DeadHitchhiker

Ban behavior, not people. You can convert non-productive people to productive people, most of them only want to be noticed or accepted and past a certain point there is only so much you can do to block anyone anyway. Stylometric analysis would just be another simple hurdle to cross for a persistent person.

The idea that this tool would be useful for community management is terrible.

John Searle on Derrida:

With Derrida, you can hardly misread him, because he’s so obscure. Every time you say, “He says so and so,” he always says, “You misunderstood me.” But if you try to figure out the correct interpretation, then that’s not so easy. I once said this to Michel Foucault, who was more hostile to Derrida even than I am, and Foucault said that Derrida practiced the method of obscurantisme terroriste (terrorism of obscurantism). We were speaking French. And I said, “What the hell do you mean by that?” And he said, “He writes so obscurely you can’t tell what he’s saying, that’s the obscurantism part, and then when you criticize him, he can always say, ‘You didn’t understand me; you’re an idiot.’ That’s the terrorism part.” And I like that. So I wrote an article about Derrida. I asked Michel if it was OK if I quoted that passage, and he said yes.

http://reason.com/archives/2000/02/01/reality-principles-an-...

The line between 'aesthetic preference' and 'fetish object' is a fine one.

Just remember: Your name is on this and you're intentionally pouring gasoline onto an issue that didn't need it.

> Should you get paid near $80k a year for the next 26 years when you are not working?

Yes. Why not? Because that offends your sensibilities about work? Because you feel that people should work until they're 65~70 to retire, if they ever manage to? Right now a number of school teachers are working until their late 60s to make a pittance upon retirement, trading down from houses to mobile homes to even make their retirement manageable. Do you feel these people aren't as worthy as others making obscene amounts of money as they essentially raise the nation's children for them?

Your entire supposition either buys into the myth that there isn't enough to go around or worse, that you simply believe because we treat the majority of our labor pool like shit that anyone daring not to is in the wrong.

It's fantastic how articles like these trot out figures like '$80k a year!' as if we're all supposed to be shocked and appalled that someone is making around what it costs to have a decent home and raise a family. I guess we really do need to pay our greedy firemen and teachers less, they have had it too good for too long making a decent wage and deserve to go right on the scrapheap with the rest of the trash in this country that we've already convinced to work for peanuts. Not that they had a choice.