My God, you are an idiot.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by Adder

Wow. I generally take your police-state leanings with a big train a salt, but you really are a tool, aren't you?

Jackassery is disturbing the leafy, peaceful neighborhoods of the generous civil servants who find the pretexts to suppress dissent. Really?

It's not the best of strategies, but I understand the frustration after other avenues have been shut out, and if the elected officials haven't dealt with worse they should count themselves lucky. But not jackassery of any scale, certainly not on the same scale as middle of the night police raids, violated TROs, and pepper spraying of kids. More like pesty than jackassery.

Of course, if they did this at 2:00 am at Bloomberg's house, well, then I'd just call it justice.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

Conf to Ty I realize I'm being a dick. I'm trying to show you all why you shouldn't engage in this type posting.

Peace, brother. Why don't you model an ideal poster, just so we can all see what one looks like?

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy

It's not the best of strategies, but I understand the frustration after other avenues have been shut out, and if the elected officials haven't dealt with worse they should count themselves lucky. But not jackassery of any scale, certainly not on the same scale as middle of the night police raids, violated TROs, and pepper spraying of kids. More like pesty than jackassery.

Of course, if they did this at 2:00 am at Bloomberg's house, well, then I'd just call it justice.

To repeat and expand on what I said over on the other board:

Those people are jackasses. In a city of a million people, to say nothing of the rest of the Valley, they have a small coterie of whackadoos. It's not because they are being suppressed in any meaningful sense. If they were permitted to occupy a piece of land in front of City Hall, no one would notice. If they want to be heard, they should organize.

[Adder]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

To repeat and expand on what I said over on the other board:

Those people are jackasses. In a city of a million people, to say nothing of the rest of the Valley, they have a small coterie of whackadoos. It's not because they are being suppressed in any meaningful sense. If they were permitted to occupy a piece of land in front of City Hall, no one would notice. If they want to be heard, they should organize.

Let me clarify:

Those people may be jackasses. The conduct reported upon in Atticus's story was not jackassery. I don't have a problem with protesting at a public officials' house per se, although it's an easy place to go over the line. But there was nothing in that article that indicated that lines have been crossed.

I'm really not sure what you mean by "organize" though, and they seem to have found a way to be heard.

Finally, if no one would notice them occupying a small piece of land in front of City Hall, wouldn't city officials have been far smarter to let them do so?

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

To repeat and expand on what I said over on the other board:

Those people are jackasses. In a city of a million people, to say nothing of the rest of the Valley, they have a small coterie of whackadoos. It's not because they are being suppressed in any meaningful sense. If they were permitted to occupy a piece of land in front of City Hall, no one would notice. If they want to be heard, they should organize.

I don't know these people, but we may have a definitional problem.

On a scale of 1 to 10, say 1 is NotBob, 4 is Hank, and 8 is Thottam, where would you put "Jackassery"?

[Fugee]

Originally Posted by Adder

Those people may be jackasses. The conduct reported upon in Atticus's story was not jackassery. I don't have a problem with protesting at a public officials' house per se, although it's an easy place to go over the line. But there was nothing in that article that indicated that lines have been crossed.

I do have a problem with protesting at a public official's house. People have families and neighbors who don't deserve the fall out (much less the ease with which lines may be crossed) from a public protest.

I think it is jackassery. If you have a problem with a public official, protest at the person's office or as close as you can get. Don't take it to someone's home.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by Fugee

I do have a problem with protesting at a public official's house. People have families and neighbors who don't deserve the fall out (much less the ease with which lines may be crossed) from a public protest.

I think it is jackassery. If you have a problem with a public official, protest at the person's office or as close as you can get. Don't take it to someone's home.

But you live where people are nice. I'll bet you put jackassery sub-Hank on the scale, where in NYC, Hank wouldn't even rank a jackass wannabe.

I think you need thick skin to be an elected official (college president, a few other jobs). Back when I worked in politics, that would have been one step above the fake-bomb-threat (a weekly occurance), and certainly wouldn't have been as bad as much of what I saw. Peksy, annoying, but fairly pedestrian. Be glad they put up with it, but don't think that one is anything out of the ordinary.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by Adder

Let me clarify:

Those people may be jackasses. The conduct reported upon in Atticus's story was not jackassery. I don't have a problem with protesting at a public officials' house per se, although it's an easy place to go over the line. But there was nothing in that article that indicated that lines have been crossed.

I'm really not sure what you mean by "organize" though, and they seem to have found a way to be heard.

Finally, if no one would notice them occupying a small piece of land in front of City Hall, wouldn't city officials have been far smarter to let them do so?

I do not see how protesting at officials' houses will help the movement advance its goals. It's designed to be a pain in the ass. Which is not to say that the city shouldn't have let them camp downtown.

[Adder]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

I do not see how protesting at officials' houses will help the movement advance its goals. It's designed to be a pain in the ass.

I don't follow the disconnect between these two statements.

[Fugee]

Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy

I think you need thick skin to be an elected official (college president, a few other jobs). Back when I worked in politics, that would have been one step above the fake-bomb-threat (a weekly occurance), and certainly wouldn't have been as bad as much of what I saw. Peksy, annoying, but fairly pedestrian. Be glad they put up with it, but don't think that one is anything out of the ordinary.

Elected officials may need thick skins but their families and neighbors should not need them. If I lived next door to an official and protesters blocked the street or sidewalk protesting there, I'd turn my hose on them -- even if I agreed with the cause, don't bring it to my neighborhood.

[sgtclub]

Originally Posted by Adder

I don't follow the disconnect between these two statements.

I don't understand why the elected officials haven't dispersed these protests yet. Certainly they can't be properly permitted, can they?

[Sidd Finch]

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

because a person with a degree is "better" than the hypothetical poor person? you can't be serious. it seems to me pointing out that one of them is "less deserving" of punishment because she is of the elite goes contrary to one of the few uniting tenants in the movement.

No, because a tenured professor is less likely susceptible to an irresponsible violent outburst than an 18-yo student.

But you know this, you're just being a schmuck.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by Fugee

Elected officials may need thick skins but their families and neighbors should not need them. If I lived next door to an official and protesters blocked the street or sidewalk protesting there, I'd turn my hose on them -- even if I agreed with the cause, don't bring it to my neighborhood.

That's why it's ineffective to protest like that; it even gets sympathy for elected officials. Not many people realize most politicians are on the job 24/7 and the family is just happy they've brought their work home to do and aren't still stuck in the office.

But, yeah, sucks for the neighbors.

[Adder]

Originally Posted by Fugee

Elected officials may need thick skins but their families and neighbors should not need them. If I lived next door to an official and protesters blocked the street or sidewalk protesting there, I'd turn my hose on them -- even if I agreed with the cause, don't bring it to my neighborhood.

Yes, we wouldn't want you to be inconvenienced. That's all the really matters, afterall.

[Fugee]

Originally Posted by Adder

Yes, we wouldn't want you to be inconvenienced. That's all the really matters, afterall.

There is no reason to protest at someone's house other than to piss off their neighbors and make the person's family feel threatened. That's jackassery.

Using RT's example -- would you feel the same about a protest at an abortion provider's home? If it's wrong for the one, it's wrong for the other.