The Gaming Den

This is why I try to keep you guys aware of politics.

-Crissa

"Websites That Make Us Bang Our Heads Against The Wall And Moan Softly"

Yoou're a cruel woman, Crissa. I was in my happy place; now you're making me think about my fellow humans.

On a related subject, today Congress did its best to destroy the Fourth Amendment. FYI. Link.

the link wrote:Nearly half (49%) of Americans think the president has the authority to suspend the Constitution.

It's amazing what eight years of W and Cheney will do to people.

Fuck Obama.

Look, people had a chance, a long one, to choose someone other than Obama to lead against the Republicans. No buyer's remorse allowed.

Talisman wrote:"Websites That Make Us Bang Our Heads Against The Wall And Moan Softly"

-Crissa

I think the article is wrong on a key point.

It's not the fault of flawed media.

Sure the crap media you guys have is certainly not helping, but ultimately many societies have been far more aware of political realities despite even worse media opposition to informing them.

It's cultural. Too many people in the USA think they don't want to know, they don't need to know and that not knowing won't hurt them.

The west in general (though you guys more so) is beset with a great raging plague of wilful and gleeful ignorance. Interest in education, science, fact, real politics, and current events is remarkably low.

Somewhere along the line affluence and security has become a mere assumption and knowledge, science and political awareness has not just lost credit for it's achievements but also become actively shunned by a large portion of the population.

And all the knowledge is out there, easy to find with the tiniest effort. I mean even here it utterly amazes me how little even people in this (slightly better off) western country don't know and haven't bothered to find out.

Sometimes it seems like half the time I spend at the local games store is spent giving informative and entertaining lectures on politics, history or science. And I'm not a fucking politician, a historian or a scientist. I just watch documentaries and read stuff, and you know, pay some fricking attention.

I can say "John Howard covered up his bungle with Timor and I remember how and when it happened, I mean it was big news for ages". And other folks will be "Tim Who?".

They just don't want to know.

While privacy issues are not something I actually care about much at all, I do have to say I'm disturbed at Obama's sudden about-face on the issue.

PhoneLobster wrote:It's cultural. Too many people in the USA think they don't want to know, they don't need to know and that not knowing won't hurt them.

The west in general (though you guys more so) is beset with a great raging plague of wilful and gleeful ignorance. Interest in education, science, fact, real politics, and current events is remarkably low.

I'm trying to figure out at what age the disinterest sets in...

Some time ago, I did a comparison of newspapers - Haaretz, Al-Jazeera, and the New York Times - that involved finding a common story and comparing how the story was reported by each news source. One common article on the events of Ramadan described the location of the activities three ways:

Haaretz (Israeli) - Temple Mount/Mount Moriah
Al-Jazeera (Arab) - Al-Aqsa Mosque
NY Times (American) - Disputed Shrine [in Jerusalem]

This wasn't the only time that the American media reported location that vaguely, but it was certainly the most contrasted.

The thing that really gets me is that in teaching Sunday School, I've learned that one of the most engaging things to do for little kids is to stick them in front of a map. It seriously occupies them for long stretches at a time, and they're constantly asking questions like "Where are we?" "Where's my grandma?" If we're talking about stuff like ninja or cats or Galapagos turtles or temples or whatever, the kids immediately want me to pull out the map to see where we live in relation to where the other stuff lives. They want to know how many miles it is and how long it takes to get there and what it's like there.

Looking back at my own life, I remember my mom letting us kids (my two significantly younger siblings and me) navigate on our family trips. Yeah, we got lost a few times and had some interesting adventures, but we never were impatient about how long it would take to get somewhere, and we always knew where we were, so we never had to ask if we were there yet.

I can only surmise that kids actually do want to know about the world and that somewhere along the line, that impulse to know is disrupted... Rather than never being created to begin with. That thought is somewhat disturbing.

Maj wrote: Summarized: Stuff about kids loving maps

I concur with above comment. I used to love playing with maps.

Hell, one of my favorite games that I played all through 2nd-7th grade was taking an atlas with me to school and during the breaks, someone would list out a location and everyone else would run and try to figure out where it was.

Granted this was in India and for some odd reason all us kids just brought Atlas' to school even though there was no reason to actually have them there.

I remember explaining this phenomenon to different people in the states and for the most part I was looked on as a nerdy tool and at times I had people look at me in awe at the kind of awesome games we used to play apparently. That is compared to them playing tic-tac-toe and dots in notebooks.

Hmm. When I was bored I would just pick on the kid with low self esteem. Crying boys are kinda funny...

I'm a terrible person.

Hey, I'm 28 and I still love maps! Maps are just plain cool.

Maj wrote:Haaretz (Israeli) - Temple Mount/Mount Moriah
Al-Jazeera (Arab) - Al-Aqsa Mosque
NY Times (American) - Disputed Shrine [in Jerusalem]

I don't see the problem with this. It's cutting out the bullshit and telling it like it is: a disputed shrine. While they could say it's an important disputed shrine, they're still absolutely right.

Surgo wrote:I don't see the problem with this. It's cutting out the bullshit and telling it like it is: a disputed shrine. While they could say it's an important disputed shrine, they're still absolutely right.

So that's what happened to kids' curiosity about location: it was called bullshit and beaten into oblivion.

The phrase "disputed shrine" sounds to me like a statuette-filled niche in the wall that may or may not be considered a shrine by various people.

The problem is that the description doesn't mention that it's the most fought over chunk of rock in monotheism, so even our own country's Christians - who by all rights should care - don't even recognize the location as being where Solomon's Temple stood thousands of years ago.

And frankly, I consider that shoddy reporting. It doesn't really answer the question "where."

Maj wrote:So that's what happened to kids' curiosity about location: it was called bullshit and beaten into oblivion.

What the fvck are you talking about? I'm quite aware of what that place is, and its history. The fact of the matter is that it is all of the above and "disputed shrine" is the most neutral one. Sure, they might have said "disputed shrine in Jerusalem" or "disputed important holy place for both religions" in better language, but still. I applaud the neutrality.

The article, Surgo, the article doesn't say that the shrine is anyplace except jerusalem, or that any of that history exists.

So people tune it out, because the news has nothing that they can relate to.

-Crissa

By the way, I would have buyer's remorse IFF the other candidate didn't cuddle up to Richard Scaife for that tiny worthless edge.

Obama is a sellout, but Clinton is basically a... well, I don't want to use the word 'whore' and get accused of sexism, but someone needs come up with a better word then. A word that describes someone who was a victim of the right-wing noise machine that got her husband impeached over a BJ but finds it perfectly okay to let bygones be bygones when she needs a couple of extra points in the polls.

Nah, no buyer's remorse here. I just went with the hotdog dropped in sand rather than the burger dropped in dogshit or a burger MADE of dogshit.

Crissa wrote:The article, Surgo, the article doesn't say that the shrine is anyplace except jerusalem, or that any of that history exists.

So people tune it out, because the news has nothing that they can relate to.

Exactly. The exact quote was "disputed shrine."

With a description like that, Americans have to wonder why the story was even news to begin with. By removing the location of the story, the entire set of events was removed from context, and thus the response would have largely been "Why is this news?"

Surgo wrote:"disputed shrine" is the most neutral one

False Tricotomy. There is a descriptive term for the location that's neutral but at least provides a bit more context: the Dome of the Rock. Because there's a Dome. On a rock. That's way more descriptive than "disputed shrine" but doesn't choose any side other than that of observing-historical-landmark.

In other political news anti abortion movement hates contraception and uses imaginary science against the advice of its own medical experts to conflate it with abortion and deny access.

Like over here

What? They just plain want sex and women in particular to be punished? Who knew?

PhoneLobster wrote:In other political news anti abortion movement hates contraception and uses imaginary science against the advice of its own medical experts to conflate it with abortion and deny access.

Like over here

What? They just plain want sex and women in particular to be punished? Who knew?

God, that is terrible. We have too many humans already. What do they have against slowing the tide?

ubernoob wrote:

PhoneLobster wrote:In other political news anti abortion movement hates contraception and uses imaginary science against the advice of its own medical experts to conflate it with abortion and deny access.

Like over here

What? They just plain want sex and women in particular to be punished? Who knew?

God, that is terrible. We have too many humans already. What do they have against slowing the tide?

It goes against their beliefs, and they'll never go against their beliefs, not matter how miserable people get.

ubernoob wrote:Hmm. When I was bored I would just pick on the kid with low self esteem. Crying boys are kinda funny...

I'm a terrible person.

Hey, I used that trick. One year, all 12 others, I was the target. but you're right, crying boys are kinda funny, and I'll save a table for you in hell, fuck we're probably all headed there anyway.

...think Satan will play D&D with us?

Annoying Pessismist wrote:It goes against their beliefs, and they'll never go against their beliefs, not matter how miserable people get.

ha, right... because christians never go against their beliefs because it's easier...

heh, you're funny, maybe you're not Jerry.

Prak_Anima wrote:

ubernoob wrote:Hmm. When I was bored I would just pick on the kid with low self esteem. Crying boys are kinda funny...

I'm a terrible person.

Hey, I used that trick. One year, all 12 others, I was the target. but you're right, crying boys are kinda funny, and I'll save a table for you in hell, fuck we're probably all headed there anyway.

...think Satan will play D&D with us?

Of course. Satan is a really cool guy. Great roleplayer.

ubernoob wrote:

Prak_Anima wrote:

ubernoob wrote:Hmm. When I was bored I would just pick on the kid with low self esteem. Crying boys are kinda funny...

I'm a terrible person.

Hey, I used that trick. One year, all 12 others, I was the target. but you're right, crying boys are kinda funny, and I'll save a table for you in hell, fuck we're probably all headed there anyway.

...think Satan will play D&D with us?

Of course. Satan is a really cool guy. Great roleplayer.

yeah, but it's a shame he's no where near the role playing caliber of God... on the other hand... God'd probably just munchkin out and kill everyone... at least Satan will give us a chance.