3 ms·

It's an article about someone's opinions about storytelling. Who cares what political team some person connected to the project was on. Are you claiming this in

by anm89 5y ago

It's an article about someone's opinions about storytelling. Who cares what political team some person connected to the project was on. Are you claiming this invalidates their opinion about screenwriting? Not every occurrence in the world needs to be leveraged to air political grievances.

bigbillheck 5y ago
> Not every occurrence in the world needs to be leveraged to air political grievances. The comments on the original article certainly appear to have taken it as an invitation to air political grievances.
dTal 5y ago
>Not every occurrence in the world needs to be leveraged to air political grievances. But the article is rich with political subtext; the idea that society is declining due to unreasonably soft-hearted attitudes towards undesirables is a fundamental anti-progressive pillar. The author is completely aware of these political lines and directly references them. Counterpoint - why would you expect articles on a media website funded out of pocket by a hedge fund billionaire with a penchant for political lobbying to be neutral? What's in it for the billionaire?
- anm89 5y ago
  Gasp! Billionaires! And they have their own website which people can post links to! Gasp again! Those dastardly billionaires with their media websites. If only I had known this website was run by evil billionaires I could have found some other website to read links people post about tech stuff.
  - romwell 5y ago
    You have added nothing of substance to the thread. Thanks for admitting you have nothing to say; I love comments that consist of nothing but sarcasm for that reason alone. Please continue.
  - wpietri 5y ago
    Gosh, you sound like a guy with a political grievance. Why are you bringing that to a simple statement about who paid for an article?
optimalsolver 5y ago
>connected to the project By "connected to the project" you mean "funds the entire thing".
wpietri 5y ago
> Not every occurrence in the world needs to be leveraged to air political grievances. Sure. But many things do exist exactly for that purpose. So I think it's always worth knowing why something's being written. In this case, the funding model suggests that it's exactly about airing political grievances. Since you claim to care about that, shouldn't you be glad to know that may be going on here?

by anm89 5y ago

bigbillheck 5y ago

> Not every occurrence in the world needs to be leveraged to air political grievances. The comments on the original article certainly appear to have taken it as an invitation to air political grievances.

dTal 5y ago

>Not every occurrence in the world needs to be leveraged to air political grievances. But the article is rich with political subtext; the idea that society is declining due to unreasonably soft-hearted attitudes towards undesirables is a fundamental anti-progressive pillar. The author is completely aware of these political lines and directly references them. Counterpoint - why would you expect articles on a media website funded out of pocket by a hedge fund billionaire with a penchant for political lobbying to be neutral? What's in it for the billionaire?

anm89 5y ago
Gasp! Billionaires! And they have their own website which people can post links to! Gasp again! Those dastardly billionaires with their media websites. If only I had known this website was run by evil billionaires I could have found some other website to read links people post about tech stuff.
- romwell 5y ago
  You have added nothing of substance to the thread. Thanks for admitting you have nothing to say; I love comments that consist of nothing but sarcasm for that reason alone. Please continue.
- wpietri 5y ago
  Gosh, you sound like a guy with a political grievance. Why are you bringing that to a simple statement about who paid for an article?

optimalsolver 5y ago

>connected to the project By "connected to the project" you mean "funds the entire thing".

wpietri 5y ago

> Not every occurrence in the world needs to be leveraged to air political grievances. Sure. But many things do exist exactly for that purpose. So I think it's always worth knowing why something's being written. In this case, the funding model suggests that it's exactly about airing political grievances. Since you claim to care about that, shouldn't you be glad to know that may be going on here?