|
Thorn Wishes Talon posted:I want to ask the following: i'm in a position where i get irritated with most reade skeptics and everyone who seeks to weaponize her accusations against bidenlikers  For myself, there would have to be something extremely smoking-gunny to disbelieve Reade. At this point, given that any possible low-hanging fruit would have been plucked, it would be along the lines of "Russian Intellligence announces that yes they plotted with Tara Reade to go after Biden and here is a video of the interview in which Tara Reade says 'yes, I will lie publicly about Joe Biden raping me, thank you for the rubles'". So practically speaking, no, I am not actually open to disbelieving her. I do not believe the marine who announced alongside Jacob Wohl that Elizabeth Warren hosed him into therapy, and I do not believe the woman who was approached by Project Veritas to accuse Robert Mueller. Absent that sort of incredibly obvious bullshit business or extremely clear evidence of deliberate falsehood, I feel an obligation to default to believing women. See also, Keith Ellison, who I am obligated to assume is a domestic abuser. This incidentally means that I am not actually personally all that interested in the details of either Reade's possible past perjury or circumstantial concerns about the accusations, except insofar as I have to moderate them, which is certainly going to be Fun. They're just not relevant to the position I must take as far as whether I, personally, believe the accusation.
|
#
¿
Feb 7, 2021 23:23
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 16, 2024 19:45 |
|
|
I feel like arguing about individual voting behavior is - extremely played out - unlikely to have any positive results - tangential and distracting both to the original thrust of this thread and the potentially more constructive angles people have suggested so let's table that, thanks.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 8, 2021 21:39
|
|
|
silicone thrills posted:Thanks! Like I said, this thread is good and i'm glad it was made. It's a pretty secondary topic in this thread at the moment, but the DNC is substantial-majority an elected body and is shockingly vulnerable in many / most? states. Even without an organized campaign specifically against incumbents involved in 2020 primary operations, they can be knocked over. we would have done it in the Texas caucus I was most involved in boring internal politics of; turns out the DNC incumbent was already Actually Good lol so she stayed Goatse James Bond fucked around with this message at 00:41 on Feb 9, 2021 |
|
#
¿
Feb 9, 2021 00:34
|
|
|
This is neither a general electoralism thread nor a general Biden administration thread. I can think of rather a lot of other avenues for this thread to go down (there have been a couple good "where do we go from here" or "what does this all tell us about rape culture" posts, for example), but neither of the first two things are really topical here.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 24, 2021 02:21
|
|
|
he's also, you know, the governor of New York, so even if he somehow survives this that's not necessarily much of a reflection on the national party, any more than his destruction over this would be very good, mind
|
|
#
¿
Mar 4, 2021 05:49
|
|
|
really getting the impression that this thread's culture and/or posting standards might be better suited to cspam
|
|
#
¿
Jun 9, 2021 03:40
|
|
|
I concede that "post better" may have been a clearer mod suggestion.
Somebody fucked around with this message at 02:09 on Jun 10, 2021 |
|
#
¿
Jun 9, 2021 19:30
|
|
|
The Kingfish posted:I only read the majority opinion (and I read it off my phone), but the fact that Cosby was forced to give deposition testimony almost certainly prejudiced him in the civil case that ultimately settled. It also prejudiced him because it gave the prosecution an improper insight into his version of events. I don't think that bit necessarily matters too much. My understanding is that the American legal system is very permissive about prosecutors knowing things they don't (or can't) introduce as evidence. The trickiest argument I've seen is that Castor's successor wouldn't have reopened the investigation without the civil testimony, which seems like a complicated hypothetical to work with. My assessment of the decision is largely mediated by lawyers who know more than I do about lawyering. My impression is that the legally correct decision would have been either "the original guy and possibly the civil judge hosed up but your fancypants expensive lawyers should have been able to both handle that and keep you informed of the possible consequences of your testimony, conviction stands" or "good point, your civil testimony may have altered the outcome, it's a mistrial and the state can try you again". Conveniently for Andenno's discussion of the legitimacy of court decisions, either one of these would also have a better chance of leading to the better moral outcome (Cosby punished for sexual assault), while representing a rule that if fairly applied wouldn't overly injure people less wealthy than Cosby. and as it happened, one of the judges on the panel did in fact argue for one of those alternative remedies Mr Luxury Yacht posted:Maybe? It obviously wasn't the only evidence but the testimony was pretty damning considering it's basically Cosby saying "I, William Henry Cosby drugged women including Andrea Constand with quaaludes before raping them and also I specifically procured the drugs for that purpose." Strictly speaking, i think they can appeal it to scotus, but that'll take a while. Goatse James Bond fucked around with this message at 20:18 on Jul 1, 2021 |
|
#
¿
Jul 1, 2021 20:06
|
|
|
I alluded to this in my last CosbyCourt post. As it happens in Cosby's case there was a possible response that doesn't go the full "people above x net worth are stripped of major criminal trial rights": his horde of expensive lawyers should have been able to discern, and inform him of, and argue in court, the exact binding nature or lack thereof of Castor's massive dumbassery. I still don't hate the "fine just declare a mistrial and exclude his civil deposition from the next one" proposition, structurally, but there's a very plausible argument for "your lawyers should have been able to argue the forced testimony thing, sucks to be you". John_A_Tallon posted:And then what? What's your remedy beyond "the rules should be bent the other way now"? If you explicitly impose less favorable standards to the people most able to dismantle the system, you will not get to keep that system for very long. So what's your solution to that problem? While I'm curious about the proposed remedy, fear of retaliation by the wealthy is not high on my list of reasons to preserve the notional underlying assumptions of the justice system.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 6, 2021 00:28
|
|
|
some plague rats posted:Yeah we get it, you've read case law, fantastic, now could you guys PLEASE find a different thread to yell at each other about this in? I think spr is right about the semi-derail having gone on a bit too long.  Mod hat on, let's table the legal discussion or move it to a different thread.edit: with the exception of rerailing a la Timeless' good post Goatse James Bond fucked around with this message at 04:37 on Jul 8, 2021 |
|
#
¿
Jul 8, 2021 04:17
|
|
|
Pamela Springstein posted:Is there a reason d&d doesn't have an open mod feedback thread like many other subforums do? Seems like there's a lot of feedback for the mods right now. My understanding is that dnd feedback threads tend to have a lifecycle where the quality eventually drops and stays dropped, generally after most things recently worth saying have been said. So that's why we don't have a perpetual one. We're probably overdue for the next one.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 8, 2021 01:11
|
|
|
Antifa Turkeesian posted:Metoo was kind of doomed the moment it was reduced to entertainment media coverage of celebrities. Reportage neutralized a lot of its potential by turning it into human-interest content involving actresses and stories about how famous women have gone through things their audience have endured, rather than keeping attention on how and why sexual violence persists. While I don't really agree with the "metoo is doomed / dead" position, this is probably the best argument I've heard for it actually having taken a significant hit as a movement. It also doesn't really require a conspiracy, which is more troubling than if it did. Extended discussion of rape culture is upsetting, takes more effort, and gets fewer clicks. That said, I certainly feel anecdotally like there is more discussion of the wider metoo issues than there was before. Both in media and the general population.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 8, 2021 21:20
|
|
|
shimmy shimmy posted:I mean, he's a mod and the thread doesn't move that fast. Someone probably reported it or he just got around to reading the last like, 20 posts in the thread. This is a very, very common mod experience. It would be nice to have a solid, even coverage of mods who, on balance, read every thread every single day with a deep yet tender amount of mod care. We do not have that. ask me about somebody in the canpol thread stanning for quebecois separatist literal terrorists
|
|
#
¿
Nov 2, 2021 07:53
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 16, 2024 19:45 |
|
|
I am *really* curious about those numbers per worker (easy to find numbers for tbh, might try) or per female worker (less easy but probably doable on the fly). My immediate guess is that the manufacturing numbers are even worse when calculated that way. It's also for charges filed which... dunno how that shakes out per actual incident in each industry.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 18, 2024 01:10
|
|