Rosa Parks was a staged incident (and one that definitely needed to happen)

You really don't believe that you can hold an opinion that's contrary to a legal requirement and still be effective in your position or executing your duties? You don't find that limiting?

You should be modded flamebait and troll because you were, as evidenced by personal attacks. I said the comment was stupid, which it was. You, however, attacked me. There's a troll here, and it wasn't me.

The funny thing is, I don't give a rip who dates who. It's none of my business. I would vote against laws putting limits on it. My problem is with people like you who feel that yours is the only valid opinion and shout down anyone who disagrees with you. Notice that you proved my point when you modded me down. That's not a debate and your position is not legitimate.

It's nice if you can surround yourself with people who completely share your views and only patronize businesses that only share your views. In the real world, this isn't possible because, as someone else kindly pointed out, the world is not black and white.

Why should I even try to be reasoned with you? Go back and read what you wrote. Read it again.

Sarcasm over "elevating the discussion." Sarcasm isn't a good way to make your point. But, frankly, people who insist on shouting down others for having a differing opinion are the ones who need to be punished.

Rhetoric over "pitchforks and torches." BTW, that's figuratively what you people did. You raised a fit until someone was forced to resign, which definitely has an impact on his life and most likely will effect his job prospects. And you seem to feel justified for doing so because he doesn't agree with you on marriage. I don't agree with him either, but he's entitled to be an ass if he wants to. Personally, I'd rather have my corporate head competent enough to do his job.

The crack on grammar doesn't even warrant a response.

I've said this before, I'll say it again. Get your nose out of everyone else's business and worry about yourself. You'll be a lot happier.

Right, because someone who disagrees with you is discriminating. While the use of the word is technically correct, you mean it as a pejorative, and deserve to get kicked in the genitals.

I'm sorry, but your opening sentence is so laughably bad it's really hard to take seriously. You really believe that every position can be filled with someone who espouses every belief system that you do? And that everyone else will share those beliefs with you? Seriously? Because that's what you're saying.

You should probably stop looking to corporations to tune your moral compass.

I'm going to disagree with you there. Both sides in any debate have rights. A customer may have a right to buy something, but a store has a right to not sell and a right to refuse service. Sometimes, for the good of society, we curtail the service provider's rights. Examples would include Utilities, Telecom, Housing, Banking, Transportation. Big ticket items where there are de facto oligarchies entrenched are far too powerful to let them do however they please, so we have laws to (try to) limit that.

That doesn't mean that you can force a baker to sell you a wedding cake when doing so violates their beliefs. Suck it up and move on. Someone else will be happy enough to take your money.

Same thing on health care. No company should be forced to provide it, let alone dictated to which specific features it will/must include. Some companies will provide it, others will not. Let the market decide. Personally, I'd rather have the extra money in my pocket (Especially since I've been laid off four times in ten years. That's money that would have gone straight down the toilet, and instead helped me keep food on the table. Yeah, something bad requiring a hospital stay could have happened. I would have crossed that bridge when I got to it.).

By saying that you hope SCOTUS "knocks some sense into that company" what you're saying is that you're right, they're wrong, and you're willing to use the threat of force, via the government, to get your way.

Here's a simpler idea: Go shop some place else.

What I suspect will actually happen is that people will continue shopping at because they like the product selection and prices, and that's more important than maintaining your ideals. So instead of tightening your belt and going some place whose standards you agree with, you'll soap box against . Either you have integrity or you do not, and crying over morality speaks volumes.

There's one side of the debate that constantly screams about equality and respect over one's choices, yet it's ALWAYS apparent that it really only applies when they agree with you.

Looks like I don't need to use OKCupid or Firefox. Spend more time worrying about yourself and less about others. You'll be a lot happier.

Seriously, WTF? I come in here with my morning cup of joe and see this pink slime all over the place and a poll asking my opinions on craptastic website design where it seems that the full suckfest has already been implemented. Look, change it back, or I'm leaving. We are not your "customers" or your "audience." We submit stories, we edit them, we moderate them and we discuss them. The community IS Pipedot. We are not here for you to monetize us.

I move that we start a new site, AllPipedot, and prove that the community can take back what's ours. In the mean time, I urge everyone to stop submitting new stories, and all mod points should only be spent on Fuck Pipedot Beta posts. We need to send a strong message to our evil, if benevolent, overlord, Bryan.

Yeah, but the |. tagline is a not-so-thinly-veiled reference to the other one. I take both Pipe and Soy to be competing with Them and providing the same sort of news coverage. Just without the asshatery. That's just my take on it. YMMV

I think things will get better and I would hope that people would post and not worry about cross-posting stories.

Despite all the crap that's happened over at The Other Site, it stayed my homepage for 15 years. I like the breadth of stories. Even if they're dupes and "old" news (a few days to a few weeks) I didn't really care because I wasn't going to scour those sources and find those articles on my own. I left when the boycott started and have been back maybe 3-4 times out of morbid curiosity to see if the number of comments have decreased. I don't even read the headlines there, let alone dive in to read comments. Instead, I jumped on the SN and |. bandwagon. I certainly appreciate what each is trying to do and wish them success, but they're both a little disappointing TO ME because the style of stories is just different. It seems it's more News For Nerds, but it was the Stuff That Matters that I cared about.

I know, get off my ass and start submitting the kinds of stories I want to see. No. I have enough on my plate that some days I barely have time to read the newspaper (which is what these sites are for me). So that's my grouse and I won't mention it again, since I'm not really willing to do anything about it. Sorry.

Nobody gives a shit what you think

;)

I signed on at Soylent reasonably early. Honestly, I like this place more. No, the community isn't here, yet, but it will come. I found the politicking over there to be rather distasteful. Moreso than anything Dice ever did at The Other Site.

I wish I had the skills to help out here, but I really, really don't. I'll have to settle for sitting back and enjoying the ride.

I think you mean for parts of the U.S., not the U.S. as a whole. Remember, it's a pretty big country. (Yes, there are some larger, but that's hardly the point. The point is that the U.S. is sufficiently large that we have wildly different climates across the country. My boss has been out shoveling snow off his roof, while I've been sitting in a t-shirt & shorts)

So I voted "Mild." I think I had to put on a sweater once. Damned inconvenient, if you ask me.

As for the "Just wait until summer!" crowd, sure, I like sitting in the shade and sipping fresh-squeezed lemonade, or going back into the A/C when I actually need to do some work...

Sorry, but you're wrong. A lot of aircraft, like every helicopter, fly low. 500'-1000' AGL is not a lot of time to react when you've been blinded. Frankly, I'm surprised that there haven't been any fatalities. I hesitate to label pointing a laser at an aircraft as attempted murder, but it's close. You don't do things that you know can seriously injury/kill people or do significant damage to property and then act like it's something minor when you get caught. It's not like it's an unreasonable request. It requires nothing more than for you to not be as asshole. I'm astonished that's there's even a debate.

So I should go with the added expense of adding a new coating (when was this approved by the FAA btw? You do know that you can't just add anything to aircraft that you feel like. It's not a car.) to keep from being blinded by some assclown on the ground with a laser. Or, maybe, we can continue pointing out that it's dangerous and illegal to point lasers at aircraft and punish the nincompoops who do it?

Can we get a description, including proposed features, of the proposed additions rather than just a bullet list?

I'm guessing we'll see a lot more censorship. Yes, the actual government-driven variety. Probably increased costs as each fiefdom requires businesses to conform to local laws

Half the reason I joined was for a low UID. Yes, I'm petty like that.