|
|
Post by realjla on Mar 13, 2016 15:20:39 GMT -5
Isn't part of the point of the distribution process for the cookies giving the Girl Scouts the opportunity to go out into their communities and connect with them through the selling of their cookies? I think it is, if I recall correctly. So, as much as we love these cookies as consumers and devourers of their deliciousness, the cookies are not about us, Mecha. It's about the entire learning experience for the Girl Scouts.  Like CW said, if Girl Scouts didn't have Thin Mints to sell without competition, they'd be turning tricks to raise money I wish I didn't say that Maybe it could be retconned? |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 13, 2016 17:34:50 GMT -5
Created a New Avatar that has 50 of my favorite Kaiju's listed in Alphabetical Order.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ish Kabbible on Mar 13, 2016 17:41:50 GMT -5
Created a New Avatar that has 50 of my favorite Kaiju's listed in Alphabetical Order. I'm sure that's worth its own thread There I Said it Bwah HA Ha Ha Ha |
|
|
|
Post by Roquefort Raider on Mar 18, 2016 7:54:01 GMT -5
I've just seen a TV insurance ad in which a family is enthusiastic about its new small car:
"Look, there's no rear camera! No television screen on the back of the seats! no motion detector! No electric windows!" ...and I thought "great! Exactly the kind of trimmed down car I'd like! I'm glad someone is final... er..." (it then became apparent that the enthusiasm was a joke; we were meant to think "what a terrible car, and I wouldn't want my insurance company to trim down on its services either").
I am really fed up with the industry forcing us to accept the idea that cars with eighteen airbags, internet connectivity, heating steering wheel, cooling glove compartment, television screens, motion detectors, self-parking capacity, ABS brakes, water-saving windshield washers and computer-controlled locks are not only desirable, but needed. All those fringe "improvements" are thinly disguised ways of increasing prices (sale, maintenance and repair) and have done very little by way of safety and economy compared to simple and cheap measures like mandatory seat belts, sturdier designs or plain smaller models. When I was a kid (a looooong time ago), the most frugal small cars could do 40mph on the highway... and nowadays, with our newfangled automotive technology, it's pretty much remained the same. Except I have the privilege of having to pay $200 to replace a f**** car key!!! (Last time i had to change one, I went to the local Canadian Tire and it cost a big five bucks). And those %$#$ ABS brakes still refuse to let me properly handle an icy road, rendering years of training useless.
Apart from their new car smell, I hate almost everything about modern cars. There! I said it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Prince Hal on Mar 18, 2016 8:49:34 GMT -5
I've just seen a TV insurance ad in which a family is enthusiastic about its new small car: "Look, there's no rear camera! No television screen on the back of the seats! no motion detector! No electric windows!" ...and I thought "great! Exactly the kind of trimmed down car I'd like! I'm glad someone is final... er..." (it then became apparent that the enthusiasm was a joke; we were meant to think "what a terrible car, and I wouldn't want my insurance company to trim down on its services either"). I am really fed up with the industry forcing us to accept the idea that cars with eighteen airbags, internet connectivity, heating steering wheel, cooling glove compartment, television screens, motion detectors, self-parking capacity, ABS brakes, water-saving windshield washers and computer-controlled locks are not only desirable, but needed. All those fringe "improvements" are thinly disguised ways of increasing prices (sale, maintenance and repair) and have done very little by way of safety and economy compared to simple and cheap measures like mandatory seat belts, sturdier designs or plain smaller models. When I was a kid (a looooong time ago), the most frugal small cars could do 40mph on the highway... and nowadays, with our newfangled automotive technology, it's pretty much remained the same. Except I have the privilege of having to pay $200 to replace a f**** car key!!! (Last time i had to change one, I went to the local Canadian Tire and it cost a big five bucks). And those %$#$ ABS brakes still refuse to let me properly handle an icy road, rendering years of training useless. Apart from their new car smell, I hate almost everything about modern cars. There! I said it. The key thing kills me. Everything's a racket. If it's any consolation, a couple of years ago we took advantage of a low monthly lease rate offer for a Corolla (around $120). We knew we were going to do the deal, but refused any options, which of course would have upped the price, and the disappointment on the salesman's face was obvious. It got worse for him, though, when we told him that we wanted a standard transmission, which knocked the price down even further, and finally told him that we naturally wanted something for the old, very much rundown car we wanted to trade in. I think we got our monthly lease down to about 80 bucks. |
|
|
|
Post by Rob Allen on Mar 18, 2016 12:48:40 GMT -5
Apart from their new car smell, I hate almost everything about modern cars. There! I said it. I love my 25-year-old car, with a $5 metal key, hand-cranked windows, manual transmission and AM/FM radio. |
|
|
|
Post by Roquefort Raider on Mar 18, 2016 12:57:06 GMT -5
Apart from their new car smell, I hate almost everything about modern cars. There! I said it. I love my 25-year-old car, with a $5 metal key, hand-cranked windows, manual transmission and AM/FM radio. Sounds like my dream car, Rob! |
|
|
|
Post by adamwarlock2099 on Mar 18, 2016 15:15:56 GMT -5
I love my 25-year-old car, with a $5 metal key, hand-cranked windows, manual transmission and AM/FM radio. Sounds like my dream car, Rob! As Marv would say "modern cars ... they all look like electric shavers". |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 18, 2016 20:27:34 GMT -5
Apart from their new car smell, I hate almost everything about modern cars. There! I said it. I love my 25-year-old car, with a $5 metal key, hand-cranked windows, manual transmission and AM/FM radio. One of my oldest brother owns a 65 Mustang and I exactly knows this feeling Rob! |
|
|
|
Post by Ish Kabbible on Mar 26, 2016 21:36:05 GMT -5
I'll use this thread to post the one thing that's been bugging me about this forum lately.
There has been so many excellent threads concerning reviews on comics, movies etc. The authors have put in considerable time and effort in formulating their writing. My hat is doffed to each and every one of you. Even if I disagree with an opinion, the work you put into expressing yourself is commendable
There is one exception and it concerns repeated plagiarism.
A certain review thread is practically all copy/paste jobs from Wikipedia. And this is done over and over again. There is no acknowledgement of this, in fact the poster has their name highlighted as if it's their own work. I find it disingenuous and a total fraud. It's a slap against the efforts of all the other reviews found here. And this thread keeps letting us know how hard and how much work is involved to create it. Really?
So I'm asking the offender-use you're own voice or just supply the link to what you have been copying. But don't claim its you're own work
That's my rant. What do do think? Am I out of line or should this practice be discouraged? I'd love to see some feedback about this
|
|
|
|
Post by spoon on Mar 26, 2016 22:28:06 GMT -5
I'll use this thread to post the one thing that's been bugging me about this forum lately. There has been so many excellent threads concerning reviews on comics, movies etc. The authors have put in considerable time and effort in formulating their writing. My hat is doffed to each and every one of you. Even if I disagree with an opinion, the work you put into expressing yourself is commendable There is one exception and it concerns repeated plagiarism. A certain review thread is practically all copy/paste jobs from Wikipedia. And this is done over and over again. There is no acknowledgement of this, in fact the poster has their name highlighted as if it's their own work. I find it disingenuous and a total fraud. It's a slap against the efforts of all the other reviews found here. And this thread keeps letting us know how hard and how much work is involved to create it. Really? So I'm asking the offender-use you're own voice or just supply the link to what you have been copying. But don't claim its you're own work That's my rant. What do do think? Am I out of line or should this practice be discouraged? I'd love to see some feedback about this I don't think your out of line if the copying your referring to is actual plot summaries, critical analysis, etc. I'm assuming that you're talking about substantive copying like that. Even in something like a comics message board, people should pass off other's writing as their own. I edit Wikipedia, and I've started a bunch of biographical articles about athletes or entertainers. I've later seen websites copy the work I've done on Wikipedia verbatim. It's annoying, because there's no attribution. Plus, in the case, don't we want to know what our fellow CCF members think for themselves. Our own genuine thoughts build this community. Maybe you should try messaging this person (or a mod) to see if he/she will discontinuing this without having to call them out in public. But if someone won't stop after that, they've really brought the public criticism on themselves. (And just for the record, I don't know who this is about, so my take on this is nothing personal). |
|
|
|
Post by Ish Kabbible on Mar 26, 2016 22:41:43 GMT -5
I'll use this thread to post the one thing that's been bugging me about this forum lately. There has been so many excellent threads concerning reviews on comics, movies etc. The authors have put in considerable time and effort in formulating their writing. My hat is doffed to each and every one of you. Even if I disagree with an opinion, the work you put into expressing yourself is commendable There is one exception and it concerns repeated plagiarism. A certain review thread is practically all copy/paste jobs from Wikipedia. And this is done over and over again. There is no acknowledgement of this, in fact the poster has their name highlighted as if it's their own work. I find it disingenuous and a total fraud. It's a slap against the efforts of all the other reviews found here. And this thread keeps letting us know how hard and how much work is involved to create it. Really? So I'm asking the offender-use you're own voice or just supply the link to what you have been copying. But don't claim its you're own work That's my rant. What do do think? Am I out of line or should this practice be discouraged? I'd love to see some feedback about this I don't think your out of line if the copying your referring to is actual plot summaries, critical analysis, etc. I'm assuming that you're talking about substantive copying like that. Even in something like a comics message board, people should pass off other's writing as their own. I edit Wikipedia, and I've started a bunch of biographical articles about athletes or entertainers. I've later seen websites copy the work I've done on Wikipedia verbatim. It's annoying, because there's no attribution. Plus, in the case, don't we want to know what our fellow CCF members think for themselves. Our own genuine thoughts build this community. Maybe you should try messaging this person (or a mod) to see if he/she will discontinuing this without having to call them out in public. But if someone won't stop after that, they've really brought the public criticism on themselves. (And just for the record, I don't know who this is about, so my take on this is nothing personal). Yes, it's verbatim plot summaries and quite substantive. I'd rather not get into PMing the guilty party or the mods nor posting my displeasure directly on the thread itself. Hopefully it will cease when the offender sees this here. Just use your own voice. If thats too much work then don't do it at all |
|
|
|
Post by Icctrombone on Mar 27, 2016 5:03:08 GMT -5
OH wow. It's kind of silly to have a review thread and never actually write the review. Maybe the person hasn't even read the comics themselves. Tacky, man.
|
|
|
|
Post by DE Sinclair on Mar 28, 2016 11:21:00 GMT -5
Plagiarism of any kind is intellectually dishonest. Despite this, we don't have any actual rules on the board (as far as I know) against it. I would join with the others here and recommend that the "unknown reviewer" submit his/her own reviews so that we get an honest opinion on the material. Otherwise, we could just go to Wikipedia ourselves.
|
|
|
|
Post by Farrar on Mar 28, 2016 11:23:23 GMT -5
I've later seen websites copy the work I've done on Wikipedia verbatim. It's annoying, because there's no attribution. Plus, in the case, don't we want to know what our fellow CCF members think for themselves. Our own genuine thoughts build this community. I noticed a few months ago in one of the panels/art/cover threads (not the contest), someone was regularly posting covers from an informative, well-regarded, archived blog. I suppose it has become "fair game" to reproduce what others have curated (though I think credit should be given)....but the poster was also using the blogger's clever commentary nearly word for word, without indicating the source. From what I have noticed, the poster has since stopped that practice of poaching that blogger's commentary and seems to have become more confident in using his own voice. That's good; like Spoon said, we want to hear what our members genuinely think. |
|
