RJS you can’t put this many links in a post without getting sent to Moderation. If you don’t mind waiting for it to show up or risk it not showing up at all then break it into parts.
Moderators get notified by e-mail. And availability to jump in and approve varies a lot by time and season. I am looking for work so am constantly on the Intertoobz monitoring my own e-mail and idly surfing. So can jump on it. This isn’t always the case. And similar constraints apply to other Admin/Moderators. But if you are cool with possible delays then go ahead, just know we are not picking on you.
If , like me , you think you’ve noticed recently some curious changes in the comment sections of political posts here at AB or at other blogs ( the comments on the latest of Krugman’s pro-Hillary , anti-Bernie rants being one particularly notable example ) , then reading the material at these two links will convince you that it’s not your imagination – it’s simply HRC campaign tactics ( and cash ) :
” Hillary Clinton camp now paying online trolls to attack anyone who disparages her online ”
Marko even granting the time honored big T Truth that “Even Paranoids have Real Enemies” I have to say I am just not seeing that many new commenters. Wish I were. Unless you are implying that some long time posters/commenters are taking cash. Now it is certainly true the I could be bought (Hilary folk take note!!! I am not cheap but I can be had!! Okay ‘cheap’)
But I would need Chapter/Verse/Time Stamp to put the slightest credence into this. Sometimes paranoids are just that.
Who has been obnoxious to you here? These look like the same old faces with a few new ones added. Have yet to see a troll other than the ones who reside here.
Bruce, no, i dont have any problem with going into moderation, especially if it’s justified by my use of a lot of links…happens often at naked capitalism, and also at some of the right wing web sites where i often try to point out the errors of their ways…
on the issue Marko brought up, i have a sense that i am one of the victims, as i’ve been banished from Daily Kos for posting an Anonymous video addressing Hillary…Anonynmous referred to Hillary as a “puppet bitch”, and said she was controlled by Zionist bankers…i hear & see that kind of language all the time, so i never gave it a second thought…i was banned for “overt misogyny” and “anti-Semitism”…i gather more than 2 dozen readers reported me as in violation of their banned speech standards…(& i posted the video without comment)
in his latest post, Randy Wray complained about the same thing, and equates it to McCarthyism on the part of the Clinton campaign…
I see a lot of misogynistic language and people getting too close to LaRouchite Rothschild/Zionist Bankers stuff for comfort. Which is why I wouldn’t cross post it and CERTAINLY not without comment. That is applied approval anywhere. That said I got BoJo’d from dKos by the Man Himself for posting on I-P issues from a critical perspective. And it took a personal appeal pointing out the value of my SocSec work to get Kos to lift it. Lesson: it is his house and his guests and if he doesn’t want to hear “puppet bitch” and LaRouchite slogans or as in my case a historical analysis of the Book of Joshua as it applies to modern I-P relations then post somewhere else.
For example AB has clear limits understood by the moderators (though not advertised) and some people have been made to go away. Rare considering the longevity of the site, but it happens. Blogs are not in law and generally in practice any more a Free Speech Zone than is my living room. People don’t get that.
A little subtlety such as a trashing of a comment across the bow and it takes a lot to aggravate me. I agree with Bruce. I also read just about everything out here and at times clench my jaws. There is also some good intellect here at AB
When I read it , there were a few hundred comments I’d guess. I see it’s over 1000 now , but I suspect that the comment pattern that drew my attention still holds. This post’s comments seemed completely out of sync with those of previous Krugman posts attacking Sanders – i.e. , previously the most numerous high-rated comments were always those supportive of Bernie and critical of Krugman , with many stating that they were long-time fans of Krugman but were disappointed that he’d seemingly abandoned his progressive principles. Now , the weighting of high-rated comments seems to have shifted strongly in Krugman’s favor , and against Bernie.
More generally , both here and at other sites , I’d noticed recently that there seemed to be a more of a cookie-cutter vibe to pro-Hillary and anti-Bernie arguments , similar to the Fox-type repetitive soundbite techniques that have been used for so long ( and so effectively , sadly ) by Repubs. The down-ballot argument , the Supremes , Nader , Nader , blah-blah , etc , etc. Same-same , everywhere you go.
My first thought was that this was all the result of a coordinated action , though I had no evidence to support that. My thinking was that the HRC campaign , having effectively clinched the nomination , would begin to devote more resources towards social media-based steering of Bernie supporters to a more HRC-friendly position , or , failing that , to at least better counter their attacks on HRC.
Then I saw the articles about HRC’s paid troll armies , and it all made sense.
That’s all. To the extent the trolls are having any influence here at AB , it’s more likely via infectious influence from other sites than by their direct visitation.
Gotta’ love the idea that people change their minds depending on what they read on the internet.
In almost ten years of playing around in here I think I have had my mind changed two or three times by people who knew the subject much better than myself, and have changed the mind of one person on a 1 + 1 question.
Changing someone’s mind about a candidate? Better odds can be found on the Powerball.
my posting of the Anonymous video, the first politically slanted post i put up on Kos after a year and a half posting there, was certainly meant to challenge to the Clinton supporters, im not denying that….but in viewing it myself, i didn’t see that it could be offensive in the way it was interpreted…living in a conservative rural county, i’m sure i hear worse language about Obama and Clinton in the checkout line at the local Walmart than i heard in that video…and being an isolated old fart, i’m not that in tune to what the current politically incorrect phrases are with the young people…
but the broader point is that if i had posted a similar video about Trump with all those “naughty” words in it, no one at Kos would have lifted a finger against me…
contrary to media reports, 1st quarter GDP will be revised down…
there was widespread media misreporting of the revisions included in the March report on construction spending (pdf); for example, Bloomberg’s Econoday said “February is now revised sharply higher; Reuters called it “an upwardly revised 1.0 percent jump in February”, and the NY Times reported that the “February increase represented an upward revision by the government from its initial estimate that spending had fallen 0.5 percent”…they are are all wrong…February construction spending was originally reported at $1,144.0 billion annually, and it has now been revised down to $1,133.6 billion annually, and hence spending in March was below what was originally reported for February…what happened was there was a large downward revision to January spending, from the revised $1,150.1 billion figure reported last month to $1,122.0 billion with this report; hence the downwardly revised February spending was up from from January, even though it was lower than originally reported…reporters apparently took the change in the MoM percentage change to mean there was an upward change in spending…even worse than that, the NY Times quoted someone at Barclays in reporting “Barclays thinks the government will revise up its estimate of the economy’s growth last quarter to a 0.7 percent annual rate, from its initial 0.5 percent estimate“…we have a $28.1 billion downward revision to January spending, a $10.4 billion downward revision to February spending, and March construction spending that was almost certainly lower in most sectors than was estimated by the BEA, who in their technical notes for that in their technical notes for 1st quarter GDP, noted they assumed an increase in nonresidential construction, and an increase in residential construction…not even considering what ever the downward revision to assumed March spending might be (GDP investment categories include more than is included in this report) the $38.5 billion downward revisions to January and February alone would subtract more than 0.23 percentage points from GDP, just the opposite of what Barclays is alleged to have forecast….
RJS you can’t put this many links in a post without getting sent to Moderation. If you don’t mind waiting for it to show up or risk it not showing up at all then break it into parts.
thanks, Bruce, i had no idea it was in moderation…it appeared to post alright to me, as have others i’ve put up here previously with a bunch of links.
Moderators get notified by e-mail. And availability to jump in and approve varies a lot by time and season. I am looking for work so am constantly on the Intertoobz monitoring my own e-mail and idly surfing. So can jump on it. This isn’t always the case. And similar constraints apply to other Admin/Moderators. But if you are cool with possible delays then go ahead, just know we are not picking on you.
Trending on twitter :
https://twitter.com/ThankYouBernie/status/728025847848820737
If , like me , you think you’ve noticed recently some curious changes in the comment sections of political posts here at AB or at other blogs ( the comments on the latest of Krugman’s pro-Hillary , anti-Bernie rants being one particularly notable example ) , then reading the material at these two links will convince you that it’s not your imagination – it’s simply HRC campaign tactics ( and cash ) :
” Hillary Clinton camp now paying online trolls to attack anyone who disparages her online ”
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/king-hillary-clinton-paying-trolls-attack-people-online-article-1.2613980
” Hillary to Bernie Supporters: Don’t Vote for Me! ”
Marko even granting the time honored big T Truth that “Even Paranoids have Real Enemies” I have to say I am just not seeing that many new commenters. Wish I were. Unless you are implying that some long time posters/commenters are taking cash. Now it is certainly true the I could be bought (Hilary folk take note!!! I am not cheap but I can be had!! Okay ‘cheap’)
But I would need Chapter/Verse/Time Stamp to put the slightest credence into this. Sometimes paranoids are just that.
Ditto. If you find a payer, let me know.
Marko:
Who has been obnoxious to you here? These look like the same old faces with a few new ones added. Have yet to see a troll other than the ones who reside here.
Bruce, no, i dont have any problem with going into moderation, especially if it’s justified by my use of a lot of links…happens often at naked capitalism, and also at some of the right wing web sites where i often try to point out the errors of their ways…
on the issue Marko brought up, i have a sense that i am one of the victims, as i’ve been banished from Daily Kos for posting an Anonymous video addressing Hillary…Anonynmous referred to Hillary as a “puppet bitch”, and said she was controlled by Zionist bankers…i hear & see that kind of language all the time, so i never gave it a second thought…i was banned for “overt misogyny” and “anti-Semitism”…i gather more than 2 dozen readers reported me as in violation of their banned speech standards…(& i posted the video without comment)
in his latest post, Randy Wray complained about the same thing, and equates it to McCarthyism on the part of the Clinton campaign…
I see a lot of misogynistic language and people getting too close to LaRouchite Rothschild/Zionist Bankers stuff for comfort. Which is why I wouldn’t cross post it and CERTAINLY not without comment. That is applied approval anywhere. That said I got BoJo’d from dKos by the Man Himself for posting on I-P issues from a critical perspective. And it took a personal appeal pointing out the value of my SocSec work to get Kos to lift it. Lesson: it is his house and his guests and if he doesn’t want to hear “puppet bitch” and LaRouchite slogans or as in my case a historical analysis of the Book of Joshua as it applies to modern I-P relations then post somewhere else.
For example AB has clear limits understood by the moderators (though not advertised) and some people have been made to go away. Rare considering the longevity of the site, but it happens. Blogs are not in law and generally in practice any more a Free Speech Zone than is my living room. People don’t get that.
A little subtlety such as a trashing of a comment across the bow and it takes a lot to aggravate me. I agree with Bruce. I also read just about everything out here and at times clench my jaws. There is also some good intellect here at AB
No , I’m not suggesting that longtime AB’ers are on Hillary’s payroll , and I’m sorry I wasn’t more specific about what inspired my comment.
What got me thinking about paid HRC trolls , before I saw the articles linked above , was the comment section of this Krugman post:
http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2016/05/02/bernies-bad-end/#commentsContainer
When I read it , there were a few hundred comments I’d guess. I see it’s over 1000 now , but I suspect that the comment pattern that drew my attention still holds. This post’s comments seemed completely out of sync with those of previous Krugman posts attacking Sanders – i.e. , previously the most numerous high-rated comments were always those supportive of Bernie and critical of Krugman , with many stating that they were long-time fans of Krugman but were disappointed that he’d seemingly abandoned his progressive principles. Now , the weighting of high-rated comments seems to have shifted strongly in Krugman’s favor , and against Bernie.
More generally , both here and at other sites , I’d noticed recently that there seemed to be a more of a cookie-cutter vibe to pro-Hillary and anti-Bernie arguments , similar to the Fox-type repetitive soundbite techniques that have been used for so long ( and so effectively , sadly ) by Repubs. The down-ballot argument , the Supremes , Nader , Nader , blah-blah , etc , etc. Same-same , everywhere you go.
My first thought was that this was all the result of a coordinated action , though I had no evidence to support that. My thinking was that the HRC campaign , having effectively clinched the nomination , would begin to devote more resources towards social media-based steering of Bernie supporters to a more HRC-friendly position , or , failing that , to at least better counter their attacks on HRC.
Then I saw the articles about HRC’s paid troll armies , and it all made sense.
That’s all. To the extent the trolls are having any influence here at AB , it’s more likely via infectious influence from other sites than by their direct visitation.
for the record, here’s the Randy Wray post i was refering to:
http://neweconomicperspectives.org/2016/05/progressives-dont-let-friends-vote-neocon.html
it was also cross-posted at Naked Capitalism
Gotta’ love the idea that people change their minds depending on what they read on the internet.
In almost ten years of playing around in here I think I have had my mind changed two or three times by people who knew the subject much better than myself, and have changed the mind of one person on a 1 + 1 question.
Changing someone’s mind about a candidate? Better odds can be found on the Powerball.
Don’t tell us , EMichael , tell your lady , Hillary.
She’s the one blowing million$ on the trolls. Speaks to her decision-making ability , BTW. Universally shitty.
my posting of the Anonymous video, the first politically slanted post i put up on Kos after a year and a half posting there, was certainly meant to challenge to the Clinton supporters, im not denying that….but in viewing it myself, i didn’t see that it could be offensive in the way it was interpreted…living in a conservative rural county, i’m sure i hear worse language about Obama and Clinton in the checkout line at the local Walmart than i heard in that video…and being an isolated old fart, i’m not that in tune to what the current politically incorrect phrases are with the young people…
but the broader point is that if i had posted a similar video about Trump with all those “naughty” words in it, no one at Kos would have lifted a finger against me…