Gyroscopic Investing

I"ll just say that having learned a little bit about the circumstances, I can only feel respect for Jackson's choices. 'Nuff said.

Here's a situation that ties together a few different threads of the zeitgeist.

A beneficial takeaway from the Kavanaugh debacle was the need to preserve rape evidence if one wants to put away rapists. I keep an eye on the European mass immigration situation.


Evidently an 18 year old German girl was raped by up to 15 Muslims over 4 hours in Freiburg. The Polizei were able to arrest the suspects due to preserved evidence brought by the girl. All detainees were previously known to the Polizei due to earlier crimes. NPCs immediately execute "Crimes like this should not serve to condemn refugees" script. A particularly egregious NPC announced he was sick of groups like AfD "politically exploiting our grief" and scheduled his own rally, titled "My horror is no excuse for your hate."

About that evidence...

Every year since 1989, in about 25 percent of the sexual assault cases referred to the FBI where results could be obtained, the primary suspect has been excluded by forensic DNA testing. Specifically, FBI officials report that out of roughly 10,000 sexual assault cases since 1989, about 2,000 tests have been inconclusive, about 2,000 tests have excluded the primary suspect, and about 6,000 have "matched" or included the primary suspect... these percentages have remained constant for 7 years, and the National Institute of Justice's informal survey of private laboratories reveals a strikingly similar 26 percent exclusion rate.
- Peter Neufeld & Barry C. Scheck, co-founders of the Innocence Project

Kriegsspiel wrote: ↑Sat Oct 27, 2018 12:35 pm A particularly egregious NPC

I had to look that up the other day because I got called one.
So that's non-player character? Like someone who doesn't have their own opinion?

dualstow wrote: ↑Sun Oct 28, 2018 10:36 am I had to look that up the other day because I got called one.
So that's non-player character? Like someone who doesn't have their own opinion?

An NPC is a computer-controlled character in a game that follows a script designed to advance a particular storyline. Talk to them a few times and they simply repeat the same pre-programmed talking points. The NPC meme basically points out that many people in the real world act the same way, and in a larger sense plays on the idea that you may be one of only a handful of "live" players in some giant simulation.

That's a good explanation, Tyler, thank you. I remember a non-computer idea of non-player characters from playing D&D circa 1980 -- oops, did I just say that out loud -- and it sounds similar.

moda0306 wrote: ↑Sat Sep 22, 2018 7:59 am And what do you think she wants? Besides death threats and public shaming by 30% of the population, that is?

Just as predicted:

Christine Blasey Ford, the California psychology professor who accused Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh of sexual misconduct 36 years ago, received a $1 million windfall and is receiving several requests for book deals after her testimony.

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2018 ... ok-offers/

A very, very lucrative public shaming--but then we knew this was coming.

Breitbart commenters are always so mad. lolz

On a slightly related note, Harvey Weinstein has an accuser who was 16 at the time, 16 years ago.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/lawsuit-alle ... 45622.html

Also somewhat related to Kavanaugh, I haven't heard from any liberal (either personally, online or in "thu mediuh") defending Weinstein or question the womens' claims simply because they either have some to potentially gain or the allegations are from several years ago or more. Maybe there have been some in Hollywood that are fans of the dude. I think I heard that Tarantino tried to defend him somewhat.

It's probably because I think people with actual leftist civic values have little real loyalty to "Hollywood," on average, and conservatives don't see this because "Hollywood" has very hammy (and perhaps often genuine) loyalty to leftist civic values.

moda0306 wrote: ↑Thu Nov 01, 2018 11:13 am On a slightly related note, Harvey Weinstein has an accuser who was 16 at the time, 16 years ago.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/lawsuit-alle ... 45622.html

Also somewhat related to Kavanaugh, I haven't heard from any liberal (either personally, online or in "thu mediuh") defending Weinstein or question the womens' claims simply because they either have some to potentially gain or the allegations are from several years ago or more. Maybe there have been some in Hollywood that are fans of the dude. I think I heard that Tarantino tried to defend him somewhat.

It's probably because I think people with actual leftist civic values have little real loyalty to "Hollywood," on average, and conservatives don't see this because "Hollywood" has very hammy (and perhaps often genuine) loyalty to leftist civic values.

Remembering when and where it took place does help to make it more believable.

The accuser, identified as Jane Doe, alleges that Weinstein assaulted her at his New York City apartment in 2002, just days after they'd met at an event involving her modeling agency.

jacksonM wrote: ↑Thu Nov 01, 2018 12:28 pm

moda0306 wrote: ↑Thu Nov 01, 2018 11:13 am On a slightly related note, Harvey Weinstein has an accuser who was 16 at the time, 16 years ago.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/lawsuit-alle ... 45622.html

Also somewhat related to Kavanaugh, I haven't heard from any liberal (either personally, online or in "thu mediuh") defending Weinstein or question the womens' claims simply because they either have some to potentially gain or the allegations are from several years ago or more. Maybe there have been some in Hollywood that are fans of the dude. I think I heard that Tarantino tried to defend him somewhat.

It's probably because I think people with actual leftist civic values have little real loyalty to "Hollywood," on average, and conservatives don't see this because "Hollywood" has very hammy (and perhaps often genuine) loyalty to leftist civic values.

Remembering when and where it took place does help to make it more believable.

The accuser, identified as Jane Doe, alleges that Weinstein assaulted her at his New York City apartment in 2002, just days after they'd met at an event involving her modeling agency.

I guess those couple details explain the deafening silence of would-be-librul-Weinstein-supporters, vs how'd they'd be if this woman (or others) couldn't remember the exact day or party-house... perhaps something more similar to the bombastic display by Trumpists/conservatives to feign concern for due process and smear a likely assault victim.

There are a lot of things I remember where I couldn't give you the exact day or location, but could replay you what happened almost moment by moment. But of course memories fade... and a judge who's a disaster for the 4th Amendment & due process deserves better due-process than that in his job interview for a lifetime appointment to one of the most powerful positions in the world.

I didn't follow the Weinstein stuff too closely, but from what I heard, he didn't exactly rape rape them; he told them he'd put them in a movie if they blew him or something along those lines. Or maybe that was just one, and the others he just asked them to, and they did it, without a threat? Correct?

I guess I could go look this up.

Kriegsspiel wrote: ↑Thu Nov 01, 2018 4:15 pm I didn't follow the Weinstein stuff too closely, but from what I heard, he didn't exactly rape rape them; he told them he'd put them in a movie if they blew him or something along those lines. Or maybe that was just one, and the others he just asked them to, and they did it, without a threat? Correct?

I guess I could go look this up.

He rape raped some women.

K.

Hmm, it looks like some of the Weinstein allegations are very old too. A May 2018 article says that a grand jury is hearing evidence, I'm wondering what kind of evidence they'd have other than the women's statements, and his?

The Manhattan district attorney, Cyrus Vance, had been under enormous public pressure to bring a criminal case against Weinstein.

A grand jury has been hearing evidence in the case for weeks.

In March, Andrew Cuomo, the New York governor, took the extraordinary step of ordering the state’s attorney general to investigate whether Vance acted properly in 2015 when he decided not to prosecute Weinstein over a previous allegation of unwanted groping, made by an Italian model. That investigation is in its preliminary stages.
https://www.theguardian.com/film/2018/m ... ct-charges

Lack of prosecutable evidence?

Prosecutors in New York City abandoned part of their sexual assault case against Harvey Weinstein on Thursday after evidence surfaced that a police detective coached a witness to stay silent about evidence that cast doubt on the account of one of his earliest accusers.
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/world/a ... al-charge/

Mmmm.

BTW dualstow, this was the one I was referencing.

The woman also told the detective — identified by Weinstein’s lawyer as Nicholas DiGaudio — that sometime after Evans’ office meeting with Weinstein, she suggested what happened was consensual, according to the letter. Weinstein had promised to get her an acting job if she agreed to perform oral sex, and she agreed, it said.

moda0306 wrote: ↑Thu Nov 01, 2018 12:49 pm

jacksonM wrote: ↑Thu Nov 01, 2018 12:28 pm

moda0306 wrote: ↑Thu Nov 01, 2018 11:13 am On a slightly related note, Harvey Weinstein has an accuser who was 16 at the time, 16 years ago.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/lawsuit-alle ... 45622.html

Also somewhat related to Kavanaugh, I haven't heard from any liberal (either personally, online or in "thu mediuh") defending Weinstein or question the womens' claims simply because they either have some to potentially gain or the allegations are from several years ago or more. Maybe there have been some in Hollywood that are fans of the dude. I think I heard that Tarantino tried to defend him somewhat.

It's probably because I think people with actual leftist civic values have little real loyalty to "Hollywood," on average, and conservatives don't see this because "Hollywood" has very hammy (and perhaps often genuine) loyalty to leftist civic values.

Remembering when and where it took place does help to make it more believable.

The accuser, identified as Jane Doe, alleges that Weinstein assaulted her at his New York City apartment in 2002, just days after they'd met at an event involving her modeling agency.

I guess those couple details explain the deafening silence of would-be-librul-Weinstein-supporters, vs how'd they'd be if this woman (or others) couldn't remember the exact day or party-house... perhaps something more similar to the bombastic display by Trumpists/conservatives to feign concern for due process and smear a likely assault victim.

There are a lot of things I remember where I couldn't give you the exact day or location, but could replay you what happened almost moment by moment. But of course memories fade... and a judge who's a disaster for the 4th Amendment & due process deserves better due-process than that in his job interview for a lifetime appointment to one of the most powerful positions in the world.

I get that you think liberals are more pure of heart than Trumpists/conservatives but I really don't get your comparison between Weinstein and Kavanaugh. Other than the fact that they've both been accused of sexual misconduct what do they have in common?

In the first article I linked to it mentions a few that are outside the statute of limitations. Which is one of the main "actionable" items that has been reinforced over the past couple months. If you want the rapists put away, don't save reporting for a distant day.

Oh yeah, there is no doubt that there was also a lot of that old school sleep your way into films stuff going on. I remember Howard Stern asking him about it and Weinstein said, “I was born to late. That was in the 60s, blah blah blah.” Howard later replayed that during the inchoate phase of #metoo and said, “I just knew he was lying!”

But, then the real rape allegations came to light and it wasn’t so funny anymore.

Kriegsspiel wrote: ↑Thu Nov 01, 2018 7:17 pm BTW dualstow, this was the one I was referencing.

The woman also told the detective — identified by Weinstein’s lawyer as Nicholas DiGaudio — that sometime after Evans’ office meeting with Weinstein, she suggested what happened was consensual, according to the letter. Weinstein had promised to get her an acting job if she agreed to perform oral sex, and she agreed, it said.

Ladies and gentlemen, we have another recanter.

https://amp.usatoday.com/amp/1863210002

But certainly there is no shame in making false accusations against a man who might take away your right to kill your fetus. The God-given right that was written into the Constitution in plain English (albeit ye olde Englishe) by George Washington himself back in 1776.

dualstow wrote: ↑Sat Nov 03, 2018 9:33 am Ladies and gentlemen, we have another recanter.

https://amp.usatoday.com/amp/1863210002

Of course she recanted. Now that the white male patriarchy is fully entrenched on the supreme court and the Nazis have complete control over all the branches of government she probably feared for her life.

(I'm learning how this game is played. When the narrative starts to collapse, double down on it. Eventually people will get so confused they won't be able to tell what's real and what isn't).

@Stuper, I know it’s beside the point, but: 1787.

Well, that was an interesting election result.

No way to know for sure but my guess is that if it had not been for the Kavanaugh hearings, the Democrats would have probably won the senate as well as the house. Instead they actually lost 3 seats.

Normally, I don't really care all that much of late who wins elections and don't remember even voting in a midterm election before. So my advice to the Dems would be to stop motivating voters like me to go to the polls and vote a straight Republican ticket.

From what I've been hearing I doubt that is advice they are going to take.

dualstow wrote: ↑Sat Nov 03, 2018 12:42 pm

@Stuper, I know it’s beside the point, but: 1787.

You know that, and I know that, but do you think the people who I was parodying know that?

Be bold. Make them look it up if they doubt you. :-)