nice shoutout
banned-users
Phi Kappa Chi ΦΚΧ <a:yeah:589703000977571860><a:ppHop:536353159615086612>
Friday, December 15, 2017
High quality content
A Man on a flight
excuse me, what year is this?
Have to play a game that won't have its music claimed
Get that ad money
huh
wouldya look at that
oh
thanks
Look at all the new people we've got this week alone
complete randos
Saturday, December 16, 2017
Just think how many people we'll get when PkmnRob starts back up again
>when
oh hi new person
that's funny that you just got here randomly
Yeah
excuse me but i'm not a rando
idk
i don't really remember you
Dialga was the shitty version of Palkia
For all the suckers who didn't buy Pearl
excuse me
Dialga is rad
Roar of Time sounds so much cooler than Spacial Rend
>recharge moves
>not platinum
Dailga can destroy fairies still unlike those other wuss dragons
this is the fairy slayer dragon
this is pretty fucked up
I read that as being a good thing
Non-politicizing budget line-items leads to less scrutiny
And almost always, the shit that gets raised around small sums of money being spent on these things is always disproportionate
So you think it's good because if they don't use these words, stupid people won't notice?
Nobody will notice
It'll go in as a line-item expenditure that matches another 100
Anyway, "science-based" and "evidence-based" are banned phrases too
I'm a pirate so not exaclty big on politics, but it seems like a bad idea to ban the phrases" evidence-based" and "science-based"
Just like in your Windows task manager, you have 10+ svc host processes
The fact that there's a banned phrases list at all is an uncomfortable precedent
Literally 1984-esque
The most direct example yet
It's banning terms to be used on government budget reports
To expediate the process of accounting these expenditures
Why in the world would you need to ban "science-based" or "evidence-based" on any report
The public should literally never be scrutinizing line items
How does it help to say "zygote" instead of "fetus"
They're still going to have to say it somehow
No they don't. This is a push to remove details from expense reports
Lest ever bit of expenditure get scrutinized.
If that was their goal, I'm sure there's a better way to do it than by banning words and phrases
Feds are tired of people raising a fuss over the language on these reports
This is just going to raise even more of a fuss
I'm sure the actual lists of words/phrases they're tryign to filter out are 100x as long
These were leaked to cause a fuss
There are only seven
not leaked
There are only seven
“vulnerable,” “entitlement,” “diversity,” “transgender,” “fetus,” “evidence-based” and “science-based”
Policy analysts at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in Atlanta were told of the list of forbidden words at a meeting Thursday with senior CDC officials who oversee the budget
That's a nice way of saying leaked
It also says "The forbidden words are" rather than "The known forbidden words are"
Which seems like a pretty big detail that WaPo wouldn't miss
The post isn't writing a story about the policy shift, because nobody would care
They're writing a story about 7 "controversial" words that will no loger appear on expense reports
As fed to them by a source within the CDC
What do you mean nobody would care about the policy shift
People absolutely would care
you know it doesn't really seem like either of you plan on seriously considering what the other guy is saying
I'm trying to, does it seem like I'm not?
Federal expense documents are going to henceforth be streamlined and standardized across agencies
That's the policy
Which, if that was their aim, shouldn't have been done through banning of words and phrases
That's how it's done though
Also:
"Kelly did not say why the words are being banned, according to the analyst, and told the group that she was merely relaying the information."
If an innocuous goal like that was their aim, I would think that they would have little problem saying so
"innocuous goal"