Jake

It's a deal where Marcus is still wrong for hitting a fan, but if the context is what we believe it to be, we just know that he's not a bad kid. He's a kid that lost his temper when someone quite legitimately challenged that temper. We'll hope he learned from it.

The guy who instigated (maybe) the incident texted a reporter and said he said something that he shouldn't have and feels bad about it. Of course...many wonder if it is the so-called "magic hate word" going on here.

QUOTE (chw42 @ Feb 8, 2014 -> 06:22 PM) MySpace became a total clusterf*** with all the HTML editing you can do on their pages. It always seemed to me that was the thing its users liked the most about it. I think the problem was that by its nature, HTML editing or not, it became something that adults would never like...and unfortunately its user base starting approaching adulthood. We're already seeing with Facebook that you can't own a single age demographic across generations when it comes to social networking, it seems.

Facebook, like Gmail, had exclusivity on its side. Only *certain* people could join at first.

Nowhere did he say anything like "I never wanted to rebuild." All he said was that the reason we didn't rebuild is because we had competitive teams. We've already seen elsewhere where it has been strongly suggested that Reinsdorf has been the one commanding against rebuilds against KW's suggestions otherwise.

QUOTE (chw42 @ Feb 7, 2014 -> 10:51 PM) Google+ is pretty much a Google/tech news reader. Oh and I also use it to get beta versions of apps. That's about it. I actually do talk to friends on Hangouts though, it's one of the few major video services that allows you to do multi-person chats for free. I'm also a big fan of Hangouts and following Google/Android news and getting beta apps is pretty much what I do with G+. With that said, I probably still use it more than Facebook, which has become a tremendous waste of time despite my doing a mass purge of friends/follows to see if I might start seeing things that are worthwhile on there

Yeah, I would love Google+....if only anyone used it.

I think he dropped the charges so that the arbitrator's findings didn't go public.

I've also heard that these things dogs are no longer fit for living among humans, that they've generally been wild for so many generations that they can only fathomably exist in the form they do now -- in cities, with relatively non-hostile humans, eating human waste. They would harm other ecosystems and they'd be too volatile to live with people.

If I'm the rooftop owners, I'm pricing myself unbelievably high. I would be calling their bluff on moving perpetually. I would make them go very far down the process of moving before I'd budge unless they met an obscenely high demand, something like my next 30-50 years of projected profits

I think Luol is really good. He should be the kind of guy that gets a ring, but doesn't get anywhere near the love he deserves on the team he wins it with. While it is worth recognizing that his per-36's won't be as impressive as his per-game stats, the fact that he can play so much is itself a big value.

What juicer are you using?

Nothing is really more unprecedented about our current polarization than this. Our Congress acts extremely polarized, pretty much as polarized as any other time before, but not more than any other time. But the way we feel about the opposing parties? Yuck, and the feeling is mutual. Then there's this, which is interesting. Republicans will have elevated trust in the government when there is a Republican president while it drops noticeably when there is a D in there. Democrats, according to the researchers, who produced this graph, simply don't really identify the government with the President the way Republicans do. They are optimistic that the government can do right when there is an R president in a way that the inverse is not true.

QUOTE (Alpha Dog @ Feb 5, 2014 -> 08:54 PM) 'enhanced freedom' on the government dime. Yes. I see freedom maximization as one of the primary functions of the government

QUOTE (bmags @ Feb 6, 2014 -> 09:25 AM) They should. And in the East, having Luol Deng as your second best player doesn't mean you are a bad team. Contrary to Bulls fans opinions of every single player on their team, Luol is actually good! They have more than enough to win, and it's the coach that gets the axe. Look at the bobcats, less talent, imo, but same squandering lack of identity. They finally get a coach who demands they play the way he wants and suddenly they are a playoff team with Al Jefferson as their #1. I've never particularly disliked Mike Brown, but I would be for firing him now too. That team direly needs leadership. My sense is that the problem is actually Kyrie Irving, to a great extent, but I can't fire him just yet...so I'll hire a coach and hope things can get right.

QUOTE (Joxer_Daly @ Feb 6, 2014 -> 05:32 AM) Just had a look at the second video there. Interesting stuff alright. I think I'll have a look at The Righteous Mind, as recommended by your good self. It's pretty great and while he himself is an academic, it doesn't really read like an academic book. He starts by explaining the history of moral psychology, as learned by himself, in a way that is easy to get and is more of a narrative - he explains it as he learned it. Then he moves on to the interesting experiments he did. He then explains his own Moral Foundations Theory that came forth from that...followed by where he realized he was wrong/incomplete and the new things he did to make that right. Each chapter has a nice little wrap-up at the end, basically a sentence to a paragraph that recaps the bare bones things to remember. One of the most personally beneficial parts of reading the book for me, which is what he would have intended, is it helped me to understand why it is that people don't agree with me about political things. In another thread, Alpha Dog is not happy with the idea of people leaving the work force because they are being given something for nothing, in his eyes. If I am to think of him in some ways morally similar to conservatives, I can see that he invests a lot of moral importance in parts of morality that I don't. Haidt finds generally that of his six moral foundations (Care/harm, Fairness/cheating, Liberty/oppression, Loyalty/betrayal, Authority/subversion, Sanctity/degradation), conservatives tend to distribute their moral importance across all six of them. Left-liberals tend to be invested in only the first three, with a particular interest in Care/harm and Liberty/oppression. I'm guessing that Alpha Dog is much more sensitive to the notion of cheating the system than I am, which makes it less likely that he sees it as more a black-and-white Care/harm and Liberty/oppression problem as I do. On another topic, you can see the Sanctity/degradation, something he also just calls Purity, area as crucial to many divisive discussions. This speaks to being conservative, in many ways. Gay marriage is "disgusting" in that it is too different to be comfortable. Conservatives, generally having this strong sense of Sanctity/degradation, will always react negatively to strong cultural change, particularly when it is unprecedented change. Liberals are hardly worried about degradation of society. Of interest, libertarians generally register practically nothing on the Sanctity/degradation area, which constitutes a key difference between them and conservatives and explains why they sometimes agree with left-liberals. What is interesting to me is that his current job is at Columbia's business school, where he is trying to teach business ethics.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jan 25, 2014 -> 01:21 PM) Hell, the savings the White Sox got in their top few rounds last year allowed them the money it took to sign a guy like Trey Michalczewski later on, and they wound up having more than a couple guys who had 3rd round talent out of it. FWIW, Jacob May was the first player taken that many assumed was chosen for the purpose of his signability. He became a top 10 prospect in our system by the end of the season, per some lists.

Just remember, we're talking about the same guy who ridiculed us as a losing franchise for not signing Josh Hamilton last offseason. Marty's turning into the voice of the generic disgruntled fan, perpetually pissed about not spending money while simultaneously being pissed about every expenditure of money

QUOTE (Y2HH @ Feb 6, 2014 -> 08:43 AM) Probably got a really low quality one, or one with a flaw during its forging process...shouldn't break very easily at all. On the bright side, the jeweler replaced it free of charge. I'm still interested, I really like how they look and the idea that I can't accidentally break them

QUOTE (Harry Chappas @ Jan 29, 2014 -> 09:41 AM) The Crawford deal was more of a necessity while Bickell was a turd[ (or fourth) line winger that got hot at the right time. FTFY

It seems to me that Cleveland is a team where the inmates are running the asylum. I think they should be better than this

A good friend of mine got a tungsten ring, was boasting of its unbreakableness, then dropped it onto their tile floor as we all watched it shatter. I don't know if he got jipped or what

It takes somebody doing something very right to get a bunch of kids to live in s***holes like Tuscaloosa and Baton Rouge. Even crazier that black kids are flocking to those places. When I was working for the news, we reported on a (admittedly small) group of Ole Miss students burning Obama in effigy and chanting the n-word after the 2012 election was decided. How do you gloss over that s***? Maybe it's $$$

QUOTE (farmteam @ Feb 5, 2014 -> 10:36 PM) This is really interesting, what sort of studies have there been on this? This comes most generally from the field of moral psychology. That isn't my field of expertise, so I can't speak to the absolute agreement of that field, but one of its most esteemed researchers is a man whose work I am quite familiar with. His name is Jonathan Haidt and if you're interested in a book, The Righteous Mind is what you're looking for. There are many good YouTube videos out there, including a TED talk, where he lays things out pretty accessibly. Bear in mind that he has had some new developments since his TED talk though, even though the core is largely the same. He has begun to tease out libertarians as a tertiary group to study beyond the more vague "liberal vs. conservative" binary. Another fun place to go is YourMorals.org where you can take some of a whole bunch of surveys to see how you rank among your peers in this, that, and the other thing. By answering a few questions about your age, gender, and political beliefs (a couple of other things I can't remember too) you are also anonymously contributing to ongoing research. It is run by the same man, Haidt, and some other researchers. I think you can browse results without actually taking them too.