• Announcements

    • UnderDawg

      A Few Simple Rules   05/22/2017

      Sailing Anarchy is a very lightly moderated site. This is by design, to afford a more free atmosphere for discussion. There are plenty of sailing forums you can go to where swearing isn't allowed, confrontation is squelched and, and you can have a moderator finger-wag at you for your attitude. SA tries to avoid that and allow for more adult behavior without moderators editing your posts and whacking knuckles with rulers. We don't have a long list of published "thou shalt nots" either, and this is by design. Too many absolute rules paints us into too many corners. So check the Terms of Service - there IS language there about certain types of behavior that is not permitted. We interpret that lightly and permit a lot of latitude, but we DO reserve the right to take action when something is too extreme to tolerate (too racist, graphic, violent, misogynistic, etc.). Yes, that is subjective, but it allows us discretion. Avoiding a laundry list of rules allows for freedom; don't abuse it. However there ARE a few basic rules that will earn you a suspension, and apparently a brief refresher is in order. 1) Allegations of pedophilia - there is no tolerance for this. So if you make allegations, jokes, innuendo or suggestions about child molestation, child pornography, abuse or inappropriate behavior with minors etc. about someone on this board you will get a time out. This is pretty much automatic; this behavior can have real world effect and is not acceptable. Obviously the subject is not banned when discussion of it is apropos, e.g. talking about an item in the news for instance. But allegations or references directed at or about another poster is verboten. 2) Outing people - providing real world identifiable information about users on the forums who prefer to remain anonymous. Yes, some of us post with our real names - not a problem to use them. However many do NOT, and if you find out someone's name keep it to yourself, first or last. This also goes for other identifying information too - employer information etc. You don't need too many pieces of data to figure out who someone really is these days. Depending on severity you might get anything from a scolding to a suspension - so don't do it. I know it can be confusing sometimes for newcomers, as SA has been around almost twenty years and there are some people that throw their real names around and their current Display Name may not match the name they have out in the public. But if in doubt, you don't want to accidentally out some one so use caution, even if it's a personal friend of yours in real life. 3) Posting While Suspended - If you've earned a timeout (these are fairly rare and hard to get), please observe the suspension. If you create a new account (a "Sock Puppet") and return to the forums to post with it before your suspension is up you WILL get more time added to your original suspension and lose your Socks. This behavior may result a permanent ban, since it shows you have zero respect for the few rules we have and the moderating team that is tasked with supporting them. Check the Terms of Service you agreed to; they apply to the individual agreeing, not the account you created, so don't try to Sea Lawyer us if you get caught. Just don't do it. Those are the three that will almost certainly get you into some trouble. IF YOU SEE SOMEONE DO ONE OF THESE THINGS, please do the following: Refrain from quoting the offending text, it makes the thread cleanup a pain in the rear Press the Report button; it is by far the best way to notify Admins as we will get e-mails. Calling out for Admins in the middle of threads, sending us PM's, etc. - there is no guarantee we will get those in a timely fashion. There are multiple Moderators in multiple time zones around the world, and anyone one of us can handle the Report and all of us will be notified about it. But if you PM one Mod directly and he's off line, the problem will get dealt with much more slowly. Other behaviors that you might want to think twice before doing include: Intentionally disrupting threads and discussions repeatedly. Off topic/content free trolling in threads to disrupt dialog Stalking users around the forums with the intent to disrupt content and discussion Repeated posting of overly graphic or scatological porn content. There are plenty web sites for you to get your freak on, don't do it here. And a brief note to Newbies... No, we will not ban people or censor them for dropping F-bombs on you, using foul language, etc. so please don't report it when one of our members gives you a greeting you may find shocking. We do our best not to censor content here and playing swearword police is not in our job descriptions. Sailing Anarchy is more like a bar than a classroom, so handle it like you would meeting someone a little coarse - don't look for the teacher. Thanks.

Saorsa

Members
  • Content count

    28,146
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Saorsa

  • Rank
    Anarchist

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://
  • ICQ
    0

Recent Profile Visitors

11,861 profile views
  1. Yeah, and Obamacare premiums are a tax not a government mandate to by a commercial product.
  2. Why blame slavery on America? The system was established when we were ruled by Europe. It just took us 90 years from the revolution to get rid of it.
  3. This thread is fucking hillaryous.!!! BTW, Glacier bay has been in retreat for a long time before the industrial revolution or Drake's first oil well. Just to make it political you might want to look at Obama the glaciologist For something a bit more scientificky (while still invoking global climate change) try this one.
  4. Working on a big boat. In a bigger place. Where it's not hot Where I get on the internet about 3 times a week and politics is the last thing on my mind.
  5. complex. but basically take existing premium and tax streams, and consolidate into 1 tax stream. Companies paying healthcare premiums today? Pay the tax man tomorrow. Etc. Some sort of incremental income tax. It will "hurt" folks who currently have good employer based plans, as the whole package is "tax free" today, and will no longer be part of compensation in the future (you get the basic plan, not a gucci plan) and high income earners will likely pay a higher % of income in tax. The idea if for overall costs to remain the same or decline, with more comprehensive coverage for all. we shall see. If anyone can make it happen, it's Brown, and word is, he doesn't want to make it happen. "I've Heard That Song Before" It seems to me I've heard that song before It's from an old familiar score I know it well, that melody It's funny how a theme recalls a favorite dream Dream that brought you so close to me I know each word because I've heard that song before The lyrics said, "Forevermore" Forevermore's a memory Please have them play it again And I'll remember just when I heard that lovely song before It's funny how a theme recalls a favorite dream Dream that brought you so close to me Please have them play it again And I'll remember just when I heard that lovely song before The entire world spends less than the US. Using one of those systems makes sense Do they include fake tits in their medical calculations?
  6. Oooooh, nice. You do realize that that whole meme is based on one guy who thought it was cute to dress up and whack a few people with a broomstick during the Berkeley riots. Here is the image that makes the meme He was arrested but after making bail, all charges were dropped. Still, photoshopping it into a army was a little bit clever. These were the guys he was up against. and here is what they did
  7. complex. but basically take existing premium and tax streams, and consolidate into 1 tax stream. Companies paying healthcare premiums today? Pay the tax man tomorrow. Etc. Some sort of incremental income tax. It will "hurt" folks who currently have good employer based plans, as the whole package is "tax free" today, and will no longer be part of compensation in the future (you get the basic plan, not a gucci plan) and high income earners will likely pay a higher % of income in tax. The idea if for overall costs to remain the same or decline, with more comprehensive coverage for all. we shall see. If anyone can make it happen, it's Brown, and word is, he doesn't want to make it happen. "I've Heard That Song Before" It seems to me I've heard that song before It's from an old familiar score I know it well, that melody It's funny how a theme recalls a favorite dream Dream that brought you so close to me I know each word because I've heard that song before The lyrics said, "Forevermore" Forevermore's a memory Please have them play it again And I'll remember just when I heard that lovely song before It's funny how a theme recalls a favorite dream Dream that brought you so close to me Please have them play it again And I'll remember just when I heard that lovely song before
  8. From 2005 to 2016 it is actually the 3rd most overturned with 77% reversed. Not by volume or constituency. Uh, no. By actual count. No need to normalize to suit your preconcieved notions or make excuses. Number of actual cases heard, number rejected or accepted. It's pretty simple really. what would be more comparative would be Total cases heard by the circuit court total cases overturned by the SCOTUS make it a % The BS stat from one small period, is pretty damn well within the margin of error in sampling. 70% of cases heard are overturned (duh, why else would they hear them) and the 9th is all of 13% greater than the 70%, at 79%. By any view - that's just about the same as others. Not surprising, as the same presidents nominated, and the same senate confirmed, all the judges. the sample is 11 years. See razi's post. Idiotic is a good description. Change your username. Most cases that come to a court are pretty mundane, cut and dried. The measure here is those who are so contentious that one of the parties will continue to fight and are raise the issue to another level, appeal to the SCOTUS. That's when the accept/reject game begins and where you keep score. Preseason isn't worth shit in the big leagues.
  9. Actually, you are wrong there. Pretty middle ground compared to others. Don't ask for a cite, you do your own research since you posted the lie. Hmmm. I remember Tom Ray making the claim, right before Jackson vs San Francisco, that the Ninth is the "most overturned" of all the circuits. He gave no cite, either. As Jackson unfolded, Pooplius predicted a summary reversal...and the statute (requiring gun locks in SF, and restricting ammo sales) was upheld...quite contrary to Heller stipulations. Paul Clement was the losing attorney of record, by the way. The 9th CIrcuit is tough on guns. It backs up CA courts, somehow, to materially defeat the effects of NRA "pre-emption" problems. From 2005 to 2016 it is actually the 3rd most overturned with 77% reversed. Not by volume or constituency. Uh, no. By actual count. No need to normalize to suit your preconcieved notions or make excuses. Number of actual cases heard, number rejected or accepted. It's pretty simple really. what would be more comparative would be Total cases heard by the circuit court total cases overturned by the SCOTUS make it a % The BS stat from one small period, is pretty damn well within the margin of error in sampling. 70% of cases heard are overturned (duh, why else would they hear them) and the 9th is all of 13% greater than the 70%, at 79%. By any view - that's just about the same as others. Not surprising, as the same presidents nominated, and the same senate confirmed, all the judges. the sample is 11 years.
  10. Not publishing so many fucking statistics would go a long way to increasing that one. Quantifying happiness is ludicrous. How many decimal points do you want? Some things could be done towards inferring happiness. Population wide stats on people's health, life expectancy, education, divorce rate, murder rate, drug addictions, abortions, hours needed to work to make ends meet. It's a lot better than just measuring their income. Those would be two different measures of different things which don't (to my mind) have shit to do with each other other than a desire to make the labels sound 2/3 the same implying a relationship that doesn't exist.
  11. Actually, you are wrong there. Pretty middle ground compared to others. Don't ask for a cite, you do your own research since you posted the lie. Hmmm. I remember Tom Ray making the claim, right before Jackson vs San Francisco, that the Ninth is the "most overturned" of all the circuits. He gave no cite, either. As Jackson unfolded, Pooplius predicted a summary reversal...and the statute (requiring gun locks in SF, and restricting ammo sales) was upheld...quite contrary to Heller stipulations. Paul Clement was the losing attorney of record, by the way. The 9th CIrcuit is tough on guns. It backs up CA courts, somehow, to materially defeat the effects of NRA "pre-emption" problems. From 2005 to 2016 it is actually the 3rd most overturned with 77% reversed. Not by volume or constituency. Uh, no. By actual count. No need to normalize to suit your preconcieved notions or make excuses. Number of actual cases heard, number rejected or accepted. It's pretty simple really.
  12. That may be the case but it is no excuse for a bunch of liberal punks to riot and assault people expressing their views. If the Republicans screwed up so badly why do they still win elections? Liberals get so upset when people have different opinions that they have. If they were more willing to tolerate and respect other's opinions then they probably would win more elections. No doubt. I shudder to think what America would be like if these assholes were in power. Yeah, because the assholes currently in power are doing such a good job. They have complete power and they can't even agree with each other. Just brilliant. You are seriously delusional. You are a typical Conservative, you can't stand to be wrong and will say anything other than admit that you are miserably wrong. There are plenty threads here about the Trump administration. This thread is about the leftist thought police. I still think you are overgeneralizing about this being a "leftist" thing. But, if it floats your boat..... You think.... You don't see parades cancelled because Democrats participated? You didn't see Hillary campaign events shut down, You don't see liberal speakers shut down at our universities? Hillary campaign events were invite only.
  13. It's not "the left", or liberals. It's assholes who prefer to lob anonymous threats. More like anarchists. Who is their target?
  14. Not publishing so many fucking statistics would go a long way to increasing that one. Quantifying happiness is ludicrous. How many decimal points do you want?
  15. Actually, you are wrong there. Pretty middle ground compared to others. Don't ask for a cite, you do your own research since you posted the lie. Hmmm. I remember Tom Ray making the claim, right before Jackson vs San Francisco, that the Ninth is the "most overturned" of all the circuits. He gave no cite, either. As Jackson unfolded, Pooplius predicted a summary reversal...and the statute (requiring gun locks in SF, and restricting ammo sales) was upheld...quite contrary to Heller stipulations. Paul Clement was the losing attorney of record, by the way. The 9th CIrcuit is tough on guns. It backs up CA courts, somehow, to materially defeat the effects of NRA "pre-emption" problems. From 2005 to 2016 it is actually the 3rd most overturned with 77% reversed.