Blogosphere--Angry White Males?

[Ilvane]

I saw this opinion piece and thought it was pretty interesting.



~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
ELLEN GOODMAN
E-male
By Ellen Goodman, Globe Columnist | August 10, 2007

IT'S WORTH remembering that the blogosphere is still so new it baffles spell check. For that matter, if I type "blogger" on my screen, my retro software offers alternatives like "loggers," "floggers," and "boggler."

It "boggles" my mind to realize how quickly a piece of Internet terrain has gained power in politics. By now, the political blogosphere is to the left what talk radio is to the right. It is a forceful, sometimes demagogic, message-monger organizing tool for the progressive end of the Democratic Party.

The New Republic's Jonathan Chait recently called the netroots "the most significant mass movement in US politics since the rise of the Christian right." In fact, they've amplified the antiwar, anti-Bush views, become an alternative fund-raising operation, and linked cyberliberals across the country.

Last week, these progressive political bloggers not only attracted 1,200 to Chicago for the Yearly Kos convention, but made it a designated stop for seven out of the eight Democratic candidates.

Nevertheless, there is another, less flattering way in which broadband has followed broadcast and the liberal political bloggers mimic the conservative talk-show hosts. The chief messengers are overwhelmingly men -- white men, even angry white men.

I began tracking the maleness of this media last spring while I was a visiting fellow at Harvard's Shorenstein Center on the Press, Politics, and Public Policy. An intrepid graduate student created a spreadsheet of the top 90 political blogs. A full 42 percent were edited and written by men only, while 7 percent were by women only. Another 45 percent were edited or authored by both men and women, though the "coed" mix was overwhelmingly male. And, not surprisingly, most male bloggers linked to male bloggers.

Yes, this is the kettle of the MSM -- mainstream media -- calling the pot of the netroots male. In fairness, half of all 96 million blogs are written by women. But in the smaller political sphere, what is touted as a fresh force for change looks an awful lot like a new boy network.

Now, after what's been a long, low rumble over demography and diversity, a grass-roots rebellion is finally surfacing in the netroots. At Yearly Kos itself, home of what Jennifer Pozner described on Huffington Post as the "blustering A-list boys of the 'netroots,' " there was the panel titled gamely: "Blogging While Female." The question for the panel was this: "The blogosphere was supposed to be a place where gender didn't matter and voice was all. So what happened?"

What did happen? Is it the angry voice -- a netroot norm but a female abnorm? Markos Moulitsas, founder of the Daily Kos and namesake of the convention, said unabashedly in an ABC News interview last year, "I learned to talk the way I do in the US Army. And we don't mince words. In politics, I don't see it any different. I see it as a battlefield." The American Prospect's Garance Franke-Ruta, who was on the panel notes, wryly, "If you're an angry man you're righteous. If you're an angry woman, you're crazy or a bitch."

Is it harassment? Women have been talking about this since blogger Kathy Sierra was threatened with a picture of her next to a noose. Convention organizer Gina Cooper has two e-mail addresses, just one carrying her female name. Only "Gina" gets the hate e-mail with sexual threats and such comments as: "I'm going to hunt you down." Who knows how many women are scared silent.

Is it because men raise their hands first in class? Cooper thinks one reason for the demographics is that educated, economically comfortable men were the early adapters to the technology and took the lead. Blogger Adele Stan suggests white male bloggers have a network of "funding, linking, quoting, or bookings on political talk shows." Or maybe we need only count viewers. The typical political blog reader is a 43-year-old man with an $80,000 family income. Is it any surprise that Hillary Clinton gets only 9 percent in most online-activist polls, while garnering more than 40 percent in traditional polls?

It's not that women are invisible. There are "women's pages" on the Internet. Technorati counts more than 11,000 "mommy blogs." There are "women's issues" blogs like the funny and bracing Feministing.

But this is not just about counting, not just about diversity-by-the-numbers. It's about the political dialogue -- who gets heard and who sets the agenda. Cooper asks herself: "Are we going to do the same thing we've done all along, but with computers? Or will we create a new institution that allows for marginalized voices?"

Next year, Yearly Kos will undergo a name change. The assembly of progressive bloggers will call themselves Netroots Nation. But when will the members of these netroots look more like the nation?

Ellen Goodman's e-mail address is ellengoodman@globe.com.

© Copyright 2007 The New York Times Company

[Xaerve]

1) There is no anti-feminist agenda at play, if females are interested in politics they should start writing more "blogs." I personally think most blogs are a fucking joke and are for people who have too much free time on their hands, or are too dense to figure out their own opinion on issues in the country.

Furthermore, the point she forgets to mention is salient enough: blogs are just as much for entertainment value as they are for real political information (if not more). So yes, the "angry-white man" might be a little more interesting to read than the "mommy blog" with a political bent.

Lets not also forget the major political commentator for the NY times who is 1) female, and 2) probably one of the angriest political commentators in the blog/news/whatever space: Maureen Dowd (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/opinion/editorialsandoped/oped/columnists/maureendowd/index.html)

2)
I began tracking the maleness of this media last spring while I was a visiting fellow at Harvard's Shorenstein Center on the Press, Politics, and Public Policy.

Nice plug in dropping the Harvard name, but unfortunately for Ellen the Shorenstein Center is a fucking joke.

[Gan]

1) There is no anti-feminist agenda at play, if females are interested in politics they should start writing more "blogs." I personally think most blogs are a fucking joke and are for people who have too much free time on their hands, or are too dense to figure out their own opinion on issues in the country.

Furthermore, the point she forgets to mention is salient enough: blogs are just as much for entertainment value as they are for real political information (if not more). So yes, the "angry-white man" might be a little more interesting to read than the "mommy blog" with a political bent.

Lets not also forget the major political commentator for the NY times who is 1) female, and 2) probably one of the angriest political commentators in the blog/news/whatever space: Maureen Dowd (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/opinion/editorialsandoped/oped/columnists/maureendowd/index.html)

2)

Nice plug in dropping the Harvard name, but unfortunately for Ellen the Shorenstein Center is a fucking joke.

/Agreed.

I consider personal blogs as diatribes. If I want news, I'll read the news. If I want discussion, I'll participate in a forum. The last thing I need to do is waste time reading someone's bullshit opinion in a blog and not have it linked to any active discussion.

Blogging is like shitting on the sidewalk in hopes that someone else will walk by and enjoy the sight, smell, and perhaps even step in it. Thank God there's more than one 'sidewalk' on the internet.

[Celephais]

Too... Much... Text... I'm interested in this topic but not enough to actually read this so far.

Methais, please read those posts and summerize in a picture.

[ElanthianSiren]

I believe the problem is that women, when writing blogs, write as if they're communicating with friends (casually), while men write for an audience. They use tighter lines and less adverbs. This makes their writing more appealing to a reader's general goal (information, less extraneous bullshit).

You can take entire classes on the different ways that men and women communicate (rapport verses report). I don't believe that there's a big conspiracy to keep women out of political blogging.

[Meges]

I saw this opinion piece and thought it was pretty interesting.



~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
ELLEN GOODMAN
E-male
By Ellen Goodman, Globe Columnist | August 10, 2007

...The American Prospect's Garance Franke-Ruta, who was on the panel notes, wryly, "If you're an angry man you're righteous. If you're an angry woman, you're crazy or a bitch." ...

© Copyright 2007 The New York Times Company

Heh.


Meges

[CrystalTears]

Heh yeah, pretty much. Angry women ARE bitches though.

"When man makes a mistake we call it evil. When God makes a mistake we call it nature."

[Krendeli]

Heh yeah, pretty much. Angry women ARE bitches though.


Don't kid yourself. All women are bitches.

[Ilvane]

It's true in a lot of ways that women who are powerful are seen as being bitches, while men who are the same way are considered to be strong, and hard working.

Or a woman who gets to the top of a company usually has to deal with people thinking she slept her way to the top, where a man wouldn't, etc..

It's a tough world for women at the top.

I guess it would be something of a thought that Hilary Clinton has this issue too, as a strong woman. People don't like her for that for one reason, or find different faults with her then I think they would if she were a man saying the same kind of things.(not always, but sometimes--I'm not being general here)

Angela

[Meges]

Heh yeah, pretty much. Angry women ARE bitches though.

"When man makes a mistake we call it evil. When God makes a mistake we call it nature."

I think Congreve had it right, "Heaven has no rage like love to hatred turned, nor hell a fury like a woman scorned." However, Shakespeare's adaptation of Congreve's work sounds a bit better on the ear.

This might simply be generalizing and I'm sure I'll be corrected if it is, but it does seem that an upset woman goes to great lengths to cause misery to the source of her angst. While a man can spend round after round pummeling an opponent, shake hands afterward then go out for a beer.

History has certainly been sympathetic to this view and there are obviously exceptions, but it would appear that it hasn't changed even on the net.


Meges

[Celephais]

It's true in a lot of ways that women who are powerful are seen as being bitches


CT, you are seriously a bitch. I get so sick of your stupid little snide comments.

Why you really care about a game you don't even play is beyond me.

Angela

God, I love this forum.

[CrystalTears]

This might simply be generalizing and I'm sure I'll be corrected if it is, but it does seem that an upset woman goes to great lengths to cause misery to the source of her angst. While a man can spend round after round pummeling an opponent, shake hands afterward then go out for a beer.
That's how I see it too. Women see things in a rather defensive point of view, and things are personal. Men can tell each other to fuck off and a few minutes later it's like nothing happened. Tell a woman fuck off and you may as well pack up your shit cause to her it's all over.

[DeV]

For the longest time I found that even being assertive gained you the label "aggressive bitch."

Generally speaking, a lack of emotional control of self, written or spoken, whether you're a man or a woman, shows weakness more than bitchiness, IMO. However, passivity, timidness, whining, resorting to anger when you can't get your way, etc, are traits I associate with being a bitch and those are definitely not limited to one gender.

[Ilvane]

Cephalis: No, there are those that are *seen* as being bitches, and those that actually are.;)

heh.

Angela

[DeV]

Don't kid yourself. All women are bitches.Don't talk about your mother that way. :nono:

[Celephais]

Cephalis: No, there are those that are *seen* as being bitches, and those that actually are.;)

heh.

Angela

At least go all out and just call me syphilis...

I think you're just intimidated by CT's assertion of power.

[DeV]

This might simply be generalizing
Meges:yes:

[CrystalTears]

I think you're just intimidated by CT's assertion of power.
I have power??

[Gan]

God, I love this forum.
x100


Cephalis: No, there are those that are *seen* as being bitches, and those that actually are.;)

heh.

Angela
Just as there are those that are *seen* as being stupid, and those that actually are.;

[Gan]

I have power??

Hot mami chica :love: power.

[Ilvane]

Can we try and keep this on topic, please?

I'd rather not have this turn into an Ilvane is stupid and CT is a bitch thread. Kthx?(and besides I don't dislike CT enough to keep calling her a bitch)

I'd like to keep it as a discussion of what was posted.

Angela

[Gan]

Can we try and keep this on topic, please?

I'd rather not have this turn into an Ilvane is stupid and CT is a bitch thread. Kthx?(and besides I don't dislike CT enough to keep calling her a bitch)

I'd like to keep it as a discussion of what was posted.

Angela

:lol:

Oh the irony.

[Xaerve]

There was no point to what was posted, hence the digression. The article has no valid thesis, save some Feminism QQing.

[CrystalTears]

So what is the topic of the thread? Angry white males? Angry white women complaining about angry white men? Hell you didn't even comment about it one way or another in your typical fashion, just said "interesting". So you kinda left the topic open for discussion regarding any aspect of that blog, including the footnote of the blog.

Besides, there really isn't anything to discuss with that second part. I am a bitch and you are stupid. Just facts really.

[Celephais]

Can we try and keep this on topic, please?

Isn't the topic about how women don't deserve to be on the internet or something? (I didn't read the original post, I only started reading when posts got under 3 paragraphs)

[Ilvane]

If you aren't going to read the original article, why bother being part of the discussion?

It's okay if you don't want to, I just don't see the point.

Angela

[Meges]

That's how I see it too. Women see things in a rather defensive point of view, and things are personal. Men can tell each other to fuck off and a few minutes later it's like nothing happened. Tell a woman fuck off and you may as well pack up your shit cause to her it's all over.

Exactly. To go a bit further, two men who don't even know each other could get into an physical altercation at a bar then later that night be seen buying each other beer. Men tend to bond over such things. I'm not sure if it's because a mutual respect is earned or perhaps a hierarchy is established and both accept it. I keep using the physical examples, because I spent five years in the Marine Corps, seeing and experiencing an enormous amount of this type of activity.

There are different types of personal infractions that cause extenuating circumstances, which might create long-term plotting, but I think that’s rare. Respect is probably the foundational issue that any other complication stems from. Regardless, with all the possible scenarios, generally, a friendship or brief encounter will end and there will be no attempt to destroy the other person’s life. So even in the example at the bar; it ends there most of the time.

Stereotypically speaking, women seem a little more detailed oriented when it comes to getting back at someone. A good example of scorn would be that website where women can post negative and, apparently, often false information about ex-boyfriends or significant others. That’s simply vindictive.


Meges

[Xaerve]

Angela, do you not read what people write and just type? I'm not being mean here... but your above post makes 0 sense given the comments above it.

[Ilvane]

Just above it, he said he didn't even read the article.

(((I didn't read the original post, I only started reading when posts got under 3 paragraphs)))

Seems I responded to that. I'm working on responses to the others.:P

Angela

[Celephais]

If you aren't going to read the original article, why bother being part of the discussion?

It's okay if you don't want to, I just don't see the point.

Angela

Heh... "Why you even care about a thread you don't even read is beyond me"

I read Gan's post, including the quote (so I read Xaerve's post), before I had said I didn't read anything, but I was definatly able to get the context of the OP, and how stupid the article must have been. Anyone who thinks of the "bloggosphere" as credible is a moron to begin with (although those who properly exploit it are genius, exploiting morons FTW), so an article expounding "OMG BLOGGO UNFAIR! SKEWEEED!", is like someone writing an article saying "HEAAY! I just figured out wrestling is fake!"

[Gan]

Nothing like making your own thread, then trying to moderate it to hell when the conversation doesnt go your way.

^^ Speaking about women and power...


This thread is climbing from 1 star towards 3 now.

[Celephais]

Nothing like making your own thread, then trying to moderate it to hell when the conversation doesnt go your way.

^^ Speaking about women and power...


This thread is climbing from 1 star towards 3 now.

I'm starting to think now that Satira has the gloves off in the merchant folder that Ilvane is the new Tsin... any thread she's in turns into gold

[CrystalTears]

I was wondering why this was in the politics folder until you said that, Gan.

I don't think a blog about women feeling oppressed in the blogging world is really a political thread but here it can be moderated by its creator.

[DeV]

Granted, the women who don't react that way are a dime a dozen. I happen to know way more than my fair share. I'm sure it has more to do with the fact that I play a lot of physical contact sports where one minute I might be getting my ass handed to me by another woman out on the football field and the next I'm shaking her hand, maybe patting her on the ass, and saying job well done. I mean... seriously, these kind of generalizations are over the top IMO. I know men who are just as vindictive as women.

For that reason, among others, I try to refrain from generalizing the bitchy natures of one sex over the other. When it comes to lumping female bitches into the same boat as the more logical, unemotional women who are able to handle conflict without biting off a persons left nut or right nipple, I turn aside.

No, really, not all women behave in the manner described in Meges post. Some of us would rather spend our time doing something productive in our lives. SHOCKER!!!

[Gan]

I was wondering why this was in the politics folder until you said that, Gan.

I don't think a blog about women feeling oppressed in the blogging world is really a political thread but here it can be moderated by its creator.

Well, with that one post she has guaranteed the derailment of this thread and assured that more folks will give her the attention she so craves. Even if its negative attention.

Hats off to you Ilvane. You've done it again.
:clap:


:lol:

[Gan]

No, really, not all women behave in the manner described in Meges post. Some of us would rather spend our time doing something productive in our lives. SHOCKER!!!

Especially if productive = reproductive (the practice thereof). :)

[Methais]

Too... Much... Text... I'm interested in this topic but not enough to actually read this so far.

Methais, please read those posts and summerize in a picture.

I couldn't give the slightest shit about politics or anything related to it, but ok.

http://hetstence.com/blog/media/vader_shut_up_bitch.jpg

[Celephais]

I couldn't give the slightest shit about politics or anything related to it, but ok.

http://hetstence.com/blog/media/vader_shut_up_bitch.jpg

Win.

[DeV]

Especially if productive = reproductive (the practice thereof). :)Yes, most definitely, in all it's umm multiple forms.

[Ilvane]

Actually, it was about political blogs(again nice reading comprehension), so it fits perfectly fine into the politics folder.

Thanks for playing.

Angela

[Methais]

This thread sucks. It is now about clocks. This is related to politics because over time, politics change, and clocks are all about time.

A clock (from the Latin cloca, "bell") is an instrument for measuring time. True clocks have an announcing or striking mechanism that sounds after each set interval of time, usually by ringing a bell (which, as previously indicated, originally gave the clock its name), chimes, or gong. A silent clock without a striking mechanism is traditionally known as a timepiece, a term sometimes used by horologists and other specialists to describe ordinary wrist watches and other timekeeping devices lacking a striking mechanism (see Baillie et al., p. 307; Palmer, p. 19; Zea & Cheney, p. 172).

"Clock" is derived from the French, cloche, which in turn was derived from the Latin term, cloca. In French, cloche is feminine, so when referring to the hour "by the bell" it takes the a la and puts it into the masculine form au cloche, properly pronounced with a long õ then "Clõsh." So, au cloche in French becomes in English o'clock, which however in older English usage was sometimes spelled "of the clock". The advent of the clock tower and bell approximates the Norman influence in England. While the Normans were of Scandinavian descent, they spoke French.

The clock is one of the oldest human inventions, to quantify and label the physical process of change. As the seasons and the phases of the moon can be used to measure the passage of longer periods of change, shorter processes of measurement were desired, hence the invention of the terms, "hours" and "minutes".

Sundials and other techniques

The sundial, which measures the time of day by the direction of shadows cast by the sun, was widely used in ancient times. A well-designed sundial can measure local solar time with reasonable accuracy, and sundials continued to be used to monitor the performance of clocks until the modern era. However, its practical limitations - it requires the sun to shine and doesn't work at all during the night - encouraged the use of other techniques for measuring time.

Candles and sticks of incense that burn down at, approximately, predictable speeds have also been used to estimate the passing of time. In an hourglass, fine sand pours through a tiny hole at a constant rate and indicates a predetermined passage of an arbitrary period of time.

Waterclocks

A scale model of Su Song's Astronomical Clock Tower, built in 11th century Kaifeng, China. It was driven by a large waterwheel, chain drive, and escapement mechanism.
A scale model of Su Song's Astronomical Clock Tower, built in 11th century Kaifeng, China. It was driven by a large waterwheel, chain drive, and escapement mechanism.

Water clocks, along with the sundials, are possibly the oldest time-measuring instruments, with the only exceptions being the gnomon and day-counting tally stick.[1] Given their great antiquity, where and when they first existed are not known and perhaps unknowable. The simplest form of water clocks, the bowl-shaped outflow type, are known to have existed in Babylon and in Egypt around the 16th century B.C. Other regions of the world, including India and China, also have early evidence of water clocks but the earliest dates are less certain. Some authors, however, write about water clocks appearing as early as 4000 BC.[2]

The Greek and Roman civilizations are credited for initially advancing the water clock design to include complex gearing, which was connected to fanciful automata and improved accuracy. These advances were passed on through Byzantium and Islamic times, which eventually made their way on to Europe. Independently, China developed its own advanced water clocks, passing on their ideas to Korea and Japan.

Some water clock designs were developed independently and some knowledge was transferred through the spread of trade. It is important to point out that the need for the common person to 'know what time it is' largely did not exist until the Industrial Revolution, when it became important to keep track of hours worked. In the earliest of time, however, the purpose for using a water clock was for astronomical and astrological reasons. These early water clocks were calibrated with a sundial. Through the centuries, water clocks were used for timing lawyer's speeches during a trial, labors of prostitutes, night watches of guards, sermons and Masses in church, to name only a few. While never reaching the level of accuracy based on today's standards of timekeeping, the water clock was the most accurate and commonly used timekeeping device for millennia, until it was replaced by the more accurate pendulum clock in 17th century Europe.

Early mechanical clocks

In 797 (or possibly 801), the Abbasid caliph of Baghdad, Harun al-Rashid, presented Charlemagne with an Asian Elephant named Abul-Abbas together with a mechanical clock, out of which came a mechanical bird to announce the hours. This indicates that the early mechanical clocks were probably made in Asia.

None of the first clocks survive from 13th century Europe, but various mentions in church records reveal some of the early history of the clock.

Medieval religious institutions required clocks to measure and indicate the passing of time because, for many centuries, daily prayer and work schedules had to be strictly regulated. This was done by various types of time-telling and recording devices, such as water clocks, sundials and marked candles, probably used in combination. Important times and durations were broadcast by bells, rung either by hand or by some mechanical device such as a falling weight or rotating beater.

The word horologia (from the Greek ὡρα, hour, and λεγειν, to tell) was used to describe all these devices, but the use of this word (still used in several romance languages) for all timekeepers conceals from us the true nature of the mechanisms. For example, there is a record that in 1176 Sens Cathedral installed a ‘horologe’ but the mechanism used is unknown. In 1198, during a fire at the abbey of St Edmundsbury (now Bury St Edmunds), the monks 'ran to the clock' to fetch water, indicating that their water clock had a reservoir large enough to help extinguish the occasional fire.

These early clocks may not have used hands or dials, but “told” the time with audible signals.

A new mechanism

The word clock (from the Latin word clocca, "bell"), which gradually supersedes "horologe", suggests that it was the sound of bells which also characterized the prototype mechanical clocks that appeared during the 13th century in Europe.

Between 1280 and 1320, there is an increase in the number of references to clocks and horologes in church records, and this probably indicates that a new type of clock mechanism had been devised. Existing clock mechanisms that used water power were being adapted to take their driving power from falling weights. This power was controlled by some form of oscillating mechanism, probably derived from existing bell-ringing or alarm devices. This controlled release of power - the escapement - marks the beginning of the true mechanical clock.

Outside of Europe, the escapement mechanism had been known and used in medieval China, as the Song Dynasty horologist and engineer Su Song (1020 - 1101) incorporated it into his astronomical clock-tower of Kaifeng in 1088. However, his astronomical clock and rotating armillary sphere still relied on the use of flowing water (ie. hydraulics), while European clockworks of the following centuries shed this old habit for a more efficient driving power of weights, in addition to the escapement mechanism.

These mechanical clocks were intended for two main purposes: for signalling and notification (e.g. the timing of services and public events), and for modeling the solar system. The former purpose is administrative, the latter arises naturally given the scholarly interest in astronomy, science, astrology, and how these subjects integrated with the religious philosophy of the time. The astrolabe was used both by astronomers and astrologers, and it was natural to apply a clockwork drive to the rotating plate to produce a working model of the solar system.

Simple clocks intended mainly for notification were installed in towers, and did not always require dials or hands. They would have announced the canonical hours or intervals between set times of prayer. Canonical hours varied in length as the times of sunrise and sunset shifted. The more sophisticated astronomical clocks would have had moving dials or hands, and would have shown the time in various time systems, including Italian hours, canonical hours, and time as measured by astronomers at the time. Both styles of clock started acquiring extravagant features such as automata.

In 1283, a large clock was installed at Dunstable Priory; its location above the rood screen suggests that it was not a water clock. In 1292, Canterbury Cathedral installed a 'great horloge'. Over the next 30 years there are brief mentions of clocks at a number of ecclesiastical institutions in England, Italy, and France. In 1322, a new clock was installed in Norwich, an expensive replacement for an earlier clock installed in 1273. This had a large (2 metre) astronomical dial with automata and bells. The costs of the installation included the full-time employment of two technicians for two years.

Early astronomical clocks

Besides the Chinese astronomical clock of Su Song in 1088 mentioned above, in Europe there were the clocks constructed by Richard of Wallingford in St Albans by 1336, and by Giovanni de Dondi in Padua from 1348 to 1364. They no longer exist, but detailed descriptions of their design and construction survive, while modern reproductions have been made. They illustrate how quickly the theory of the mechanical clock had been translated into practical constructions, and also that one of the many impulses to their development had been the desire of astronomers to investigate celestial phenomena.

Wallingford's clock had a large astrolabe-type dial, showing the sun, the moon's age, phase, and node, a star map, and possibly the planets. In addition, it had a wheel of fortune and an indicator of the state of the tide at London Bridge. Bells rang every hour, the number of strokes indicating the time.

Dondi's clock was a seven-sided construction, 1 metre high, with dials showing the time of day, including minutes, the motions of all the known planets, an automatic calendar of fixed and movable feasts, and an eclipse prediction hand rotating once every 18 years.

It is not known how accurate or reliable these clocks would have been. They were probably adjusted manually every day to compensate for errors caused by wear and imprecise manufacture.

The Salisbury Cathedral clock, built toward the end of the 14th century, is considered to be the oldest surviving mechanical clock in the world.


Elements of the mechanical clock

These 14th century clocks show the four key elements common to all clocks in subsequent centuries, at least up to the digital age:

* the power, supplied by a falling weight, later by a coiled spring
* the escapement, a periodic repetitive action that allows the power to escape in small bursts rather than drain away all at once
* the going train, a set of interlocking gear wheels that controls the speed of rotation of the wheels connected between the power supply and the indicators
* indicators, such as dials, hands, and bells

Later developments
A wrist watch

Clockmakers developed their art in various ways. Building smaller clocks was a technical challenge, as was improving accuracy and reliability. Clocks could be impressive showpieces to demonstrate skilled craftsmanship, or less expensive, mass-produced items for domestic use. The escapement in particular was an important factor affecting the clock's accuracy, so many different mechanisms were tried.

Spring-driven clocks were developed during the 15th century, and this gave the clockmakers many new problems to solve, such as how to compensate for the changing power supplied as the spring unwound.

The first record of a minute hand on a clock is 1475, in the Almanus Manuscript of Brother Paul.

During the 15th and 16th centuries, clockmaking flourished, particularly in the metalworking towns of Nuremberg and Augsburg, and in France, Blois. Some of the more basic table clocks have only one time-keeping hand, with the dial between the hour markers being divided into four equal parts making the clocks readable to the nearest 15 minutes. Other clocks were exhibitions of craftsmanship and skill, incorporating astronomical indicators and musical movements. The cross-beat escapement was developed in 1585 by Jost Burgi, who also developed the remontoire. Burgi's accurate clocks helped Tycho Brahe to observe astronomical events with much greater precision than before.

The first record of a second hand on a clock is about 1560, on a clock now in the Fremersdorf collection. However, this clock could not have been accurate, and the second hand was probably for indicating that the clock was working.

The next development in accuracy occurred after 1657 with the invention of the pendulum clock. Galileo had the idea to use a swinging bob to propel the motion of a time telling device earlier in the 17th century. Christiaan Huygens, however, is usually credited as the inventor. He determined the mathematical formula that related pendulum length to time (99.38 cm or 39.13 inches for the one second movement) and had the first pendulum-driven clock made. In 1670, the English clockmaker William Clement created the anchor escapement, an improvement over Huygens' crown escapement. Within just one generation, minute hands and then second hands were added.

A major stimulus to improving the accuracy and reliability of clocks was the importance of precise time-keeping for navigation. The position of a ship at sea could be determined with reasonable accuracy if a navigator could refer to a clock that lost or gained less than about 10 seconds per day. This clock could not contain a pendulum, which would be virtually useless on a rocking ship. Many European governments offered a large prize for anyone that could determine longitude accurately; for example, Great Britain offered 20,000 pounds, equivalent to millions of dollars today. The reward was eventually claimed in 1761 by John Harrison, who dedicated his life to improving the accuracy of his clocks. His H5 clock is reported to have lost less than 5 seconds over 10 days.

The excitement over the pendulum clock had attracted the attention of designers resulting in a proliferation of clock forms. Notably, the longcase clock (also known as the grandfather clock) was created to house the pendulum and works. The English clockmaker William Clement is also credited with developing this form in 1670 or 1671. It was also at this time that clock cases began to be made of wood and clock faces to utilize enamel as well as hand-painted ceramics.

On November 17, 1797, Eli Terry received his first patent for a clock. Terry is known as the founder of the American clock-making industry.

Alexander Bain, Scottish clockmaker, patented the electric clock in 1840. The electric clock's mainspring is wound either with an electric motor or with an electro-magnet and armature. In 1841, he first patented the electromagnetic pendulum.

The development of electronics in the twentieth century led to clocks with no clockwork parts at all. Time in these cases is measured in several ways, such as by the vibration of a tuning fork, the behaviour of quartz crystals, the decay of radioactive elements, or resonance of polycarbonates. Even mechanical clocks have since come to be largely powered by batteries, removing the need for winding.

Types

Clocks can be classified by the type of time display, as well as by the method of timekeeping.

Time display methods

Analog clocks
A linear clock at London's Piccadilly Circus tube station. The 24 hour band moves across the static map, keeping pace with the apparent movement of the sun above ground, and a pointer fixed on London points to the current time
A linear clock at London's Piccadilly Circus tube station. The 24 hour band moves across the static map, keeping pace with the apparent movement of the sun above ground, and a pointer fixed on London points to the current time

Analog clocks usually indicate time using angles. The most common clock face uses a fixed numbered dial or dials and moving hand or hands. It usually has a circular scale of 12 hours, which can also serve as a scale of 60 minutes, and often also as a scale of 60 seconds – though many other styles and designs have been used throughout the years, including dials divided into 6, 8, 10, and 24 hours. Of these alternative versions, the 24 hour analog dial is the main type in use today. The 10-hour clock was briefly popular during the French Revolution, when the metric system was applied to time measurement, and an Italian 6 hour clock was developed in the 18th century, presumably to save power (a clock or watch chiming 24 times uses more power).

Another type of analog clock is the sundial, which tracks the sun continuously, registering the time by the shadow position of its gnomon. Sundials use some or part of the 24 hour analog dial. There also exist clocks which use a digital display despite having an analog mechanism - these are commonly referred to as flip clocks.

Alternative systems have been proposed. For example, the TWELV clock indicates the current hour using one of twelve colors, and indicates the minute by showing a proportion of a circular disk, similar to a moon phase.

Digital clocks
A digital clock outside Kanazawa Station displays the time by controlling valves on a fountain.
A digital clock outside Kanazawa Station displays the time by controlling valves on a fountain.

Digital clocks display a numeric representation of time. Two numeric display formats are commonly used on digital clocks:

* the 24-hour notation with hours ranging 00–23;
* the 12-hour notation with AM/PM indicator, with hours indicated as 12AM, followed by 1AM–11AM, followed by 12PM, followed by 1PM–11PM (a notation mostly used in the United States).

Most digital clocks use an LCD or LED display; many other display technologies are used as well (cathode ray tubes, nixie tubes, etc.). After a reset, battery change or power failure, digital clocks without a backup battery or capacitor either start counting from 00:00, or stay at 00:00, often with blinking digits indicating that time needs to be set. Some newer clocks will actually reset themselves based on radio or Internet time servers that are tuned to national atomic clocks.
Basic digital clock radio
Basic digital clock radio

Auditory clocks

For convenience, distance, telephony or blindness, auditory clocks present the time as sounds. The sound is either spoken natural language, (e.g. "The time is twelve thirty-five"), or as auditory codes (e.g. number of sequential bell rings on the hour represents the number of the hour like the clock Big Ben). Most telecommunication companies also provide a Speaking clock service as well.

Timekeeping methods

Most types of clocks are built around some form of oscillator, an arrangement that goes through an endless sequence of periodic state changes, designed to provide a continuous and stable reference frequency. The periods of this oscillator are then counted and converted into the desired clock display.

* Mechanical clocks use a pendulum as their oscillator, which controls the rotation of a system of gears that drive the clock display.
* Crystal clocks use an electronic quartz crystal oscillator and a frequency divider or counter. Most battery-powered crystal clocks use a 215 Hz = 32.768 kHz oscillator.
* Atomic clocks use a microwave oscillator (maser) tuned by the energy transitions of elements such as caesium, rubidium or hydrogen. These are the most precise clocks available. Atomic clocks based on caesium are used as the official definition of time today.
* Mains power clocks count the 50 or 60 hertz periods of their AC power.
* Radio clocks receive time signal broadcasts from a radio transmitter (which may be hundreds of kilometers away). The clock can decode the transmission and adjust its hands or display for near perfect accuracy. The broadcast radio signals are generated by an atomic clock and typically have a data rate of 1 bit/s.
* Sundials observe the apparent rotation of the Sun around the Earth as their reference oscillation. They are observed with a solar tempometer.

Purposes

Clocks are in homes and offices; smaller ones (watches) are carried; larger ones are in public places, e.g. a train station or church. A small clock is often shown in a corner of computer displays, mobile phones and many MP3 players, including iPods.

The purpose of a clock is not always to display the time. It may also be used to control a device according to time, e.g. an alarm clock, a VCR, or a time bomb (see: counter). However, in this context, it is more appropriate to refer to it as a timer or trigger mechanism rather than strictly as a clock.

Computers depend on an accurate internal clock signal to allow synchronized processing. (A few research projects are developing CPUs based on asynchronous circuits.) Some computers also maintain time and date for all manner of operations whether these be for alarms, event initiation, or just to display the time of day. The internal computer clock is generally kept running by a small battery. Memory of this kind is often referred to as "non-volatile". Many computers will still function even if the internal clock battery is dead, but the computer clock will need to be reset each time the computer is restarted, since once power is lost, time is also lost.

Ideal clocks

An ideal clock is a scientific principle that measures the ratio of the duration of natural processes, and thus will give the time measure for use in physical theories. Therefore, to define an ideal clock in terms of any physical theory would be circular. An ideal clock is more appropriately defined in relationship to the set of all physical processes. An ideal clock should too measure time in consistent, for example decimalized time units.
A desk clock
A desk clock
French decimal clock from the time of the French Revolution
French decimal clock from the time of the French Revolution

This leads to the following definitions:

* A clock is a recurrent periodic process and a counter.
* A good clock is one which, when used to measure other recurrent processes, finds many of them to be periodic.
* An ideal clock is a clock (i.e., recurrent process) that makes the most other recurrent processes periodic.

The recurrent, periodic process (a metronome) is an oscillator and typically generates a clock signal. Sometimes that signal alone is (confusingly) called "the clock", but sometimes "the clock" includes the counter, its indicator, and everything else supporting it.

This definition can be further improved by the consideration of successive levels of smaller and smaller error tolerances. While not all physical processes can be surveyed, the definition should be based on the set of physical processes which includes all individual physical processes which are proposed for consideration. Since atoms are so numerous and since, within current measurement tolerances they all beat in a manner such that if one is chosen as periodic then the others are all deemed to be periodic also, it follows that atomic clocks represent ideal clocks to within present measurement tolerances and in relation to all presently known physical processes. However, they are not so designated by fiat. Rather, they are designated as the current ideal clock because they are currently the best instantiation of the definition.

Navigation

Navigation by ships depends on the ability to measure latitude and longitude. Latitude is fairly easy to determine through celestial navigation, but the measurement of longitude requires accurate measurement of time. This need was a major motivation for the development of accurate mechanical clocks. John Harrison created the first highly accurate marine chronometer in the mid-18th century. The Noon gun in Cape Town still fires an accurate signal to allow ships to check their chronometers.

[Celephais]

HOLY GOD DAMN Picture to text ratio is far too small.

Here...
http://media.urbandictionary.com/image/large/clockspider-1746.jpg

Edit: I also think you should have changed one of the "clock"s to "cock" in that article and see if anyone noticed.

[Gan]

LOL Methais.


(fucker)

More pictures plz. Text does not become you.

[Methais]

LOL Methais.


(fucker)

More pictures plz. Text does not become you.

.……………………._„„„--~””””¯””~-,
.………………„-~”¯;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;\
.…………„-~”;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;\
.…….„~”;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;; ;\
.…,-“;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;; ;\
.../;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;; ;;;;;\
.…\;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;; ;;;;;;;;\
.…..\;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;; ;;;;;;;;;;\
.…….\;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;; ;;;;;;;;;\,
.………\;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;; ;;;;;;;;;”-,………………¸~””)
.………..\,;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;; ;;;;;;;;;;;;”-,……….,-~”;;;;;/
.……….…\;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;; ;;;;;;;;;;;;;\…..,~“;;;;;;;,-‘.…_,-~"¯¯"~-,
.……….…..\;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;; ;;;;;;;;;;;;;;”,-“;;;;;;__„-~"¯¯:::,-~~-,_::::"-„
.……….……\;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;; ;;;;;;;;„~”;;;;„~"¯::::::::::::::"::::::::::::::::::\
.……….…….\;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;; ;;,-~”__„„„-"::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::"~-,
.……….……..\;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;,-~”-~"::,-'::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ::::"~-,
.……….………\;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;„~"::__„-~":::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: :::::::::::"-,
.……….……….\;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;_„-~”:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: :::::::::::::_„„-~,~~~~--,:|
.………_„„„----~~\.……;;;;;,„-~”¯¸„„--~-,::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: _,-~":'\'-,:\:|:\|::\|\:|:\:|
...,-~”¯;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;”-;_„„-~”::::::,-‘::::_:::::::::\:\:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: :::::::::::,~':\'-,::',"-\::'':"::::::::\|:|/
...”-,_;;;;;;;_¸„„--~~””_,-'"~----":|::/,~"¯"-::|::|:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::,~"::\'-,:\;;'-';;;;;;;;;;;,-'::\::|/
.…….¯¯¯.………,-':::::::::::::::\'-\~"¯_/:::/::|:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::,-',::\'-,:|::";;;;;;;;;;;;,-':\:'-,::\
.……….…………|::::::::::::::::::\¸:'~'::::,-'::,':::::::::::::::::::::::::::::,-':\'-,:\'-,';;';;;;;;;;;;;;;,-':\:::'\-,|''
.……….………...|::,-~"::::::::::::/"~-~"::,-'::::::::::::::::::::::::_,-~':\'-,|:"'";;;;;;;;;;;;;;,-'¯::'-,:',\|
.……….………../::/::::::::::::::::|:::::::::::::::::::::::::::_,„-~"¯\:\'-,|;''-';;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;,-'--,::\-:\:\|
.……….………/::::|::::::::::::::::|::::::::::::::::::::::::,-';;'-';;;;',/;\/;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;,-.,|:::\-,:|\|..\|
.……….……./:::::::\:::::::::::::::|:::::::::::::::::::::,-';;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;,-~'''("-.,\:::|\:|::''
.……….…...,':::::::,':::::::::::::::|:::::::::::::: ::::,-'/;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;,--'::::::/"~'
.……….…..,'::::::::|:::::::::::::::|::::::::::::::, „-~"::|;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;,-'::::::::,'::::/
.……….…./:::::::::|:::::::::::::„-|--~~""¯¯¯::',:::::,';;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;,':::::::|_,-'
.………...,'::::::::::::",:,-~"¯::::|::::"-,::::::::::|:::/;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;,':::::::|::::,'
.………../:::::::::::::::|::::::::::::|:::::::"-,:::::::\:::|¯¯¯"""~-,~,_/:::::,':::/
.……..,-“::::::::::::::::|::::::::::::|::::::::::"~-,_::|::\: : : : : : |: : \::::::::/:/-----------I SAY, THEY DO GIVE ME QUITE A
.…..,-“:::::::::::::::::::|::::::::::::|::",:::::::::::::"-':::\: : : : : :|: : :\::::::|::|\ -----------CHUCKLE HERE AND THERE
...,-“::::::::::::::::::::::\::::::::::::|::::",::::::::::::::::::\: : : : : :\: : :|:::::|::|;;\ -----------OLD BEAN
.-“:::::::::::::::::::::::::::"-,::::::::|:::::::",:::::::::::::::/|\ ,: : : : : : : |::::,'/|::::|
.::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::"-,:::::|::::::::::"-,_::::::::::\|:/|,: : : : : : :|:::|'-,/|:::|
.:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::"~-,|_::::::::::::::"~-,_:::"-,/|/\:::::::::::\:::\"-/|::|
.::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::|:::"~-,_::::::::::::',"-,:::"_|/\:|\: : : : \::\":/|\|
.::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::|:::::::: :::"~-,_:::::\:::\:::"~/_:|:|\: : : '-,\::"::,'\
.::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::|:::::::: ::::::::::"-,_:'-,::\:::::::"-,|:||\,-, : '-,\:::|-'-„
.::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::|:::::::: :::::::::::::::,-,'"-:"~,:::::"/_/::|-/\--';;\:::/:||\-,
.::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::|:::::::: ::::::::::::::/...'-,::::::"~„::::"-,/_:|:/\:/|/|/|_/:|
.::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::|:::::::: :::::::::::::|……"-,::::::::"~-:::::""~~~"¯:::|
.::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::|:::::::: :::::::::::::|………"-,_::::::::::::::::::::::::::/
.::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::|:::::::: :::::::::::::\………….."~--„___„„-~~"

[Trinitis]

...

Does every thread have to turn into an Ilvane bashing? It's getting old.

[Sean]

Eesh I dislike Ilvane as much as the next person and I understand that Backlash might have smoked himself into a coma but it seems like in his absence every thread she touches becomes ridiculous.

On topic. Ilvane should make an angry bitch blog about the PC hatred of her.

[CrystalTears]

I didn't start it this time! :(

[Gan]

Eesh I dislike Ilvane as much as the next person and I understand that Backlash might have smoked himself into a coma but it seems like in his absence every thread she touches becomes ridiculous.

On topic. Ilvane should make an angry bitch blog about the PC hatred of her.

LOL
I was just asking myself that about Backlash today, he's been unnaturally quiet these past few days. I'm glad to see others stepping up to fill the void though.

[Meges]

Granted, the women who don't react that way are a dime a dozen. I happen to know way more than my fair share. I'm sure it has more to do with the fact that I play a lot of physical contact sports where one minute I might be getting my ass handed to me by another woman out on the football field and the next I'm shaking her hand, maybe patting her on the ass, and saying job well done. I mean... seriously, these kind of generalizations are over the top IMO. I know men who are just as vindictive as women.

For that reason, among others, I try to refrain from generalizing the bitchy natures of one sex over the other. When it comes to lumping female bitches into the same boat as the more logical, unemotional women who are able to handle conflict without biting off a persons left nut or right nipple, I turn aside.

No, really, not all women behave in the manner described in Meges post. Some of us would rather spend our time doing something productive in our lives. SHOCKER!!!

Okay, since we're talking about ALL women now. Let's define what a woman is not. A woman [does not play] contact sports; those are lesbians or men without penises. So, you're life experiences cannot and are not in line with true reality. Therefore the stereotypical paragraph in my previous post must be correct and it is.

What a man is not; vendictive. Obviously the men you know that are this way are homosexual or involved in some other deviant lifestyle.

I mean really...gosh!


Meges


VVV OMG, what's this white text say??? VVV
PS This post was a joke. Even in my previous post, I recognize that what I said was stereotypical and that's why I put the word "stereotypical" in there so you'd know that perhaps I didn't really feel that way, but didn't want to go into more detail and exclusions.
edit: changed the bracketed text, because the previous incarnation didn't make any sense in that line of thought. Removed an "a" from another area. Yes, it's that important!

[Kembal]

Returning back to the OP: It's a dumb column. Absolutely dumb.

Rather than write a really long post, I'll just link to this post from one of the many liberal blogs written/co-written by women:

http://www.firedoglake.com/2007/08/10/invisible-women/

Does the best takedown of Goodman's column I've seen yet.

[DeV]

PS This post was a joke. That's exactly how I view it as well as your others. You and I both know they aren't funny, but I'll laugh anyway because that's the womanly thing to do. :rofl:!!1

[Warriorbird]

About as funny as Mel Gibson and the whole sugartits incident. Laughing at is different than laughing with.

[Parkbandit]

LOL
I was just asking myself that about Backlash today, he's been unnaturally quiet these past few days. I'm glad to see others stepping up to fill the void though.

Great.. I was hoping he would turn into "That Guy Who Cannot Be Named." Now that you named him.. he'll be back for more..

[Meges]

That's exactly how I view it as well as your others. You and I both know they aren't funny, but I'll laugh anyway because that's the womanly thing to do. :rofl:!!1

On their own, yeah probably not (that) funny, but seeing how worked up you get over them = funny. So laugh away that was the point; I know I'm laughing. You might want to run down to your local Wal-Mart and find yourself some good ol' discounted self-confidence and self-worth. They also might have something to dull your emotionally over-sensitive issue as well. However, you might need a prescription for that one.


Meges

[DeV]

This post is a joke, too, right?


On their own, yeah probably not (that) funny, but seeing how worked up you get over them = funny.Let me clarify; you weren't funny, in fact, you're about as funny as being set on fire. You can do yourself the honor if you want proof of that then I'm sure we can remedy this as soon as possible. In the mean time, I'll be down at the local Wal-Mart picking up an extra dose of self-confidence and self-worth because I am clearly lacking in those departments. :cry:


So laugh away that was the point; I know I'm laughing. Yeah, me too, but not with you. Piss poor attempt at backtracking.

[TheSmooth1]

Women playing contact sports? :lol:

[Meges]

This post is a joke, too, right?

Let me clarify; you weren't funny, in fact, you're about as funny as being set on fire. You can do yourself the honor if you want proof of that then I'm sure we can remedy this as soon as possible. In the mean time, I'll be down at the local Wal-Mart picking up an extra dose of self-confidence and self-worth because I am clearly lacking in those departments. :cry:

Yeah, me too, but not with you. Piss poor attempt at backtracking.

Let me clarify; I was not backtracking:

You became offended and defensive over stereotypical comments I made and I even labeled them that for the sake of argument. The next post was indeed made to get under your skin, despite the text at the bottom, because it is obvious you are a defensive girl who gets all bristled when a contradictory view does not jive with your own. You are one of those girls with a chip on their shoulder and something to prove (come on, you can do it!). I bet you even have one of those shrilly high-pitched shouts (a.k.a. laughable screams) while attempting to muster all the testosterone you possibly can on the field of Adam’s apples.

Perhaps you feel as though you might have better luck here than in life? Regardless, I do not even know you (thank God) and I can see that you should probably spend less time in the prostate clinic. To me, knowing someone (you) would get all up in arms was indeed a laugh and I would do it again. I do not think you are laughing however, I think you are quite upset and lashing out while attempting to pretend you are laughing at me. Nice try though. Job well done, I guess?

Bite your nails a little bit shorter before you respond so you can type a little bit faster and more accurately, okay?


Meges, the ignorant male-chauvinist



I originally was not going to post this, however, I could not resist. Sorry. ;)

[Skirmisher]

...

Perhaps you feel as though you might have better luck here than in life? Regardless, I do not even know you (thank God) and I can see that you should probably spend less time in the prostate clinic. To me, knowing someone (you) would get all up in arms was indeed a laugh and I would do it again. I do not think you are laughing however, I think you are quite upset and lashing out while attempting to pretend you are laughing at me. Nice try though. Job well done, I guess?

Bite your nails a little bit shorter before you respond so you can type a little bit faster and more accurately, okay?


Meges, the ignorant male-chauvinist



I originally was not going to post this, however, I could not resist. Sorry. ;)

Wow, your life is so empty that you feel the need to try to piss off someone over of all things an internet message board to make yourself feel better and instead only make yourself into a clown.

Sad.

[Meges]

Wow, your life is so empty that you feel the need to try to piss off someone over of all things an internet message board to make yourself feel better and instead only make yourself into a clown.

Sad.

Right, empty life. And you've come to this conclusion "over of all things an internet message board." You're simply amazing. I sure wish I was a Super Moderator on an internet message board!


Meges, or you can call me Bozo.

[Asha]

It's also pretty stupid to to take any notice whatsoever of posts that are clearly intended to be ridiculous, let alone funny.
Keep it going though. The defence is as amusing as the fake sexism.


Wow, your life is so empty that you feel the need to try to piss off someone over of all things an internet message board to make yourself feel better and instead only make yourself into a clown.

Sad.

Contradict yourself much?

[DeV]

Here, let me clarify some more.


This might simply be generalizing and I’m sure I'll be corrected if it is, but it does seem that an upset woman goes to great lengths to cause misery to the source of her angst.
I did correct you, yet you took things a tad too personal in the aftermath. I’m not saying you’ve gone to great lengths, but for some reason you seem to think you’ve upset me when you’ve done exactly the opposite. When I said I was laughing at you, I wasn't joking.

History has certainly been sympathetic to this view and there are obviously exceptions, but it would appear that it hasn't changed even on the net.
Yes, you are definitely the exception and not the rule as your history of posts in this thread alone has clearly shown.

There are different types of personal infractions that cause extenuating circumstances, which might create long-term plotting, but I think that’s rare.
I’m hoping in your case you’ve developed the ability to leave your scorn strictly to this thread. The minute it breathes life into other threads, well then, we’ll know who rattled whos feathers. Oh that's right, you’ve already taken it into another thread. :yes:

Obviously the men you know that are this way are homosexual or involved in some other deviant lifestyle.
So, in your case, which is it? Matter of fact, I’ll grease the hinges so you can go ahead and push your way out of the closet if that’s the case.

PS This post was a joke. Even in my previous post, I recognize that what I said was stereotypical and that's why I put the word "stereotypical" in there so you'd know that perhaps I didn't really feel that way, but didn't want to go into more detail and exclusions.
This is what I consider backtracking. Even if your previous posts were jokes, after the fact, that doesn't mean they won't garner a reply that you can choose to either leave alone or answer to. You choose the latter, I didn't force you to be held accountable to your opinions, I mean jokes. You’ve done so much back tracking in this thread you may as well be moonwalking.
On their own, yeah probably not (that) funny, but seeing how worked up you get over them = funny.
It is funny imagining that you are seeing me get worked up over the internet. It’s hilarious that I took your initial opinions seriously, as I do everyone’s unless it’s clear they are meant to be humorous, yet when it became obvious that they were about as funny as a dose of the clap you called them jokes to save yourself looking like a chauvinist pig, male of female.
Even more amusing because I have assumed I’ve been debating with a woman all this time.

because it is obvious you are a defensive girl who gets all bristled when a contradictory view does not jive with your own.
So are you now saying that your stereotypical, blatantly incorrect views, which you tried to pass off as jokes, are actually honest indications of your true feelings on the subject?

Then you continue with trying to vindicate how funny your unfunny posts were by getting personal:

You are one of those girls with a chip on their shoulder and something to prove (come on, you can do it!). I bet you even have one of those shrilly high-pitched shouts (a.k.a. laughable screams) while attempting to muster all the testosterone you possibly can on the field of Adam’s apples.
Yet, even you said it here:

Regardless, I do not even know you (thank God) and I can see that you should probably spend less time in the prostate clinic.
Spend less time in the prostate clinic? Lol, are you fucking serious with that one?

Ohhhhhhhh, that stung.


To me, knowing someone (you) would get all up in arms was indeed a laugh and I would do it again. I do not think you are laughing however, I think you are quite upset and lashing out while attempting to pretend you are laughing at me.
Yes, I am laughing at you. Not to mention, the tone of your posts present themselves as great examples of a scorned woman who’s trying her hardest to be as vindictive as possible, without regard for not knowing anything about the object of her scorn other than what's been posted on this forum.

Bite your nails a little bit shorter before you respond so you can type a little bit faster and more accurately, okay?
Oh come on now, you can do better than this. In fact, :wtf:. This doesn’t even tie in to the regular pattern of weak insults you've slung around like hot shit in prison, in this very thread.

Meges, the ignorant male-chauvinist
Hahaha, so, you’re not just a woman with an ignorantly warped view of her own as well as others gender in general. Yes, I thought you were a woman this entire time so :rofl: @ myself.

It's obvious that you weren't hugged enough as a child. Maybe you didn’t get to suckle on mommy’s tits as long as you wanted. Yeah, she told me all this last night. Seriously, I think you have some funny things to say stored up inside that bastion of knowledge you call a brain, but you taint them with scornful, and vindictive bullshit and then try to pass it off as a cheap joke. Grats, I have no problem with that whatsoever. However, your insults have been about as good as your wit... terrible. For future reference, you’ll fail every time if you don't come up with something a bit more clever and actually funny the next time you bail out of a discussion by passing off your opinions as jokes. Just saying.

[DeV]

It's also pretty stupid to to take any notice whatsoever of posts that are clearly intended to be ridiculous, let alone funny.If someone doesn't want their posts responded to they'll be better off shutting the fuck up before things start not going their way when it becomes obvious they have shit for a sense of humor.

Contradict yourself much?Shut the fuck up.

[Skirmisher]

Right, empty life. And you've come to this conclusion "over of all things an internet message board." You're simply amazing. I sure wish I was a Super Moderator on an internet message board!


Meges, or you can call me Bozo.

Hrm, so one shouldn't make such judgements so quickly I guess. I wonder where i might have seen an example of that.

Oh yes...


You are one of those girls with a chip on their shoulder and something to prove (come on, you can do it!). I bet you even have one of those shrilly high-pitched shouts (a.k.a. laughable screams) while attempting to muster all the testosterone you possibly can on the field of Adam’s apples.

[Skirmisher]

It's also pretty stupid to to take any notice whatsoever of posts that are clearly intended to be ridiculous, let alone funny.
Keep it going though. The defence is as amusing as the fake sexism.



Contradict yourself much?

Jeez dude, you used to come across as a pretty cool a guy and have turned into an angry nasty person.

It's too bad.

[Meges]

If someone doesn't want their posts responded to they'll be better off shutting the fuck up before things start not going their way when it becomes obvious they have shit for a sense of humor.
Shut the fuck up.

You're obviously angry. ;)

To your previous post in response to mine. Learn to read. Read my first stereotypical post over again and please take note of the language about generalizing and stereotypes. I INVITED someone like you to get upset and you allowed that chip of yours to lead the way. You have obviously taken great heart to it or you would not have responded to begin with.

I could honestly care less what you think my views in life are or are not, because you simply have no impact on me whatsoever. I'll leave it at that.

Pertaining to the other thread, read it again and then perhaps you'll notice something called context.

As I've said before, in other words, do something else with your life instead of getting so worked up over what other people think or say. You're a fanatic and that's fantastically funny. And to be sure, I know I take you seriously!

Fight the good fight! Keep up the struggle! We're all hoping that you will overcome the angry white man!



Meges

[Meges]

Hrm, so one shouldn't make such judgements so quickly I guess. I wonder where i might have seen an example of that.

Oh yes...

I'm not the one who made the deal about doing one thing over "an internet message board" then in the second half of the same sentence did exactly the same thing, which is why I said what I said. (paraphrase: hypocrite)

Here, let me use color by numbers to help you out:


Wow, your life is so empty that you feel the need to try to piss off someone over of all things an internet message board to make yourself feel better and instead only make yourself into a clown.

Sad.



Meges

[Meges]

It's also pretty stupid to to take any notice whatsoever of posts that are clearly intended to be ridiculous, let alone funny.
Keep it going though. The defence is as amusing as the fake sexism.



Contradict yourself much?


Jeez dude, you used to come across as a pretty cool a guy and have turned into an angry nasty person.

It's too bad.

OMGOMG O. M. G.!!11! you do not agree with me!!! There4 u must be an angry nasty person!!11!!

His post was fairly civil and you tell him he's become Mr. Hyde all of the sudden? I'm sure he's so depressed now that he's apparently disappointed you since all of our goals in life are centered around you.


Meges

[DeV]

You're obviously angry. ;)Is it as obvious as you acting like the stereotypical woman you portrayed in your previous posts? :)


I INVITED someone like you to get upset and you allowed that chip of yours to lead the way. You have obviously taken great heart to it or you would not have responded to begin with.I LOVE debate. Love it. You never have to invite someone like me into debate. If you post something that interests me we can debate about it 'till the cows come home. That's just my posting style; this exchange has been nothing special, lol, stop patting yourself on the back. You posted something and you received attention for it. Nothing more, nothing less.


I could honestly care less what you think my views in life are or are not, because you simply have no impact on me whatsoever. I'll leave it at that.Hello, ditto. :rofl:


Pertaining to the other thread, read it again and then perhaps you'll notice something called context.If it smells like shit, it usually is shit.


As I've said before, in other words, do something else with your life instead of getting so worked up over what other people think or say. You're a fanatic and that's fantastically funny. And to be sure, I know I take you seriously!Is this the part where I say, neener neener, it takes one to know one? I mean, do something with your life instead of getting worked up over what other people think or say? This is an internet forum, you're having about as much of a life while posting on these boards as I am. If you feel that someone taking the time to reply to your posts connotates them getting worked up over what you think or say, you're sadly mistaken missy.


We're all hoping that you will overcome the angry white man!Oh please. The article as a whole is about as brilliant as your personal contributions thus far.

[DeV]

I'm sure he's so depressed now that he's apparently disappointed you since all of our goals in life are centered around you.


MegesNice choice of words.

[Meges]

The article as a whole is about as brilliant as your personal contributions thus far.

Well, I have to say that your stellar contributions are just about the same, mister.

As far as this being a debate, it's just so happens to be the view that governs the VAST majority of women in the world. Want to debate the female rights and roles in non-western and non-democratic societies? Most societies treat women as second class citizens, if that, and not until recently was it different in "enlightened cultures." Even so, it would be very easy to argue that your struggle against the western white man is still very much of an uphill one. Lower wages, lower positions (not the sexual variety), not taken seriously etc.; that must really make the hair on your legs stand up.

You and your jock strap are on the fringe over there, buddy. Wake up and smell the estrogen!


Meges

[Bobmuhthol]

The [female] staff on this site really fucking sucks. This post is not a joke.

[TheSmooth1]

Chauvinist pig.

But seriously, quit bickering plz.

[Meges]

I'm done.


Meges

[Asha]

Jeez dude, you used to come across as a pretty cool a guy and have turned into an angry nasty person.

It's too bad.

More like a typical poster on the PC. It just sounds bad when some things are said here even if it was just an observation.
Shoudln't really care anyway. The PC is a place for opinions, and no-one here is scared to express them and they shouldn't be.

[TheSmooth1]

The PC is a place for opinions, and no-one here is scared to express them and they shouldn't be.

I used to be for fear of hurt feelings. :(

[Gan]

The [female] staff on this site really fucking sucks. This post is not a joke.

With the exception of Chica and Satira (you still get new credits).

[TheEschaton]

I keep on clicking on this thread, hoping it'll get good, but, alas...

[Ilvane]

You mean an actual discussion of the topic?

I gave up on that a couple days ago.

Angela

[FinisWolf]

"HEAAY! I just figured out wrestling is fake!"

Hot Damnit! Why'd you have to go and ruin it for me?

Finis

~ Who never watches that fake ass crap.

[Skirmisher]

OMGOMG O. M. G.!!11! you do not agree with me!!! There4 u must be an angry nasty person!!11!!

His post was fairly civil and you tell him he's become Mr. Hyde all of the sudden? I'm sure he's so depressed now that he's apparently disappointed you since all of our goals in life are centered around you.


Meges

I don't know if he is disappointed or not but I do know that you are once more making assumptions from a single post and inferring what you wish from it without knowing all you need to make such a judgment.

:shrug:

[Asha]

God, what was this thread about again?

[CrystalTears]

God, what was this thread about again?
Apparently angry, political bloggers. Doesn't seem completely off-topic. :D

[FinisWolf]

All I got out of it was that wrestling is fake.

Le Sigh.

Finis

[DeV]

Yada, yadaI'm very content with where I'm at in my life in relation to the western white man. I'm sorry you feel differently. Matter of fact, all the author of the blog has to do now is post a new one claiming how it was all one big joke considering the article was serioulsy reaching on so many levels.

In any case, my bad for thinking you were a woman during our brief discussion. Maybe we'll get a chance to exchange jokes and ideas again soon.

[Gan]

Apparently angry, political bloggers. Doesn't seem completely off-topic. :D

Specially when its the moderators who are doing the arguing.

:whistle:

(angry white female moderaters anyone???)

[Meges]

I'm very content with where I'm at in my life in relation to the western white man. I'm sorry you feel differently. Matter of fact, all the author of the blog has to do now is post a new one claiming how it was all one big joke considering the article was serioulsy reaching on so many levels.

In any case, my bad for thinking you were a woman during our brief discussion. Maybe we'll get a chance to exchange jokes and ideas again soon.

;)


Meges

[Meges]

I don't know if he is disappointed or not but I do know that you are once more making assumptions from a single post and inferring what you wish from it without knowing all you need to make such a judgment.

:shrug:

Okay, I'm done with the whole hairy leg deal and now I guess I am going off topic with the Super Moderator (tm), but you're really lacking something here. Once again, you've done the same thing you're accusing me of. I guess your problem is chronic.


Meges

[Skirmisher]

Okie Dokey

[Methais]

God, what was this thread about again?

http://www.tenspeed.com/store/images/books/isay.jpg

[Asha]

:lol: Win.