Oh, look, a snarky response from the "famous" spaceghoti. Talking about me behind my back. Discounting my comment with two quick words instead of a discussion about said article. I thought y'all were different. I was brave enough to respond to "care to elaborate?" only to get knocked down. Thanks. At least I didn't get downvoted, amirite? That is your claim to fame, eh? I thought five to eight word responses were not acceptable either. A whole lot of promises broken, if you ask me.
I'm sorry, what promises did I make to you? I'm sorry that you didn't find the hivemind you were looking for but yes, I'm going to find and post material that I think accurately reflects reality. You are not obligated to agree with me. But I responded to snark with snark, and I make no apologies for accurately predicting what your complaint would be.
Ha ha, hivemind I'm looking for? That's rich. I never said you made promises. Snapzu has been "guiding" new users all weekend to respect this kinder site than we're used to. Those promises. Anyway, go on with your bad self.
So if I understand you correctly you opened with a hostile comment describing Snapzu as "biased, slanted, closed minded" and now you're objecting because it elicited responses in kind? Just so we're all on the same page here.
And yet, here he is, with his comment still above zero, because you guys are so petrified to downvote. So, if the community at large agrees he has a valid enough opinion, then have a discussion with him. Quit arguing about petty bullshit.
I'm going to assume you are referring to Snapzu as "this site" and say I don't think the content being shared is indicative of an entire site being biased. If the users of the site generally approve of and upvote the content, then you can say the users are biased, slanted, and close-minded. However your criticism would be far better received with a proper response to the article than some attack on its perceived value here.
no, no, no, Salon.com. Its own CEO calls it a liberal tabloid. Putting an article there that is not bashed for its bias immediately and all the hoity toity, well, um hum, yes I see that this is true type discussion, is not and indication of an open and fair community that Snapzu has been touting.
If this is tabloid type Journalism, then where are the lies? Can you sight something in the article which is untrue, misquoted, or manipulated? I understand that it is pro-left, but the problem I see with the left and the right is, the right seems not to be interested in factual information.
Oh, dear. So this site is just as biased, slanted, closed minded as that last. Too bad.
Care to elaborate?
I'm guessing the answer will be "liberal bias."
Yup. Called it.
Oh, look, a snarky response from the "famous" spaceghoti. Talking about me behind my back. Discounting my comment with two quick words instead of a discussion about said article. I thought y'all were different. I was brave enough to respond to "care to elaborate?" only to get knocked down. Thanks. At least I didn't get downvoted, amirite? That is your claim to fame, eh? I thought five to eight word responses were not acceptable either. A whole lot of promises broken, if you ask me.
I'm sorry, what promises did I make to you? I'm sorry that you didn't find the hivemind you were looking for but yes, I'm going to find and post material that I think accurately reflects reality. You are not obligated to agree with me. But I responded to snark with snark, and I make no apologies for accurately predicting what your complaint would be.
Ha ha, hivemind I'm looking for? That's rich. I never said you made promises. Snapzu has been "guiding" new users all weekend to respect this kinder site than we're used to. Those promises. Anyway, go on with your bad self.
So if I understand you correctly you opened with a hostile comment describing Snapzu as "biased, slanted, closed minded" and now you're objecting because it elicited responses in kind? Just so we're all on the same page here.
Like I said, you go on with your bad self.
And yet, here he is, with his comment still above zero, because you guys are so petrified to downvote. So, if the community at large agrees he has a valid enough opinion, then have a discussion with him. Quit arguing about petty bullshit.
The first paragraph seen cites a liberal tabloid (the CEO's own words) calling out two Hispanics' "ugly bigotry," and you want me to elaborate?
I'm going to assume you are referring to Snapzu as "this site" and say I don't think the content being shared is indicative of an entire site being biased. If the users of the site generally approve of and upvote the content, then you can say the users are biased, slanted, and close-minded. However your criticism would be far better received with a proper response to the article than some attack on its perceived value here.
no, no, no, Salon.com. Its own CEO calls it a liberal tabloid. Putting an article there that is not bashed for its bias immediately and all the hoity toity, well, um hum, yes I see that this is true type discussion, is not and indication of an open and fair community that Snapzu has been touting.
If this is tabloid type Journalism, then where are the lies? Can you sight something in the article which is untrue, misquoted, or manipulated? I understand that it is pro-left, but the problem I see with the left and the right is, the right seems not to be interested in factual information.
It's an opinion piece; ergo, meant to be manipulative.