qwazse Posted July 13, 2016 Share Posted July 13, 2016 Huh? One of the comments on the first page advocated for Trail Life USA. Post-modernism ... we all pick up at a different point in the narrative. Just checked now, and there were fewer inflammatory comments. Wasn't about to click through them all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwazse Posted July 13, 2016 Share Posted July 13, 2016 True, if more women blogged, half these comments would be verbally mauled by momma bears. However, I'm not thinking it's all about the "wholesome, hardworking, provider" ... Our church ladies love us! We're a new troop and when the Norwegian Supper rolled around we volunteered to help out wherever we could.... ... we are usually wearing the Class A's. My boys get so many extra beads by middle age mom pirates because they look like wholesome choir angels in comparison... By way of encouraging the boys in the troop, I try to remind them: Them chycks be all over young men in uniform. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
walk in the woods Posted July 13, 2016 Share Posted July 13, 2016 Fair number of stupid comments over at the WaPo version of the story. Including a narrative about how the camp leaders wanted to keep the dead eagle in order to pluck the feathers for OA head dresses. For parents, it's still a brand that they trust. For beleaguered organizations, it's a liability. These kinds of stories are good for 4H recruitment in my neck of the woods. Also a brand that parents trust with none of the baggage and gov't sponsorship to boot! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJCubScouter Posted July 13, 2016 Share Posted July 13, 2016 Comments on articles on the Internet generally are not the place to go to find wisdom. I find the New York Times to be an exception, but I am sure some here would attributed that to the NYT's reputation for being "liberal" - a reputation that is greatly exaggerated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Horizon Posted July 13, 2016 Share Posted July 13, 2016 A local paper started requiring a Facebook profile to log in and comment - in other words, no more anonymous trolling. It cut down the commentary significantly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cambridgeskip Posted July 14, 2016 Share Posted July 14, 2016 Another example of why you need to ignore the comments below the line. If you go and explore the Daily Mail website (roughly our equivalent of Fox News) you will find a story about a Portuguese submarine become tangled in the nets of a French trawler, 30ish miles off the south coast of the UK. Take a look at the readers comments below and you will find people who are unaware that territorial waters extend only 12 nautical miles off shore as per international law. People who are unaware that Portugal are actually the UK’s longest standing military allie meaning that we might not actually have an issue with their submarine. People unaware that with UK, France and Portugal all being part of NATO that our navy probably knew it was there anyway. People who are unaware of how EU fishing quotas work and think the French are stealing “our fishâ€. People who think the 200 mile territorial limit for economic activity should extend off the south coast meaning that most of northern France is within UK economic waters. And most crazy of all people who think that leaving the EU will somehow mean that fish in the English channel will increase in number over night and we can fish as much as we like without devastating fish stocks. In other words most of the commentators don’t seem to have 2 IQ points to rub together. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tampa Turtle Posted July 14, 2016 Share Posted July 14, 2016 True, if more women blogged, half these comments would be verbally mauled by momma bears. However, I'm not thinking it's all about the "wholesome, hardworking, provider" ... By way of encouraging the boys in the troop, I try to remind them: Them chycks be all over young men in uniform. And the parade is a great way for Dad to point out to his boys the difference between a Comely Lass with a poor sartorial choice vs a skank. An illustration: the young lady and her (seen better days) mom wearing matching 'F--- Me" Hats. The other day my son complained "Why are we eating in again! We are the only family I know where they always eat together!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tampa Turtle Posted July 14, 2016 Share Posted July 14, 2016 Another example of why you need to ignore the comments below the line. If you go and explore the Daily Mail website (roughly our equivalent of Fox News) you will find a story about a Portuguese submarine become tangled in the nets of a French trawler, 30ish miles off the south coast of the UK. Take a look at the readers comments below and you will find people who are unaware that territorial waters extend only 12 nautical miles off shore as per international law. People who are unaware that Portugal are actually the UK’s longest standing military allie meaning that we might not actually have an issue with their submarine. People unaware that with UK, France and Portugal all being part of NATO that our navy probably knew it was there anyway. People who are unaware of how EU fishing quotas work and think the French are stealing “our fishâ€. People who think the 200 mile territorial limit for economic activity should extend off the south coast meaning that most of northern France is within UK economic waters. And most crazy of all people who think that leaving the EU will somehow mean that fish in the English channel will increase in number over night and we can fish as much as we like without devastating fish stocks. In other words most of the commentators don’t seem to have 2 IQ points to rub together. Exactly. But you still have Larry the Cat. God Save the Queen...and Larry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJCubScouter Posted July 14, 2016 Share Posted July 14, 2016 A local paper started requiring a Facebook profile to log in and comment - in other words, no more anonymous trolling. It cut down the commentary significantly. My local daily newspaper does something similar on its web site. I think comments can only be posted through Facebook, so your real name gets attached to it. (Though I know people who have Facebook sites under fake names, which makes sense for the purpose of posting comments that you don't necessarily want to have associated with yourself, but defeats most of the other purposes of having a Facebook account. Having said that, I would be very happy not to have a Facebook account. I have one, but virtually never use it. Unfortunately that means I have Facebook-bots emailing me every couple days pleading with me to come back, read my notifications, respond to friend requests, etc.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SSScout Posted July 15, 2016 Share Posted July 15, 2016 If you Google this unfortunate episode, you will find many explications. Most repeat the original Wash Post info (go to the original source ) , and then give it their own particular twist on things. The folks that read any particular webfeed will be of that relative type of person, usually, but not always (thankfully, "we" are not very homogenous still) If you want a more varied sample of the human response to a particular event, go to other webpages and look on with a smile as those with lots of extra time on their hands and keyboard (like us??) give vent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now