931–940 of 1001 posts
I hate to burst everyone’s bubble, but this is fake news. This deal is not final. The judge in the liquidation case is holding an evidentiary hearing next week to understand how and why secret bidding was set up and why it was not open to the general public. Sounds like a BIG loss for The Onion, not to mention the potential defamation cases that could arise from news outlets publishing an unverified story about a sal…
It's not fake news. The onion did indeed win the auction. What remains to be seen is if the sandyhook parents are allowed to forego some of their claim against Jones to secure the purchase, which frankly I can't see why they couldn't. The auction is there to settle Jones' debts and some of his largest debtors are willing to release some of his nondischargeable debt for Infowars. He owes some of the family's 100 milli…
Most likely the sale will be awarded to the Jones-friendly high bidder.
Tim Onion's (Ben Collins) statement on Bluesky: [0] > Hi everyone. > The Onion, with the help of the Sandy Hook families, has purchased InfoWars. > We are planning on making it a very funny, very stupid website. > We have retained the services of some Onion and Clickhole Hall of Famers to pull this off. > I can't wait to show you what we have cooked up. Next post: [1] > Does anybody need millions of dollars worth of…
The funniest thing would be to keep running the site as-is but swap out the insanity for stuff that reads like insanity but is legit or morally sound. The audience might not notice, and could (IMHO) easily be duped into supporting good causes!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If Brexit taught me anything it was that the correct phrase is pesky unelected EU bureaucrats!
Newsflash: the Pentagon has literally _millions_ of bureaucrats. None elected. Unelected people are tasked with defending the free world. how about that?
I mean, one outcome is the obvious collapse of the Pentagon. But it seems like an oversight to have those people, now with a bone to pick, running around loose. Do they propose to take all the bad Pentagon bureaucrats and confine them in some way? I wouldn't want to be the Sgt. Shultz in charge of being those guys' jailer. Seems like it would be a tall, tall order.
I know you on HN aren't actually interested in the truth, but here it is anyway. The Onion did not purchase Infowars: https://x.com/RealAlexJones/status/1857223561754059168?t=7Q-...
I'm ashamed to be among this crowd sometimes.
On that note, anyone know of websites similar to HN that aren't filled to the brim with LA/NY brats? Other than /g/?
I hate to burst everyone’s bubble, but this is fake news. This deal is not final. The judge in the liquidation case is holding an evidentiary hearing next week to understand how and why secret bidding was set up and why it was not open to the general public. Sounds like a BIG loss for The Onion, not to mention the potential defamation cases that could arise from news outlets publishing an unverified story about a sal…
I hate to burst everyone’s bubble, but this is fake news. This deal is not final. The judge in the liquidation case is holding an evidentiary hearing next week to understand how and why secret bidding was set up and why it was not open to the general public. Sounds like a BIG loss for The Onion, not to mention the potential defamation cases that could arise from news outlets publishing an unverified story about a sal…
I doubt you'd call it "fake news" if a corporate acquisition was announced, just because the deal hadn't yet passed regulatory approval. But then again, you clearly seem to have a dog in this fight.
I hate to burst everyone’s bubble, but this is fake news. This deal is not final. The judge in the liquidation case is holding an evidentiary hearing next week to understand how and why secret bidding was set up and why it was not open to the general public. Sounds like a BIG loss for The Onion, not to mention the potential defamation cases that could arise from news outlets publishing an unverified story about a sal…
I doubt you'd call it "fake news" if a corporate acquisition was announced, just because the deal hadn't yet passed regulatory approval. But then again, you clearly seem to have a dog in this fight.
The correctly should be something like "The Onion is attempting to buy Infowars"
Earlier quoted context omitted.
An outcome of two-party systems is polarization. A voter in a true multi-party democracy can vote in a multidimensional way, whereas a voter in a two-party system is forced into one of two "sides" on a one-dimensional line. As the values people hold dear are threatened, they will inevitably flatten their values and be pulled towards a pole.
I don't know how to design a system to encourage such multidimensional parties. A two-party system seems like an inevitable consequence of the fact that there is exactly 1 winner in any election. Even when a system nominally has more than two parties, there are usually two dominant parties. Other parties either align with one or the other, or are sidelined. People associated with losing parties never seem to be pleas…
But it's still not all-or-nothing. For example, the Liberal party often adopts NDP positions if they're gaining popular support. And when the big parties get complacent, they risk losing their "one of two" status. In 2011 in Canada, the NDP was the Official Opposition (second winning party) and the Liberals were a distant third, leading to a big shakeup in strategy. And the provincial parties are different than the Federal parties. I think our system is flawed and too "two party", but the small plurality of parties is what makes Canada a lot less prone to political extremism in my opinion.
Canaidan-Australian Youtuber Paige Saunders has a video arguing that instant runoff voting tempered more extreme politicians in Alaska: