Mor

As I understand that decision was to revert a recent regional year old law by the deposed president, that allowed second language status to minorities that constitute more 10% of regions population. I understand that in yout opinion the BBC coverage is unbalanced, IMO this is just really not that important right now and or our business. while what is important is that: "This is not a zero-sum game, it is not West versus East, it should not be, it is not Russia or the United States or other choices. This is about the people of Ukraine and Ukrainians making a choice about their future. We want to work with Russia, with other countries, with everybody available to make sure this is a peaceful from this day forward."(BBC) Basically Ukraine is in crisis, it needs to form a unity government, go to election and find away that everyone can work together(including external powers). Then if they want that minor law they can put to a standard vote.... jeesh I suppose that if you are watching Russian news, which has about double the "air" time on this than the BBC, then the BBC coverage might seem unbalanced to you... Keep in mind that it was mentioned in couple of hours later article when Russia pulled its ambassador(which is important for a peaceful and speedy resolution of this)... so before you cry bias, maybe you should consider all povs... Also I ignored the previous 3 paragraphs, because I am not certain what was your point other than trying to set the tone for this ( especially since changing west to east in each, well net you the same result ) It's not the first time.. and if I wanted to such arguments, i'd go somewhere were there is a religious sub-forum. Also I hope that Tagaziel return to offer some more insights on the topic.

Buying a DVR has greatly improved our quality of life, finally we watch what we want when we want instead of whatever is on tv, no more mind numbing commercials, you can pause take proper toilet break or rewind if you missed anything. If only someone would invent shared filters or playlists for those things, so we can weed out the crap like this and it would be prefect.

Not really... there is no point wasting time on trolls certain immature people tend to look for arguments to prove something in some grand battle ad nauseam, or get a rise out of you. For example: First paragraph is an attempt to get a rise, a personal attack hocked to tangibly related term "brainwashed". (used as an analog to describe, the long time standing harsh censorship in Russia, which limit available points of view to its citizen) Then he tries to dismiss the data complied on print, broadcast, and internet freedom(free Press index) and analysed by experts, by making assertion about its validity and attributing it to some questioner about an unrelated index about journalists. (plus some BS about Israel and turkey, and amusing himself) Then after agreeing with himself about the above, he dismiss criticism about censorship in Russia media since: he is not "an expert on Russian media" and knows "very little of..journalists..there" and that "unless you are Russian" he isn't going to take your word for it. While making a parallel sweeping statement about western mainstream media, so presumably he he is "an expert" on all western countries mainstream media, knows enough about journalists in those countries, and native to them otherwise why would should we take his word for it... Finally, flushed with yet again unrelated BS that going further from the topic which no one can prove. To sum it up, he dismiss data by experts, so he can turn this into he said she said diarrhea. Which is why you don't argue with a troll. They tend hang on some BS or quote out of context so they can jump to some BS tangible topic within their comfort zone, so they can win some BS point...

I like the toilet reference because how much it sounds like your nick +4U

Of course we are going with an article that covers censorship in the world (Which provide referenced data including an institution which studied and analyzed print, broadcast, and internet in every country, every year since 1980 ) over your personal experience in some incident. (Why you presume that you are the only one with the right personal experience and the right context/perspective to interpret it?!) Also do you understanding the difference between freedom and liberty? or that in this case digging for sensualized news is anything but demagogy? or do you really think that other than showing that no system is perfect(something that everyone knows) that those incident speak about the "Westren" media as a whole, and more importantly that they in any way shape or form implies that "Westren" media is less free than Eastren or Russian media. I'd love to see any independent institute that would even imply that Russian or Eastren media is more liberal in that respect then westren.. Until then all your goggling effort make me think of tinfoil conspiracy nut. So even your example about America and Western media is an american documentary criticizing america... or reiterating from before that in the west criticism of government and its policies is allowed a much greater degree of freedom, unlike in most Eastern countries(including Russia) with harsh censorship. (Which is very likely why trolls such as oby keep ranting about the west...insisting that everyone lies and only they know the truth..) p.s. I was talking about the example you noted as "more to the point", which has its own IMDB page. I am happy to to entertain, but lets make sure we are not railroading, we weren't talking about standard of life per se, but your claims that the western media is the propaganda machine, which lies and paint bad picture of Russia, a picture that according to you is far from the truth. To which I offer you a lot of possible ranking to check if you are running on "Putin" glue fumes or not. or which international indexes from independent sources are usually readily available, which overall seem to disagree with you.. So what you are talking about, why what you would or woldn't claim about the USA vs Russia or your excuses are important or relevant to what we talked about?!?! I don't know, who the F*** cares, get your head out of ass and stop comparing Russia to the USA. But for the sake of the argument to put things for you into perspective: I didn't care enough to spend time to look up the most recent data, so according to several years old info, what you describe as USA "worst health care system in the world" and its crap educational system are better by big margin then the those in Russia. Who knows maybe you are watching too much crap shows in the media? Also according to 2013 UN Human development report, which include health/education and more, USA is #3, Poland is #39 and Russia is #55, just to put things into. Agenda against putin? no. Freaking sick and tired of that over chewed Putin meme and oby like trolls? absolutely. So for once let put him into a good use. Also it is not my, westren or anyone else picture, it is data and science baby as for the rest what you are saying is painfully obvious to everyone.. yes no one is completely free( Personal freedom doesn't mean you can do whatever you want and freedom of speech doesn't mean say whatever you want) However the bottom line is it like it or not censorship in the east is far far worse then it is the west. So ranting about the West/USA and dismissing out of hand anything that is not in line with "Putin" daily brain fart is not a good idea. EDIT: @213374U, go troll somewhere else.

I agree that by large West vs East is defined either by economics(industrialized countries vs developing countries) or development index. Although I would be careful to generalize it as "western liberalism vs eastern conservatism". While the dentition of who is liberal or conservative is very subjective (e.g. with many western countries or even individual countries polarized between the two definitions e.g. US democrats vs republicans) I think that calling places where they practice corrective rape, genital mutilation, honor killings etc simply as conservatives leaves a bad taste in my mouth.

No need for wild imagination, you just described good ol' system in most Eastren countries(including Russia) where the government tells the press what is ok through harsh censorship. As demonstrated by the data I linked, so that we can avoid any statements based on our own beliefs or biases... Speaking of censorship, that film you linked to make your point about america was produced in and acted by Americans. In fact many films and other media in the "west" are openly critical of its various governments and policies. Which brings me back to Russia, when was last time that anyone was allowed to make a truly critical about Russia\Putin (in fact, some of the bigger fishes have been jailed on tramped up charges, so that others get the hint that you either with or against the "party" line ). So before we continue, you need to understand that from day one you have been exposed(brainwashed) to only one point of view i.e. "Putin daily". This is particularly hard to understand to people in the east where censorship is most brutal, thus their initial experience to global media is usually WTF?! LIES! this is usually passes once you expand your foundation and figure out that the world doesn't revolve around you. Again I am asking what is this picture of the west/east you are talking about? Is it Quality of Life, Purchasing Power, Safety, Education, Health Care, commute time(infrastructure), Pollution etc ? or maybe its things like repression, censorship, human rights abuses etc? Because overall in all those indexes Russia measured closely to a third world country. So it is not the "western" media that sells you the wrong picture, but "Putin daily" BS that keep finding enemies and conspiracies outside to deflect from issues within. Unless you have some other data to back up your belief other than the common rant west this west that.. of course where do you want the "bad guys" to come from "dady issues obesity central" or the "east"(i.e. third world countries) of child soldiers, crime/lawlessness/human rights abuses, where most of the wars, conflicts and generally **** happens... of course those actiony shows you mentioned pick exotic element and not your everyday joe. Say thank you you are not from Germany, those guys are still getting it bad with nazi zombies and the like. Sure TV shows has influence on our life, like most things books\games\youtube(e.g. I like big butts and I can't lie, so who knows maybe I was conditioned by some very old "westren" propaganda) Though I'd argue that news has far greater effect, as before here again we back to the main I noted above i.e. the crowd that read newspapers and follow current events, or watch more serious tv, is exposed to much larger verity of points of view in the west, while back Russia they generally broadcasting Putins message of the day... which you are spoon feed..

That is a strawmen argument. He didn't said that US or any other country for that matter, try to influencing the attitude of others toward its cause or position. What is being said that in the US and other western countries you also have free media which show opposing points of view(it is allowed not to agree with government on everything). Everyone, even you can sta"spread the word" as long as its not some kind of hate speech.(iirc Algazira started broadcasting in the US) While in countries such as Russia you are spoon feed the government propaganda.

Sorry, I don't want to diminish the severity of any kind of rape, but "corrective"?! It made me think of old porn movie with cheesy music/lines. With the main actor wearing a ridicules costume flashing his badge, saying "Hi, I am the 'corrective' sex inspector" and boom chicka Wow Wow

Ah, well, I would need to convince you that the picture the western newspaper paint of the east is not all that true and some other things, for which I am not currently in the mood to try. Sufficeive to say, I don't see the EU as our savior and we should not forget what they have done to us repeatedly in the past. We can keep it light. For example I think we can agree that media in general(not just newspapers) and not just Western is biased. So just like the "Western" newspaper, "Eastern" newspaper paint a poor picture of the West, which is not all that true. (btw I am Russian speaker so I am familiar with both sides) Also surely you will agree that the "west" is not homogeneous, it comprised of many countries, many of who tend to disagree, a lot. Even within those country you can find all points of view reflected by different news outlets( e.g. USA: FoxNews vs Cnn). However, this is not the case for in the "east", where freedom of press is very limited e.g. in Russian news are nationalized and censored, so instead of being exposed to all points of view you are mostly feed with Putin daily... I think this map illustrate this point very well.(note Russia is ranked just above Zimbabwe). p.s. how I hate the terms Westren and Eastren...

I agree with first sentence, but can you be more specific as to what exactly is this "pro west attitude" you have observed? Because to me most of European countries and North America are the "west", which give us a healthy mix of policies on every aspect of governance I can think off the top of my head, so I am little at loss here exactly what is the allure of the "east" ?

Just to clarify do you have a point or are you replaying to any of the points Tagaziel made? Or just ranting about Yugoslavia political and economical situation in general? If the later, then you preaching to the quire, if there is one thing that everyone agree on is that their country economy is ****e and their politicians are incompetent and or corrupt. Also I pretty sure that most of us would agree that people has become more apathetic (unless it directly involve them or a their daily quota of sensualized news has been filled, good luck to get them to care)

So do you accept there are good trolls? Maybe I am misreading the map, but I don't think at this point he, I and most of the rest, regardless of our positions care about this topic. But for the sake of the discussion, this my last shot at any contribution here and even tough it is blunt, I hope it will received as constructive. I guess I am not articulate enough in english, so let me try to be more blunt. There is no change of definitions, the term 'retard' was used as analog to help you visualize the difference between our and your definition i.e. what you define as "good trolls" we don't consider to be an act of retard(troll), which leaves us with a "good" retard still being a retard, even if the retard is right twice a day. The use of Open Post text with that analog, was an attempt to show you which definition is the more widely accepted. The "compromise" wasn't on my definition, but a retort to you calling that post a troll, after explaining the valid reason behind it, which would place it in the ballpark of what most said about a "good troll"... and considering your reactions, I added a reference to alanschu post, which explains that even your "good troll" may still be hurtful, hoping that what you got from it is the good ol' don't do to others what you don't want done to you. Also IMHO any person who in GENERAL define himself as any shade of troll is literally a retard or edgy retard if you wish. For the same reason that privet jokes outside of family\friends\co-workers or whatever social circle is usually doesn't received well.. it doesn't mean it's not a "good" joke, it doesn't says anything about you, only that generally you shouldn't throw them around unless you know the circumstances are right..

I thought that rephrasing the OP underscored nicely the point about who is changing the definitions and which point of view is generally accepted. In relation to my previous post and your reaction to it. So how about we compromise on a "good troll" Also considering your reaction you now might want to reread this post by alanschu to you, I thought it was a good post, but I guess that those things just fly by us until we get to experience them. Otherwise you'll have to go by 213374U advice to grown a "thicker skin".

nm

Religious debate eh? maybe. Since you are aware that there is a definition gap and that most of us define trolls differently then you, for the sake of the arguments let call them retards. So trying to show us the light with examples of few "good trolls" from your pop culture, which we don't consider as acts of retards and arguing that we don't see the light of the troll face god, giving credits to retards, indeed sound like a religious debate. (ETA: I don't suppose that my use of retards in this context is good/bad/ugly trolling?) Other than that, some of you are arguing for freedom of speech and expression without being a retard, agreed. Some of you are arguing that it is too easy to accuse a person of trolling if they do not agree with you, agreed. That how post are perceived is subjective, agreed. ..

Nice, although I'd note Norway, who had almost half as many competing athletes and wasn't the host nation..

I agree with all the examples you made, with the exception that I don't consider any of them as cases of trolling. criticism, satire, non PC commentary, good natured ribaldry etc shouldn't be dress up as trolling, just because they have been posted online. The difference between those things and trolling is just like the difference between Humor and 'making fun of' or even abuse i.e. knowing the right timing and situation. This difference is highlight on the internet because for the most part you have no awareness of your surroundings(and it gives some people the freedom to act out). Overall when you say trolling most of us think of stuff like kids who add 'boobs' to wikipidea or the reason why every forum need moderators( and sometimes anti spam measures). Not your examples.

The question you should be asking is if those "right wing" aspect define or unique to those supporting ties with EU, or highlighted by interested parties(supporters of ties with Russia), so they can dismiss grievances by public that grown weary of political corruption and Russian influence on Ukraine. I liked this Q&A article by the BBC it gives a good summary of the issues and all interest parties(including protest leaders, escalation and Radicals).

I wasn't addressing the economic question, I was addressing obyknven post. I suspect that he(like at least one other poster) was suggesting that this problem is due to external powers meddling in Ukraine affairs, ignoring Russia affairs. I haven't watched Russian news recently, but I wont be surprised if the general mood there is very similar i.e. that once again this an anti-russian move by westren russian haters.. ( I find it amazing how everyone(including former soviet countries, who had strong ties with Russia) developed such anti Russian sentiments and rush westward... Does Russia has any non grudging friends that neither need her or bullied by her? ) In that respect I thought it was important to show who is actually steering the pot. Also concerning the protest don't forget the anti protest laws and that before the police moved in, those were peaceful protest like the before in 2004. If you are suggesting that the protesters aren't totally clean as well, then IMO this was underscored from the start in video article in the OP. Also if you want to be objective a good rule of the thumb is no to pick edited videos titled "how it really happened", which like you dish out the blame in one direction and even trying to label the protesters as terrorist... Btw, why in your opinion is the recent escalation? after all the protest were peaceful for several month and before hand they were peaceful as well.

poles?! I don't where you pulled this from, but it is Russia with its interest to regain a part of its former sphere of influence who has been steering the pot. When Ukraine moved to signing up with the EU, Russia has put economic pressure on Ukraine(suspending loans, restricting trade). Russia backed the current President Yanukovych since 2004(when his election was ruled to have been fraudulent). Yanukovych the oligarch has since canceled the deal with EU and now Russia offering a lifeline loans and cheaper gas.. As for the protests, as far as I can see after the initial Police brutal raids didn't work nor Russia's carrot and stick measures, the Parliament has passed anti protest laws, which lead to the intense clashes you see today where police is shooting live rounds and protesters arming themself.

Neither would china or any dictatorship. So what exactly it says about the nature of the protests? EDIT: Also would the British Government use Militant groups such as Titushky?(which sound very much like Assad shabiha militia thugs who broke up protesters)

What funny is that other summarizing your long list of numbers, I haven't commented on either of the posts. But I am glad that you are able to entertain yourself

Spacey's is the is cynical and morally ambiguous antihero. As long as ain't going to continue building his house of cards for 3 seasons without being knocked down it will be fine.

Btw, those who are unfamiliar with the topic can find some info here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euromaidan