Search archive

It does say that the representative didn't tell them any reason behind the changes.

I shouldn't assume the worst

You raised a point I didn't think of

Anyway, it's been fun, Spooky

lol

Eh, I don't drink

That's pretty normal

I mean, I guess? We're defending our opinions.

Rip each other up? I thought we were having a good natured discussion.

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

Leg, I meant in terms of scale only.

What about you?

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

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

No "specifically" about it

The story is being written on all seven of the words

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

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

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

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

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

It does not lead to good things

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

If an innocuous goal like that was their aim, I would think that they would have little problem saying so

"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."

Also:

Which, if that was their aim, shouldn't have been done through banning of words and phrases

I'm trying to, does it seem like I'm not?

People absolutely would care

What do you mean nobody would care about the policy shift

Which seems like a pretty big detail that WaPo wouldn't miss

It also says "The forbidden words are" rather than "The known forbidden words are"

“vulnerable,” “entitlement,” “diversity,” “transgender,” “fetus,” “evidence-based” and “science-based”

There are only seven

not leaked

There are only seven

This is just going to raise even more of a fuss

If that was their goal, I'm sure there's a better way to do it than by banning words and phrases

They're still going to have to say it somehow

How does it help to say "zygote" instead of "fetus"

Why in the world would you need to ban "science-based" or "evidence-based" on any report

The most direct example yet

Literally 1984-esque

The fact that there's a banned phrases list at all is an uncomfortable precedent

Anyway, "science-based" and "evidence-based" are banned phrases too

So you think it's good because if they don't use these words, stupid people won't notice?

this is pretty fucked up

https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/cdc-gets-list-of-forbidden-words-fetus-transgender-diversity/2017/12/15/f503837a-e1cf-11e7-89e8-edec16379010_story.html?tid=ss_tw&utm_term=.77385def6ed1

Ah

What anime is this by the way