>> ^Deano:
I dunno, if they weren't returning my calls I always assume they're not interested
I'm very literal when it comes to things like this.


You and me, mate. I've twice purposefully ended a potential relationship because the girls attempted stupid shit like this - played hard to get and were pretending to be someone else all the time. I have zero tolerance for that kind of thing. Dumped them, explaining why, and I hope it was an eye-opener for them, because the only kind of guys that these childish tactics work on are brain-dead narcissistic jocks.

@JiggaJonson

you've obviously got a really strange view of what is offensive and what isn't.

you sound like a really uptight typical teacher with zero tolerance levels and an inability to put things in perspective.

how on earth could you find this possibly offensive. offensive to who? black people?
your comment doesnt really make any sense.

>> ^Johnald_Chaffinch:
he's not his usual disheveled self here...
many so-called intellectuals, such as chris hitchens, argue a case for anything that would serve them purpose, rather than being open to other possibilities. in this case it's how he slanders anyone that thinks september 11th may have had more to it than the official story lets on. just because there are some unfounded theories doesn't mean that they all are.. he takes his side and sticks with it because he's so blindly pro-american.


Actually I read his manner as simply having zero tolerance for ignorance and stupidity. He opposed the first gulf with equal fervor and conviction but was not so set on not changing his position that spending time with the Kurds changed his position. He's one of the only people in the world with strong opinions and the conviction to physically go over and see for himself if his beliefs are well founded. He tested his convictions on action/inaction against Saddam by spending time with the Kurdish people. He's founded his opinions on the theocracy in Iran by going there and spending time with the Ayatalloh's own grandson. He's even spent time in North Korea as a visiting professor to see first hand what things are like there. I do no think that just because he is dismissive of opinions he is certain are wrong makes it in any way wise to try and dismiss him just as lightly. The truth of the matter is in most cases he's better informed than his critics and has been open enough to change his position on both the handling of Saddam and waterboarding.

>> ^joedirt:
I totally disagree with anyone that says it's alright to create a new account. It should be clear that if you are banned, you are banned even your sock accounts. No one should have two accounts. It should never be encouraged or even suggested. There should be zero tolerance for people that get one sock acct banned but keep their main account.


Oh come on. How in the hell do you ever propose enforcing people never opening another account? Utter madness.

Someone gets banned, they can start a new account from scratch, newbies have bugger all abilities, so to get their power back they have to play nicely... therefore, no problems.

If they somehow make a pest of themselves again via opening a gazillion accounts or so then you can get into IP banning or the like, but come on, suggesting that people may never open an account again is ridiculous.

People having 'sock' accounts which they use to vote their other account up is another story entirely and should get both accounts banned if it's proved to be occurring... but opening one account after you forget your old account, want to start afresh with a new name, are banned etc. should not be a problem for anyone.

>> ^videosiftbannedme:
Being hypocritical would be doing exactly what you postulated earlier: "un-banning" Choggie. (I know you've since changed your position, of which I now support). If Choggie wants to be part of the community again, then let him prove his worth by creating a new account,


I totally disagree with anyone that says it's alright to create a new account. It should be clear that if you are banned, you are banned even your sock accounts. No one should have two accounts. It should never be encouraged or even suggested. There should be zero tolerance for people that get one sock acct banned but keep their main account.

This was Matthews at his best IMO, zero tolerance for bullshit. Buried her alive, on air, under a mountain of common sense.

MG, i agree that pushing a police officer over in that situation was wrong, and could have led to the officer getting a seriously undeserved beating. i would call it incitement to riot, not civil disobedience. The protestor was not being beaten (if he was, i think a tackle would be in order).
This is probably not the best thread to make my point in...

but you give them way too much room dude. they work for us. each and every minute violation of the constitution should be stepped on as a first priority, no excuses, zero tolerance. In the case of this video, I hope the guy who tackled the cop is identified and prosecuted... just as I hope all the police who are taped breaking the law will be identified and prevented from ever "protecting and serving" the public ever again.

Zero Tolerance in the "War against" BS.

Wise man, that berserk office worker. There's only one way to end this scourge: zero tolerance.

Actually KOMMIE and co. keep up the criticsm. Seems like Yahtzee approves and feeds off of it.

http://www.fullyramblomatic.com/

14/3/08: Driving Me Mad
...
You see, I have this theory that the internet is causing a general mediocritisation of human culture, because you can put pretty much any piece of work on the internet and no matter how hugely it sucks dolphin jizz you'll find some dick who's prepared to tell you it's brilliant. This is the principle on which Deviantart appears to be founded.

But the cruellest thing you can do to an artist is tell them their work is flawless when it isn't. It gives them no incentive to improve or try new things, which a creative person must always strive to do. And it tends to foster the kind of monstrous egos the webcomic sphere grows like mushrooms in the shit-spattered dark. Tim Buckley of Ctrl-Alt-Del is notorious for having a zero tolerance for any criticism, constructive or otherwise, often deleting it unregarded from his forums, or declaring them invalid for half-baked reasons. It seems blanket praise has already done its damage to this fevered ego.

1) Germany killed 6 million Jews, many of which were from Prague. If there is any justification for zero tolerance on anti-semitism, that would be it. In principle, I agree with you.

2) I've got no gripes with the reporting here. If convicted, this is not right.

3) There is a big difference between being charged with a crime and being found guilty. If this guy is convicted, then you have a story, and I agree with you. Otherwise, he is innocent until proven guilty and this story is nothing more than agit-prop.

4) Welcome to the world of the protester. I know several protesters who have been arrested and it's not a big deal. It's an expected part of the protest experience and more common than you think. I would guess that these particular protesters probably got better treatment than most protesters (no tear gas, riot police, tazer guns or billy clubs). The 45 years thing is pure bullshit, and who ever told that to you was trying to manipulate you. If any of these protesters spend a single day in prison beyond their initial arrest, I will eat my hat.

In general, political fringe news sites such as World Net Daily, Raw Story, Human Events Online, etc. are not the best source material. They just aren't trustworthy. There are plenty of respected partisan political publications that you can source if you must, such as the conservative 'National Review' or the liberal 'Nation', but citing WND is only going to make people dismiss your views as flat out BS. It's better to stick to sources with wide and varied readership. It lessens the echo chamber effect.

As for 'http://www.romea.cz', if the site looks like a tripod homepage, no one is going to buy it.

If you can't find a good source for something, I wouldn't blog about it. Just sayin'

If you want a good case on thought crime that has been well covered and analyzed from many perspectives, google 'Jose Padilla'.

I respect your opinions, but this post seems like the kind of vague agit-prop I used to get from conservative relatives (before I started making my rebuttals re: all. ). You are better than this, Eric.

No one would argue that workplace safety is not important. However, these gory ads are an elaborate social marketing campaign orchestrated to manipulate the public into talking about accidents, safety and prevention rather than talking about the failure of workers compensation boards to compensate the victims. WCBs in each Canadian province (and in the US) have come under a lot of scrutiny for their avoidance of paying fair compensation to disabled workers. The fact that people are talking about the ads rather than the dysfunctionality of the WCB system shows that this orchestrated social manipulation campaign is working.

WCBs in Canada and the US represent employers (the only ones paying into the fund). Therefore WCBs will do whatever they can to lower fees for corporations. One way is by denying compensation payments to disabled workers. But this would be socially unacceptable unless the public can also be manipulated into believing that the worker is somehow negligent or at fault for causing the accident. In this social marketing campaign, WCBs are subtly adopting the language of the anti-drunk-driver campaign - " zero tolerance" "negligence", etc. to manipulate public attitudes towards injured workers. They also use the term "accidents" rather than "injuries" to take the focus away from the person and onto the event. These ads, and other orchestrated 'social engineering' techniques lay the foundation for WCBs to justify a reduction in injury compensation payments to disabled workers by manipulating public attitudes toward disabled workers.

Those injured workers in the videos would realistically spend the rest of their lives in poverty fighting the WCB for compensation.

The way to reduce injuries is to make companies accountable for workplace safety violations through realistic fees, not protect unsafe companies from these higher fees by denying disabled workers' claims.

If you think the WSIB's ads are scary, check out the Canadian Injured Workers Society at http://www.ciws.ca for a real eye-opener!

I have zero tolerance for that sort of bravado as well.

If I'm riding in a B-52 with my friend at the wheel and they pull this shenanigan bravado, I demand that I be droppd off at the nearest air force base PRONTO.
If my friends have been drinking, I make sure the get the keys to their B-52 off them.
That's zero tolerance.

Just for clarification; I would never post a video of an accident with injuries or fatalities. This crash was not an accident. It was caused by the deliberate actions of someone who knew the tolerances of an aircraft and chose to ignore them. Tragically, this pilot had a history of this behavior. As someone who is intimately involved with safety systems that protect people, I strongly endorse zero tolerance for bravado that puts others at risk.

Not from what I see. It makes fun of bad laws, not of the idea of law itself. I can't think of a better way to breed disrespect for the law than to establish bad ones. If we don't like it change the law, don't complain of the lack of respect.

We've had lots of bad laws in the past. Prohibition, returned slave laws, etc. Growing numbers of people and nations are starting to realize that this is another set of them. It's not that drugs are ok or that there shouldn't be control of them but that zero tolerance and prison seems ineffective so it's time to allow alternatives. Offer more freedom to trial study and science with less politics, see what actually works for a change. Can't do that through schedule one though, bars even medical use so no trial studies of any real alternatives. Zero tolerance is the law, period. That needs to change.