jeffw

jeffw OP , 26 days ago

Look who’s excited for a center left party!

jeffw OP , 26 days ago

How dare you insult the greatest American tradition?!

jeffw OP , 26 days ago

Because if you don’t quote someone it sounds like you’re saying it and then you get sued

jeffw OP , 26 days ago (edited 26 days ago)

I rely on 30+ sources. I do not work for any of them, although I (edit: pay to) subscribe to 3 or 4 (edit: NyTimes, WaPo, Philadelphia Inquirer, and Wired, if anyone cares). Every weekday, I ensure ProPublica’s work gets posted somewhere on Lemmy, that’s probably the only one I never skip.

I don’t alter site headlines and can’t force any outlet to write a better article. The news here is that Boebert said a racist thing. The low-quality journalism thing where they do the “what does twitter have to say about this?” isn’t really important.

jeffw OP , 26 days ago

You mean like hoods executive order that was blocked by courts? I’m not saying he’s the biggest trans ally but saying he’s done almost nothing is unfair imo

jeffw OP , 26 days ago

To be fair, I think there’s only one person who can’t put that down

jeffw OP , 26 days ago

Just to be clear, I didn’t mean to insinuate that. Posting this more as a “look how shitty our world is” than a “yay, good reforms!” kinda post.

jeffw OP , 26 days ago

Executive actions and orders are not laws.

And any law is subject to the constitution. If I write a law that says “all Japanese people must be sent to internment camps,” a court should intervene and say “no, that’s not legal.”

jeffw , 27 days ago (edited 26 days ago)

Editing this comment because it appears it has come across to some as doubting the accusers, when I intended to present a skeptical comment about Gaiman. To clarify, my point is that they have plenty of evidence and he has made one rebuttal, which included a lie about one of the victims.

jeffw , 26 days ago (edited 26 days ago)

Except the whole “women coming after him” is steeped in misogyny and not reality. How many people get accused by multiple victims of the same thing, with evidence and witnesses? I’m not clear about the 2005 case, but the more recent one has physical evidence and witnesses. Gaiman’s evidence is an already disproven claim. One side has physical evidence while one is lying.

jeffw , 26 days ago

Yes, it’s a conspiracy! That’s a great first assumption. Classic misogyny

jeffw , 26 days ago (edited 26 days ago)

Of course we shouldn’t lock someone up based on an accusation but courts are imperfect. Many people are convicted of crimes they did not commit and other crimes are difficult to convince people on. It’s also highly unlikely Gaiman will ever go to a criminal trial over this, like so many other people who commit sexual assault. That’s why you don’t wait for a conviction to support women.

Estimates of false accusations are usually under 1 in 20. This article claims 2-10%. why would you default to that position? Again, we are not a court of law. You do not need a conviction to make up your mind.

Regardless, the evidence presented so far is more than sufficient for a conviction. In the Gaiman cases, we have multiple witnesses and contemporaneous evidence for both women. It’s not just 2 random people making claims. Why would this be a vast conspiracy of 2 women who faked contemporaneous evidence and both have multiple witnesses and physical evidence? What evidence do you have that all of their evidence is fake?

Edit: let’s go one step farther. The 2 women have witnesses and contemporaneous evidence. Gaiman made a claim that one woman had a memory disorder, which has already been proven false. Not only are you siding with the party with no evidence, you are siding with the one whose only evidence has been debunked within hours. Again, why?

jeffw , 26 days ago

I’m going to copy and paste my reply from elsewhere:

Of course we shouldn’t lock someone up based on an accusation but courts are imperfect. Many people are convicted of crimes they did not commit and other crimes are difficult to convince people on. It’s also highly unlikely Gaiman will ever go to a criminal trial over this, like so many other people who commit sexual assault. That’s why you don’t wait for a conviction to support women.

Estimates of false accusations are usually under 1 in 20. This article claims 2-10%. why would you default to that position? Again, we are not a court of law. You do not need a conviction to make up your mind.

Regardless, the evidence presented so far is more than sufficient for a conviction. In the Gaiman cases, we have multiple witnesses and contemporaneous evidence for both women. It’s not just 2 random people making claims. Why would this be a vast conspiracy of 2 women who faked contemporaneous evidence and both have multiple witnesses and physical evidence? What evidence do you have that all of their evidence is fake?

Edit: let’s go one step farther. The 2 women have witnesses and contemporaneous evidence. Gaiman made a claim that one woman had a memory disorder, which has already been proven false. Not only are you siding with the party with no evidence, you are siding with the one whose only evidence has been debunked within hours. Again, why?

jeffw , 26 days ago

So what you’re saying is, all I need to do to get one of my exes jailed is get to know another disgruntled ex of theirs? Awesome!

This doesn’t insinuate it’s a lie? You’re being disingenuous now lol.

jeffw , 26 days ago

So what you’re saying is, all I need to do to get one of my exes jailed is get to know another disgruntled ex of theirs? Awesome!

How is that neutrality? If you’re going to troll, do better dude

jeffw OP , 27 days ago

Lord of the Flies? How?

jeffw OP , 27 days ago

Sucks to your assmar

jeffw OP , 27 days ago

What’s weird is that he’s complaining about androgynous names. Was he born yesterday?

jeffw OP , 26 days ago

The list repeats until a name is “retired,” as this one probably will be

jeffw OP , 27 days ago

In my state, bartenders (and waiters) can be 18. You can serve and not drink. I thought that was similar in other states

Edit: same for beer, wine, liquor stores

jeffw OP , 27 days ago

Man, I swear I heard it. Probably on NPR. I can’t find it per se but I did find that it could come from devices concealed inside standard electronics, so I think a phone would make sense.