banned-users

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

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"

Why do you seem to think this is sinister in some way

Literally banning words is generally not a good path to head down

It does not lead to good things

The goal is, when the CDC wants to do research on ---Fetus developemental studies They don't want every pro/anti abortion group weighing in and blowing their $10k research expense out of the water They don't need it to become an issue they have to spend weeks explaining to the press and their chain of command

can't they just avoid saying that instead of banning it then

The goal is for the expense report to look like ---Research expense 000F1 ---Research expense 000F2 ---Research expense 000F3 ---Project expense 000G1

etc.

That's also a bad thing, though, since it heavily reduces transparency in the budget

That's the point though, the CDC should not be answering to public opinion on every decision they make

I disagree. Transparency in a governing body is one of the most important things.

And also, what makes you think they would stop anything just based on public pressure?

The FCC has shown that that clearly doesn't matter.

lol, that's a whole different issue entirely

Public opinion matters on issues people care about

It's why the story is being written on these 7 words specifically

Both life/choice and net neutrality are issues people care about

The story is being written on all seven of the words

No "specifically" about it

Nobody, N O B O D Y gives a shit about net neutrality

It's a trendy issue on the internet, that's it

THE INTERNET IS GOING TO BE LITERAL HELL BECAUSE SUPPLY AND DEMAND AREN'T A THING

Net neutrality is an issue comparable to the life/choice debate

oboi

I whatever circles you're in, sure

no i'd say the life choice is actually a somewhat worthy debate topic

Not doubting that in the least

That's fair, I'm basing my claims on anecdotal evidence.

What about you?

Leg, I meant in terms of scale only.

I do agree with you, but that's a separate matter.

before you guys rip eachother up some more keep in mind that there's not much you can do to change whatever happens anyway