote:  

(05-29-2014 10:46 PM)iknowexactly Wrote:  

Ummm... does anyone else think it's unethical for her to publish someone's personal emails without their permission? I

Those are journalistic ethics.

As long as she and her editors deem it "newsworthy" it is, no matter what the motives or collateral damage.

WIA

wait, you mean THAT is accepted journalistic ethics, among, like people with journalism degrees? EVERYONE'S private life, obtained presumably by violating some security provision is money to be made....?

And I don't mean the news that the NSA is monitoring everyone, THAT _SHOULD_ be publicized because it's a moral wrong and Constitutional violation, but this guy's personal opinions on sex etc, it's basically no one's business in my view.

This is one of the rare times I'm glad I'm older than everyone else here, and am still shocked when the basic respect of people's private communication is considered irrelevant.

I'd say the progression went something like this
Watergate - no more trust in government
CNN - need to fill up the air
Clinton impeachment - where private matters are public spectacle
OJ - spectacle to fill air time, find more spectacles
internet - always on, all the time, infinite "channels"
Charge businesses per impressions, then charge per click - now we have to get eyeballs

Friendster, Myspace -> Facebook -> Twitter -> Instagram -> Snapchat/Kik etcetera - eyeballs

Craig's List!! - kills real journalism
Perez Hilton - brings celebrity coverage to a new low
Gawker - combines the best of everything above to outrage you now.

This is where we are.

Real journalism is done.

Infotainment has been reduced to virals of "aww, cute hamster eating a burrito" and "OUTRAGE".

Right now on any given media platform, there are stories where reporters recount debates had over Twitter. Twitter beefs are legit news on lots of sites.

But back to the viral aspect. Take the Boko Haram. BH has been committing lots of terrorist activities over the years, and they kidnapped those girls more than a month ago. But it suddenly saturates the news cycle because of twitter.

#Hashtag_Activism
*"signs" petition @ change.org*
Waits for new "think piece" or "hate read" to go viral.

I'd say one of the biggest stories of today is Google letting people know that a Silicon Valley company is primarily run by White guys, Indians, and East Asians.

WHOA, MAJOR NEWS! Those tech guys must be wearing Klan hoods when they do interviews at major universities, and using algorithms to ferret out "suspicious" resumes. *smh*

But that topic dominates my feed. Slate, Salon, NYTimes, The Atlantic, Quartz, Wall Street Journal.

I end up getting most of the "real" news from link collections in my blog feed, but even those are susceptible to "Economist calculates value of Kimye Wedding Toilet."

RVF is not really much better. Everything Else usually features somebody posting the "drek" of the day. I might be that guy on some days actually.

But yeah, anything "tangible" that can be screen capped and made to go viral is fair game.

Everyone should be vigilant about what they say and do online, but few people have that kind of willpower to always view things incognito, use proxies, use really though protection, never give anyone good information...

Before long, we'll find out that IKnowExactly, doesn't actually know exactly.

WIA

[wavey007]

slightly off topic but does anyone know how to decrypt and view snapchats .nomedia files?

[RockHard]

(05-30-2014 01:07 AM)Lufty Wrote:  

No but seriously the reason that tech is a such a male dominated sector is because no women want to code. I go to school in silicon valley and the number of female computer engineers is close to 0. I wonder when a reporter will mention that fact next time they write about gender in tech.

Feminists will say it's because of the poisonous culture and that the women who start drop out.

I'm always frustrated that the women complaining about the lack of female programmers are always journalists or in soft areas like product management or design. If you want women to be coders, why not learn to write code?

#HashtagActivism. It's not that people don't have issues to fight for, it's that they're too lazy to fight for them. If you want a talk about entitlement, how the fact that every time someone screams "gender bias!" or "misogyny!", people who refuse to take their statement at face value are labeled bigots.

[Mekorig]

Whats is the reason that these "journalists" all look like Pat look-alikes?