I just really miss the era of the Internet when we had places like blogs and websites and message boards to share ideas and have discussions, and we had tools like RSS feed readers to subscribe to websites and blogs without an algorithm "curating" your feed for you. We entered into a cycle where so much of the conversation moved to the walled garden social networks, the remaining message boards started declining in popularity so they ended up shutting down and turning into Facebook groups. With fewer people reading blogs or using feed readers, bloggers all moved to social media too and tools like Google Reader shut down. Now the only way to communicate online (other than about a handful niche topics where message boards, like this one, still exist) is to use social networks and deal with all of the grossness that comes along with them. We created a monster and we really shouldn't have let it happen this way.

More...

 

 

10 minutes ago, taestell said:

I just really miss the era of the Internet when we had places like blogs and websites and message boards to share ideas and have discussions, and we had tools like RSS feed readers to subscribe to websites and blogs without an algorithm "curating" your feed for you. We entered into a cycle where so much of the conversation moved to the walled garden social networks, the remaining message boards started declining in popularity so they ended up shutting down and turning into Facebook groups. With fewer people reading blogs or using feed readers, bloggers all moved to social media too and tools like Google Reader shut down. Now the only way to communicate online (other than about a handful niche topics where message boards, like this one, still exist) is to use social networks and deal with all of the grossness that comes along with them. We created a monster and we really shouldn't have let it happen this way.

 

 

Zuckerburg wanted forums dead despite Facebook being a platform that was inferior in every single way to forums for sharing technical information. He weaponized the fact that each forum requires separate signups and logins to kill them that way... by diverting less internet-savvy users that might otherwise have valuable information and experience to his unsearchable, non-linear, improperly-threaded Groups where information is dispersed like candy thrown from a parade float.

Edited October 22, 20195 yr by GCrites80s

I'm really glad that people are finally having the conversation about what on the internet is actually worthwhile and what isn't. For a while there (from say 2005 on) there was this sense that the internet could do no wrong and that anybody who pointed out faults was trying to be l33t or whatever. A lot of this stuff that has come along really isn't any better than 2005 internet. We thought it was going to be, but after some reflection, failed experiments and trillions of dollars in losses we found out otherwise. Sure internet video is better than 2005... but that's mostly movies and TV just without the tape or disc.

30 minutes ago, taestell said:

I just really miss the era of the Internet when we had places like blogs and websites and message boards to share ideas and have discussions, and we had tools like RSS feed readers to subscribe to websites and blogs without an algorithm "curating" your feed for you. We entered into a cycle where so much of the conversation moved to the walled garden social networks, the remaining message boards started declining in popularity so they ended up shutting down and turning into Facebook groups. With fewer people reading blogs or using feed readers, bloggers all moved to social media too and tools like Google Reader shut down. Now the only way to communicate online (other than about a handful niche topics where message boards, like this one, still exist) is to use social networks and deal with all of the grossness that comes along with them. We created a monster and we really shouldn't have let it happen this way.

 

What you just described sounds just like suburbanization of America in the 20th Century. We used to have unique places full of life and interesting stories. You just had to know where to look, or meet people who also liked the same things to show you the way.

 

Then we were lured to the new sites like Facebook, and we saw the rather rapid decline of the early stages of the internet. Now, people have started to grow unhappy with the monotony of Facebook, and are started to be lured back to old sites because they realize it creates a better experience.

 

Interestingly, it appears to be Gen X-ers and Millennials who are moving away from these types of sites (in my experience). The boomers have fully embraced Facebook, just like the suburbs. 

 

Gen Z seems to have moved away from the early suburbs (Facebook) and quickly adapt to new sites that will likely come and go as tastes change and as they are bought out by the Facebooks of the world who try to stay relevant with younger generations. None of the new sites are likely to stick around in the long term because of this. Not sure if there is a metaphor here for Gen Z and the built environment. It may be too soon to tell, since the oldest Gen Z person is ~22 years old (which people often forget when they complain about Millennials).

It's funny that you make that analogy because, as I was typing my post, a similar analogy was starting to develop in my head. The weird thing is that all of these other tools (blogging software, message board software, non-algorithmic photo sharing sites) still exist, they just feel empty and abandoned because a majority of the activity has moved to social networks — not too different than how most of the infrastructure of cities remained in place but felt increasingly empty as people moved out to suburbs and stores moved into shopping malls. All that it would take to reactivate these spaces is people deciding that they don't want to deal with the Facebook and Twitter anymore and shifting their activity back to those places. At the same time, Facebook is shifting their focus to "new urbanist lifestyle centers" like Instagram and WhatsApp that have the illusion of being hip, independent spaces but in reality are owned by the same conglomerate that owns the shopping malls.

35 minutes ago, GCrites80s said:

I'm really glad that people are finally having the conversation about what on the internet is actually worthwhile and what isn't. For a while there (from say 2005 on) there was this sense that the internet could do no wrong and that anybody who pointed out faults was trying to be l33t or whatever. A lot of this stuff that has come along really isn't any better than 2005 internet. We thought it was going to be, but after some reflection, failed experiments and trillions of dollars in losses we found out otherwise. Sure internet video is better than 2005... but that's mostly movies and TV just without the tape or disc.

 

Lots of douchery is taking over youtube's videos, but there are still scruffy unslick characters out there like Doug Demuro or the many good skateboarding, BMX, and mountain biking channels.  

 

 

 

 

 

 

14 minutes ago, taestell said:

It's funny that you make that analogy because, as I was typing my post, a similar analogy was starting to develop in my head. The weird thing is that all of these other tools (blogging software, message board software, non-algorithmic photo sharing sites) still exist, they just feel empty and abandoned because a majority of the activity has moved to social networks — not too different than how most of the infrastructure of cities remained in place but felt increasingly empty as people moved out to suburbs and stores moved into shopping malls. All that it would take to reactivate these spaces is people deciding that they don't want to deal with the Facebook and Twitter anymore and shifting their activity back to those places. At the same time, Facebook is shifting their focus to "new urbanist lifestyle centers" like Instagram and WhatsApp that have the illusion of being hip, independent spaces but in reality are owned by the same conglomerate that owns the shopping malls.

 

There's a bit of wanting it both ways for Millennials, Gen X, and Gen Z. They want things to be super convenient, and for that convenience to be super cheap for them. There's still a lack of person-to-person connection in the urban environment. Part of that is the popularity of Netflix and similar services. Annual or monthly subscriptions for unlimited access to entertainment means you don't need to leave the house, even if you live in an otherwise bustling area. There's less of a need for people to leave the house for entertainment.

 

The other half is socialization. When people are out socializing, a lot of people are still using the Internet to socialize even in person-to-person situations. You'll see people at dinner, at the bar, in a park, at a concert, etc. checking their instagram feeds or messaging other groups of people not present. I'm guilty of it at times, too, but try to be hyper aware of it. So even as people are moving back to urban areas, they aren't fully back like they would be without the introduction of wireless data. They sometimes feel like a shadow of their former selves.

 

I know people who have given up their cellular data for Lent (or other similar times). I try to make an effort to avoid using my phone when I'm with other people (unless it's to look something up we are actively talking about and "need" info on). 

 

Just now, ryanlammi said:

 

There's a bit of wanting it both ways for Millennials, Gen X, and Gen Z. They want things to be super convenient, and for that convenience to be super cheap for them. There's still a lack of person-to-person connection in the urban environment. Part of that is the popularity of Netflix and similar services. Annual or monthly subscriptions for unlimited access to entertainment means you don't need to leave the house, even if you live in an otherwise bustling area. There's less of a need for people to leave the house for entertainment.

 

The other half is socialization. When people are out socializing, a lot of people are still using the Internet to socialize even in person-to-person situations. You'll see people at dinner, at the bar, in a park, at a concert, etc. checking their instagram feeds or messaging other groups of people not present. I'm guilty of it at times, too, but try to be hyper aware of it. So even as people are moving back to urban areas, they aren't fully back like they would be without the introduction of wireless data. They sometimes feel like a shadow of their former selves.

 

I know people who have given up their cellular data for Lent (or other similar times). I try to make an effort to avoid using my phone when I'm with other people (unless it's to look something up). 

 

Universal Couchlock is totally a thing, but I even see people become constantly frustrated with the sheer amount of content that is removed from streaming services on a weekly basis. It's just gone and a lot of times doesn't turn up anywhere else. We get tons of people now coming in for DVDs so that they can have the content forever. Or for things like Revenge of the Nerds that have been completely banned from the internet.

 

I don't see how someone can use Facebook on their phone when drinking in a bar with all of that activity around. One false finger tap of just 1/100 of an inch can lead to social disaster. Anybody here wondering why I'm often the last visitor to their UO profile? It's because the little star or dot that lets you go to the newest post is a mere .5 millimeter from the last poster's username. I fat-finger it all the time... sober.

11 minutes ago, jmecklenborg said:

 

Lots of douchery is taking over youtube's videos, but there are still scruffy unslick characters out there like Doug Demuro or the many good skateboarding, BMX, and mountain biking channels.  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I don't like this years algo for finding that stuff. The early 2018 one was much better.

1 hour ago, GCrites80s said:

I've noticed that now people are much less willing to share their relationship status with Facebook. I imagine that was one of their key data points for both marketing and data collection reasons and now they aren't able to obtain it.

 

I think it has more to do with the fact that relationship status is much less well defined than it was even a few years ago.   And is often enough defined differently within a couple.

 

It's lot like the definition of what is, and is not, a "date" has changed.

Also this:

 

https://www.cnet.com/news/facebook-now-faces-47-attorneys-general-in-antitrust-probe/

 

Facebook now faces 47 attorneys general in antitrust probe

The investigation has picked up support from across the US.

 

New York Attorney General Letitia James on Monday said 47 attorneys general are now part of an investigation into Facebook over potential antitrust violations. The investigation, which was announced in September, will focus on Facebook's dominance and potential anticompetitive conduct stemming that position. 

 

...

 

As the world's largest social network, Facebook has become a central force in many people's lives online. It also owns photo app Instagram, messaging service WhatsApp and virtual reality company Oculus. Critics argue that the social network has been simply buying up its competition. 

 

And Facebook doesn't just face an antitrust investigation from these states. In June, the House antitrust subcommittee said it was launching an investigation of Facebook, Google and other tech companies. The Federal Trade Commission and the Department of Justice are also both reportedly investigating Facebook over antitrust concerns.

 

=======================================

 

I'm one of the early-days adopters of Facebook, from back when you still needed a *.edu e-mail, and I still have a soft spot for it despite various changes over time that I haven't always liked (though some I have).  But more recent changes than not have been positive, I think, especially the refocusing on Groups and Events (which are, I'm sure not entirely coincidentally, the two parts that I use the most): https://www.theverge.com/2019/4/30/18523265/facebook-events-groups-redesign-news-feed-features-f8-2019.

 

A Facebook Group still doesn't have the same comprehensive functionality of a Meetup Group, but it's also free and doesn't require keeping track of an additional membership and associated login info.  My high school class is using one right now to plan our [gulp] 20-year reunion next year.  Our 5-year reunion never even happened because we were trying to organize by (IIRC) listserv, and people's e-mail addresses were unreliable (and snail mail is slow and expensive and can also be subject to bad addresses almost as easily as e-mail).

 

And Facebook Events is incredibly convenient for a time-strapped parent looking for kid-friendly events, when a lot of one's social circle is still childless and therefore word-of-mouth might not reach you.

 

Facebook Marketplace has practically done to Craigslist what Craigslist did to newspaper ads.  My wife shops all the time on Facebook Marketplace and sends me out to pick things up after work, without a care in the world.  I let her know once that I was picking up something I bought on Craigslist and she wanted me to have a gun before I went.

 

But I won't deny that it's challenging to resist checking what's happening on Facebook even when I'm on my mobile in public with people IRL, even knowing that's a bad habit.

5 minutes ago, E Rocc said:

 

I think it has more to do with the fact that relationship status is much less well defined than it was even a few years ago.   And is often enough defined differently within a couple.

 

It's lot like the definition of what is, and is not, a "date" has changed.

 

I've totally given up on trying to explain this to Mother

14 minutes ago, GCrites80s said:

I don't see how someone can use Facebook on their phone when drinking in a bar with all of that activity around. 

 

I used to go to bars by myself and still go to 1-2 concerts by myself per year if I can't find someone to go.  It's not a big deal since I usually run into somebody I know or I talk to a random person.  

The events is the only real reason I still check Facebook. I don't think I would delete it if events were less important, but I would probably go weeks without checking it if it weren't for the events (and I use it for pages that I co-run, that use Facebook to interact with a lot of people who do regularly use Facebook).

Just now, jmecklenborg said:

 

I used to go to bars by myself and still go to 1-2 concerts by myself per year if I can't find someone to go.  It's not a big deal since I usually run into somebody I know or I talk to a random person.  

 

You can do that in Cincinnati. In Columbus that's not so good of an idea. People wonder why you aren't there with your friends from Ohio State. Since I didn't go there I don't have those.

Just now, GCrites80s said:

 

You can do that in Cincinnati. In Columbus that's not so good of an idea. People wonder why you aren't there with your friends from Ohio State. Since I didn't go there I don't have those.

 

Remember when people used to strike up conversations with other people wearing shirts for bands they like?  I still do that.  

58 minutes ago, ryanlammi said:

 

Interestingly, it appears to be Gen X-ers and Millennials who are moving away from these types of sites (in my experience). The boomers have fully embraced Facebook, just like the suburbs. 

 

Big parts of X and even the early millenials are still active on Facebook.   The crazy thing is FB isn't embracing these groups back.   It's potentially a strategic error comparable to Sears's refusal to move towards an Amazon style business model.

Does anyone have numbers on where Facebook's ad revenue comes from? Is it just Wal-Mart, Silverados and Frito-Lay funding them?

57 minutes ago, ryanlammi said:

 

There's a bit of wanting it both ways for Millennials, Gen X, and Gen Z. They want things to be super convenient, and for that convenience to be super cheap for them. There's still a lack of person-to-person connection in the urban environment. Part of that is the popularity of Netflix and similar services. Annual or monthly subscriptions for unlimited access to entertainment means you don't need to leave the house, even if you live in an otherwise bustling area. There's less of a need for people to leave the house for entertainment.

 

The other half is socialization. When people are out socializing, a lot of people are still using the Internet to socialize even in person-to-person situations. You'll see people at dinner, at the bar, in a park, at a concert, etc. checking their instagram feeds or messaging other groups of people not present. I'm guilty of it at times, too, but try to be hyper aware of it. So even as people are moving back to urban areas, they aren't fully back like they would be without the introduction of wireless data. They sometimes feel like a shadow of their former selves.

 

I know people who have given up their cellular data for Lent (or other similar times). I try to make an effort to avoid using my phone when I'm with other people (unless it's to look something up we are actively talking about and "need" info on). 

 

Hell, I have no qualms about putting on the virtual headphones, or even literal ones.   Of course, I've spent a lot of time in "social" environments in a role where it was okay and often even helpful to maintain a degree of distance.   Even outside of that role it's been a useful approach (people wanting things involving the bar could be an issue) and at this point is pretty much how I am.

 

I'm definitely seeing more of it as the years go by, and it's pretty much how it is.   People are using technology to select who they socialize with, and how.   Not so much the random chance of where you are and who happens to be there.   There's many things driving this, but the existence of the technology itself is a big part of it.   Consider who developed and promoted it and that's not a surprise.

 

There's fun things too.   Holly and I would be in a group and people would think we were texting others, but we were carrying on a private conversation, often enough mocking others nearby.  ?

 

As is the case many other ways, the norms are changing.   If you are sitting near someone you don't know and they are ignoring you in favor of their phone, to get miffed by this is what's considered weird, not the other way around.

32 minutes ago, GCrites80s said:

Does anyone have numbers on where Facebook's ad revenue comes from? Is it just Wal-Mart, Silverados and Frito-Lay funding them?

 

The pollsters and opinion monitors, methinks.

19 minutes ago, E Rocc said:

As is the case many other ways, the norms are changing.   If you are sitting near someone you don't know and they are ignoring you in favor of their phone, to get miffed by this is what's considered weird, not the other way around.

 

I'm definitely not offended by random people at a bar on their phones. If I'm by myself at a bar, I don't think twice about pulling out my phone for a while. It's when I'm hanging out with another person or two, and they are on their phone choosing to converse with others not present that's offensive IMO. A little here and there is fine (responding to texts and the like), but it's especially bad when people are just scrolling through Instagram or Facebook instead of being present.

Some people are legitimately hooked on Facebook and IG. I am more hooked on Hawkeye Report message boards and these message boards. I check quite a bit.

 

That said, I feel it's healthier as I feel on FB and IG it gives a false sense of life itself, and can leave you anxious when you see people have awesome vacations and the like.

 

Plus, whenever I do get on my facebook now it's to check the business page, but it's crazy to me how much business or inquiries we can get from Facebook say when a dog trainer endorses your product. A ton of people are on facebook and it's a huge business model.

 

Instagram, I didn't have any luck with "influencers", they would post a photo of our product with their 15k followers and their dog and recommend it, and all 50 of the comments would be about the cute dog and not the product itself and we wouldn't get any website traffic with it, only lose out on free product and free shipping for them to promote.

 

I do think there is a good space for that for certain things and definitely in the blogosphere world there are opportunities for a product like ours, but the "influencers" just don't work for a lot of products.

 

When I do check on facebook and scroll through the timeline I am amazed that I don't know anyone hardly especially the woman who have all had kids and gotten married and changed their last names. Sometimes I find myself looking at their page and see they went to my high school and then looking through photos from 10 years ago and say "Oh yeah she was so and so's girlfriend at the time" then just deleting the friend. No point in mucking up the timeline with someone I never really knew in the first place and DEFINITELY don't know now!

1 hour ago, GCrites80s said:

Does anyone have numbers on where Facebook's ad revenue comes from? Is it just Wal-Mart, Silverados and Frito-Lay funding them?

 

I believe that Facebook's ad system works similar to Google's, where any person or company can upload an ad and target it to any age group/gender/location/etc. So all of the big brands likely spend a good amount on Facebook ads, not just a few large companies.

3 hours ago, GCrites80s said:

I've noticed that now people are much less willing to share their relationship status with Facebook. I imagine that was one of their key data points for both marketing and data collection reasons and now they aren't able to obtain it.

 

Facebook is probably not emphasizing it as much because it can tell from your other interactions who you are likely in a relationship with. Things like how much time you spend looking at or liking eachother's posts, how often your GPS coordinates are near eachother, whether you've ever been on the same IP address/wifi network, etc.

24 minutes ago, taestell said:

 

Facebook is probably not emphasizing it as much because it can tell from your other interactions who you are likely in a relationship with. Things like how much time you spend looking at or liking eachother's posts, how often your GPS coordinates are near eachother, whether you've ever been on the same IP address/wifi network, etc.

 

I've tagged my daughter's mom in so many of her pictures it does so automatically now.   Sometimes even in shots of just the lake over by me.

Whenever I post a photo of my wife and I it automatically tags her twin sister, which has created some weird, awkward moments where I profess my love to my wife on our honeymoon or anniversary and it pops up on her twin's feed and everyone else's feed as such. The thing about it is I will de-tag it 5 times then post it hten when it posts it still somehow tags her because it is so convinced it is her.

46 minutes ago, IAGuy39 said:

you see people have awesome vacations and the like.

 

Last month I went to a party in the Hollywood Hills.  It was hosted by the girlfriend of one of the guys in my brother's program at UCLA.  Everyone there was taking photos of themselves with the view in the background and immediately posting to Instagram or whatever.   I took a few photos but most assuredly did not post any photos to social media.  Yeah, there's the show-offy thing, but I don't want people to know I'm not only not at my house but 2,000 miles away.  So break in, take my stuff, and let my cat run wild.   

2 hours ago, IAGuy39 said:

Whenever I post a photo of my wife and I it automatically tags her twin sister, which has created some weird, awkward moments where I profess my love to my wife on our honeymoon or anniversary and it pops up on her twin's feed and everyone else's feed as such. The thing about it is I will de-tag it 5 times then post it hten when it posts it still somehow tags her because it is so convinced it is her.

 

A couple times when I was tagging my daughter's mom, I almost accidentally tagged another friend I was rumored to be involved with WBITD.   The rumors came mostly from the fact they had the same first name, were from the same (rumor-happy) suburb, went to the same college and had the same major.   But partly because the "other friend" would sometimes stick close to me at work when she wanted some random guy to go away. 

 

 That would have stirred things up all these years later.   :0

Edited October 22, 20195 yr by E Rocc

23 hours ago, Gramarye said:

Also this:

 

https://www.cnet.com/news/facebook-now-faces-47-attorneys-general-in-antitrust-probe/

 

Facebook now faces 47 attorneys general in antitrust probe

The investigation has picked up support from across the US.

 

New York Attorney General Letitia James on Monday said 47 attorneys general are now part of an investigation into Facebook over potential antitrust violations. The investigation, which was announced in September, will focus on Facebook's dominance and potential anticompetitive conduct stemming that position. 

 

...

 

As the world's largest social network, Facebook has become a central force in many people's lives online. It also owns photo app Instagram, messaging service WhatsApp and virtual reality company Oculus. Critics argue that the social network has been simply buying up its competition. 

 

And Facebook doesn't just face an antitrust investigation from these states. In June, the House antitrust subcommittee said it was launching an investigation of Facebook, Google and other tech companies. The Federal Trade Commission and the Department of Justice are also both reportedly investigating Facebook over antitrust concerns.

 

=======================================

 

I'm one of the early-days adopters of Facebook, from back when you still needed a *.edu e-mail, and I still have a soft spot for it despite various changes over time that I haven't always liked (though some I have).  But more recent changes than not have been positive, I think, especially the refocusing on Groups and Events (which are, I'm sure not entirely coincidentally, the two parts that I use the most): https://www.theverge.com/2019/4/30/18523265/facebook-events-groups-redesign-news-feed-features-f8-2019.

 

A Facebook Group still doesn't have the same comprehensive functionality of a Meetup Group, but it's also free and doesn't require keeping track of an additional membership and associated login info.  My high school class is using one right now to plan our [gulp] 20-year reunion next year.  Our 5-year reunion never even happened because we were trying to organize by (IIRC) listserv, and people's e-mail addresses were unreliable (and snail mail is slow and expensive and can also be subject to bad addresses almost as easily as e-mail).

 

And Facebook Events is incredibly convenient for a time-strapped parent looking for kid-friendly events, when a lot of one's social circle is still childless and therefore word-of-mouth might not reach you.

 

Facebook Marketplace has practically done to Craigslist what Craigslist did to newspaper ads.  My wife shops all the time on Facebook Marketplace and sends me out to pick things up after work, without a care in the world.  I let her know once that I was picking up something I bought on Craigslist and she wanted me to have a gun before I went.

 

But I won't deny that it's challenging to resist checking what's happening on Facebook even when I'm on my mobile in public with people IRL, even knowing that's a bad habit.

 

I'm definitely not against cracking down on FB but how do you trust-bust a business which operates in cyber space where traditional state boundaries mean almost nothing?

 

I deleted FB from my phone for numerous reasons but I still find myself frequently checking it on my computer, even though I don't post anything these days. My activity is pretty much limited to liking pictures of my nieces and nephews.

Edited October 23, 20195 yr by scorpio

It's a whole different ballgame when you've never had the Facebook app on any of your phones  as far as the data they have on you goes. But that's going to change (or maybe already has) for people who have Instagram as the two apps have their data linked.

When AOC grabs you by the balls in public, you know you're having a bad day....

 

 

Zuckerburg just needs to be able to snap and say "OK, the rednecks click our ads like mad and nobody else does. Without the rednecks we go out of business!"

This was delicious.  This is a black Mama read!  I think Zucky pissed himself

 

 

 

Zuckerberg didn't fall for her tricks.  This is exactly why people don't voluntarily visit Washington who don't need to. 

21 hours ago, jmecklenborg said:

Zuckerberg didn't fall for her tricks.  This is exactly why people don't voluntarily visit Washington who don't need to. 

Tricks?  Huh.

 

He showed up un prepared.  

 

Either its a very good "corporate idiot"act or he's ill equipped to run his company.

Tell them it's going to be one kind of meeting then they show up and it's another.  Try to get them upset.  Oldest trick in the book. 

On 10/24/2019 at 1:19 AM, jmecklenborg said:

Zuckerberg didn't fall for her tricks.  This is exactly why people don't voluntarily visit Washington who don't need to. 

 

You could have meant two different people as "her" LOL

On 10/23/2019 at 5:00 PM, GCrites80s said:

Zuckerburg just needs to be able to snap and say "OK, the rednecks click our ads like mad and nobody else does. Without the rednecks we go out of business!"

 

Which is why it's profoundly stupid that he's letting proudly hypersensitive late millennials set "community standards" across the board.

10 hours ago, MyTwoSense said:

Tricks?  Huh.

 

He showed up un prepared.  

 

Either its a very good "corporate idiot"act or he's ill equipped to run his company.

 

He got taken by surprise.   Intentionally.   He probably has Asperger's, like Gates and Musk.  

BTW a guy who works in the warehouse at my company spent 4 years in prison...until they caught him with a cell phone, which cost him an extra year.  How did they know?  Because he posted something on Facebook with said phone!

My thoughts:

 

- AOC would have been an excellent prosecutor - her line of questioning was terrific to start. However, she got a bit hyperbolic towards the end and she didn't need to - she would have made her point without the exaggeration 

 

- Beatty was extremely hyperbolic and in many ways did what the GOP currently does - scream emotional things that are low hanging fruit for your base. 

1 minute ago, YABO713 said:

My thoughts:

 

- AOC would have been an excellent prosecutor - her line of questioning was terrific to start. However, she got a bit hyperbolic towards the end and she didn't need to - she would have made her point without the exaggeration 

 

- Beatty was extremely hyperbolic and in many ways did what the GOP currently does - scream emotional things that are low hanging fruit for your base. 

I thought so too.  It is obvious why GOP like to attack her so much.  They see her as a threat. 

 

Maybe your conservative buddies on this board can stop calling her a dumb bartender. 

Just now, freefourur said:

I thought so too.  It is obvious why GOP like to attack her so much.  They see her as a threat. 

 

Maybe your conservative buddies on this board can stop calling her a dumb bartender. 

 

I think there's a lot to attack her on vis a vis her policy... 

 

But as someone doing a direct examination, her initial inquiries were terrific - especially re: the Fake Ads about GOP Members supporting the Green New Deal

17 minutes ago, YABO713 said:

 

I think there's a lot to attack her on vis a vis her policy... 

 

But as someone doing a direct examination, her initial inquiries were terrific - especially re: the Fake Ads about GOP Members supporting the Green New Deal

Attacks on policy are always fair game. I don't think i agree a lot with her policies. But she is not dumb at all. 

Edited October 25, 20195 yr by freefourur

 

2 hours ago, YABO713 said:

My thoughts:

 

- AOC would have been an excellent prosecutor - her line of questioning was terrific to start. However, she got a bit hyperbolic towards the end and she didn't need to - she would have made her point without the exaggeration 

 

Video link (if you can get it queued to the right point)?

2 hours ago, freefourur said:

I thought so too.  It is obvious why GOP like to attack her so much.  They see her as a threat. 

 

Maybe your conservative buddies on this board can stop calling her a dumb bartender. 

 

Rs are especially scared that there are going to be 40 AOCs in the house next time around.

33 minutes ago, Gramarye said:

 

Video link (if you can get it queued to the right point)?

 

Edited October 25, 20195 yr by YABO713