sdfasfs

deleted by creator

I can accuse you of all sorts of things, like being “anti-semiticist.” That doesn’t mean much. If you don’t see the distinction between that and being charged with an actual crime then there isn’t much I can do to help you here.

deleted by creator

I get this project is a big deal for some folks but having a hard time accepting the argument that I shouldn’t get a better visual/overall game experience because of a mod I’ll never play and their apparent lack of communication with Bethesda. They just expected to be that high of priority? Am I reading this wrong?

Edit: reading through comments I’m a little more sympathetic to modders writ large than I am this team specifically but I get the frustration. Bethesda could’ve done everyone a solid and given a little heads up. Still, it sounds like this project has been massive in scope and basically any changes were going to cause them issues so that’s worth considering here too.

You need to show it’s a bad source. Discrediting the founder does not satisfy that requirement.

Burden of proof is on you here. What about the site are you disputing here?

The site’s history speaks for itself. Because or in spite of him, it’s a solid way to at-a-glance assess an outlet. It is not the whole story, it’s not even a great story, but it’s a start that’s pretty solid.

I don’t understand. Unless you have a degree in journalism or something similar you’re not allowed to be an expert on media outlets? How many professors of practice at universities don’t have a degree related to what they’re teaching?

Don’t get me wrong, I’m super put off by this notion that he had a “super keen eye“ and natural aptitude for spotting “bias.” I also object to the way that people talk about bias, but that’s another discussion. The point is yeah there’s a little bit of bullshit in there, but his background does not discredit the endeavor.

Are you the person who also posted an uncredited PBF the other day? You need to credit it. These are old, famous comics, and he deserves to be credited.

It concerns me that more people weren’t aware he did this

Have you ever had sex with a pharaoh?

I put that pussy in a sarcophagus

2 pieces of cinnamon bread bread with tostitos in between.

Sufjan Stevens “Concerning the UFO Sighting Near Highland, Illinois”

Darren Korb & Ashley Barrett “She Shines”

Thursday “Tomorrow I’ll be You”

Underoath “In Regards to Myself”

Emery “Listening to Freddie Mercury”

Beirut “Prenzlauerberg”

Circle takes the Square “A Crater to Cough In”

August Burns Red “Indonesia”

Every Time I Die “Planet Shit”

Norma Jean “Face:Face”

Less Than Jake “History of a Boring Town”

Oh come on are you seriously going to play dumb now? WikiLeaks had a very specific purpose and goal. You cannot possibly compare it to a standard news outlet. You are really stretching things here. This has become a total waste of time.

I think the more important question is why y’all think the charges are fabricated.

I will admit, I don’t know what to think, but that’s because the waters have become so muddy around those allegations. But I have yet to see anyone provide evidence that this was fabricated other than “it’s something that the government would do.”

So you don’t agree that the entire (claimed) raison d’être of wikileaks was that they were a haven for whistleblowers to bring their information to be vetted by quality journalists and released to the broader public, regardless of the political leanings of the information or people involved?

I agree with you that we should not be thrusting that mandate on outlets. But that’s not what happened. WikiLeaks claimed to be a beacon of transparency. That is a bar they set for themselves. I don’t care if they are “biased“ or whatever, I care that their job is to release information (their own mandate) and then they withhold it when it isn’t convenient for Assange’s politics.

I didn’t say journalists had to be neutral. I never used the word neutral. Objectivity is a myth and impossible to obtain.

I’m saying these journalists didn’t want to work for a flagrantly partisan organization
that lied about its commitment to transparency.

If you want to be a mouthpiece for Putin and conservative talking points, then you need to not pretend you’re evenhanded and egalitarian with your leaks and publication.

Unfortunately, what we actually learned is that WikiLeaks existed for him to help those he politically agrees with. There is a reason every self-respecting journalist who worked with WikiLeaks has since walked away and no, it is not because of the US government going after him. It’s because WikiLeaks wasn’t engaging in transparency and quality journalism.

The truth is important. Isn’t that the whole point of Wikileaks?