No, the worst part of Left Forum is the crackpots, the paranoiacs, the hysterics, and all the other truly dysfunctional personalities attracted by the conference’s most infamous policy: no panel submission will be rejected.

So yea, no vetting whatsoever.

It is fairly well documented that different demographic groups prioritize different issues and want different policies, the most thorough investigation of this is "Affluence and Influence", which the article obliquely references (the Gilens data). I don't know, off the top of my head, anything that looks just at how preferences differ across racial lines, but I would be surprised if they didn't.

Also, you say that "policies that help everyone flourish, like access to education and universal health care," but the problem is that not everyone agrees that access to education or healthcare is a governmental problem and even among the subset that do they don't agree on how to accomplish this.

Well it is interesting, I assume that the phrasing is important "the first black ball". So if you say the 2nd draw, and they've already drawn one on the first one then you lose.

Your probability of drawing a black ball in the first draw is 2/10 = .20 The probability of drawing your first black ball on the second draw is the probability of drawing a white ball first and then a black ball = (8/10)(2/9) = 0.178 Probability of drawing your first black ball on the third turn = (8/10)(7/9)*(2/8) = 0.156

Antwon is some weird shit. Should check out Michael Christmas as well.

Also, Flying Lotus's rap persona is Captain Murphy. This video is NSFW:

I agree, doesn't make it right though.

I appreciate what you are trying to do here, but I don't see how it cannot be an ad hominen attack.

ignore the person who lives the reality as opposed to the cis woman with privilege

What she says is "you can't not believe what this author is writing because of who she is" which is an ad hominen attack. She did not engage with the author's argument in anyway, and only dismisses it based on who the author is.

Which is too bad since I would think, perhaps wrongly, that laurelai would appreciate a book about intersectionality, and how interest organizations constantly try to frame advantaged group issues as being universal, while ignoring disadvantaged group issues.

Nope.

That is not what I was saying at all.

I was just suggesting another item to read, that attacked the point from a different direction.

What you wrote is only a call to action, perhaps I was harsh in saying this, but I clicked on it assuming it would be a critique and it wasn't.

And please continue with your ad hominem attacks.

omg, I didn't know that laurelai had a website.

This article though is entirely uninteresting. It is full of ad hoc attacks, barely makes a point, and just demands to be right.

If you'd like to read something that actually makes a compelling case that interest groups for the disadvantaged only represent the least disadvantaged disadvantaged (for example, women's groups represent white middle class women, black groups represent middle class male blacks, etc), I highly recommend *Affirmative Advocacy* by Dara Strolovitch.

FYI, you have a typo.

Also can you at least cite a source for the quote if you are going to use it as a title. Just because something is a title doesn't make it true, but people like to pretend it is. Without some sort of cite, which gives some context to what this article might be about, this whole thing just seems like a setup for more circlejerking.

Also, bitcoins have recently been offered as an awesome investment. If it is going to be framed as such, it will be taxed as such. Especially when its value explodes.

Haven't you heard? Internet is serious business.

I love the regular commenters here, but when I joined hubski it was for the articles. I like to read articles on stuff I don't know about.

I ran into flagamuffin on reddit yesterday, and was asked why I hadn't been on hubski recently. The truth of matter is that A) I'm busy and B) hubski doesn't give me what I want. When I cam here I wanted interesting articles that I wouldn't find on my google reader (RIP) but it seems that hubski is just a smaller version of /r/askreddit at times, which induces more signal to noise.

I am not sure where I am going with this at this point. All I really want is somewhere on the internet where I can discuss the news of the world in a more intelligent (read less pun filled) way.