Reader Comments (rss)

(Flattened / Threaded)

1.  

   

   Anonymous Coward, Jul 30th, 2012 @ 4:30pm

   
   

   I seem to recall troll AC saying something about Nina "abandoning techdirt".
   
   Can't wait for him to keep posting mindless ad homs at nina/mike and persist with saying retarded shit
   
   or not

    

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

2.  

   

   Anonymous Coward, Jul 30th, 2012 @ 4:34pm

   
   

   I wish more groups like the CCIA would claim the ability to speak on behalf of the public.

    

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

3.  

   

   MrWilson, Jul 30th, 2012 @ 4:36pm

   
   

   Re:

   If the AC just subscribed to the Mimi and Eunice RSS Feed, they'd know that Nina hadn't posted any new comics until recently. Seems like she might have been busy.
   
   These trolls just aren't as dedicated as they used to be.

    

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

4.  

   

   Anonymous Coward, Jul 30th, 2012 @ 4:41pm

   
   

   I wish billionaires would form more groups like the Internet Alliance to speak on behalf of the public.

    

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

5.  

   

   Anonymous Coward, Jul 30th, 2012 @ 4:45pm

   
   

   I wish the CEA would fund more groups like Demand Progress to speak on behalf of the public.

    

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

6.  

   

   Tunnen (profile), Jul 30th, 2012 @ 4:46pm

   
   

   Bipartisan, isn't that when you slice a person into two symmetrical pieces? =P

    

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

7.  

   

   SujaOfJauhnral (profile), Jul 30th, 2012 @ 5:05pm

   
   

   Re:

   Don't they also call Nina "Pirate Nina" or was I just high at the time and seeing shit.

    

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

8.  

   

   SujaOfJauhnral (profile), Jul 30th, 2012 @ 5:07pm

   
   

   Re: Re:

   Seems like she might have been busy.

   
   She is, busy with her new movie "Seder Masochism".

    

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

9.  

   

   Anonymous, Jul 30th, 2012 @ 5:11pm

   
   

   It means...

   BOHICA. The Republicrats and Demopubs are going to stick it to you again.

    

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

10.  

    

    abc gum, Jul 30th, 2012 @ 5:14pm

    
    

    Bipartisan means that millionaires from both political parties will benefit financially from passage of the pork laden bill. It also means that future generations of tax payers will be screwed.

     

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

11.  

    

    Anonymous Coward, Jul 30th, 2012 @ 5:16pm

    
    

    What Does Bipartisan Really Mean?

    Bipartisan:
    
    Adjective. Abbreviation for: "One can buy both major US parties off for insanely low prices".
    
    Definition(s): Firesale on democracy; Fucked beyond all repair (FUBAR).
    
    Typical Usage: The US political system is completely bipartisan.
    
    Synonyms: useless, dead.

     

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

12.  

    

    gnudist, Jul 30th, 2012 @ 5:27pm

    
    

    Re: Re: Re:

    New nina movie stuffs? awesome. Loved sita sings the blues

     

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

13.  

    

    Anonymous Coward, Jul 30th, 2012 @ 5:27pm

    
    

    Bipartisan is an outdated term

    They need to start calling it Omnipartisan if they want my attention...
    
    I'm neither a Republican or Democrat... what good does it do to "sell" me a bill that only has support from the two worst political parties in the world?

     

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

14.  

    

    gnudist, Jul 30th, 2012 @ 5:35pm

    
    

    Re: It means...

    Sounds about right. I see corrupt congress critters on both sides and when I hear of them working together I keep picturing the legion of doom.
    
    Also, republicrats? Wasn't it republicunts? Damn name changs

     

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

15.  

    

    gorehound (profile), Jul 30th, 2012 @ 5:44pm

    
    

    Re: What Does Bipartisan Really Mean?

    Two Useless Political Parties.................
    Taking Big Money and screwing the Public is their Business of Choice.

     

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

16.  

    

    MrWilson, Jul 30th, 2012 @ 6:26pm

    
    

    Re: Bipartisan is an outdated term

    It does a lot of good if you're fully invested in the false dichotomy of Reps vs. Dems! Surely one of the two parties represent the entirety of your cut and dry and never changing or nuanced political views!
    
    You can lead a member of the voting populace to the kool-aid but you can't make them drink...until we get this legislation passed outlawing water in favor of Brawndo!

     

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

17. This comment has been flagged by the community. Click to show the comment.
     

    

    Anonymous Coward, Jul 30th, 2012 @ 7:05pm

    
    

    Re: Re:

    I was very much aware... but also aware that they had been back for a while without a word.
    
    I have to say I am suspecting that this is just Mike / Nina trying to look smart by answering my observations.
    
    Carry on. The cartoons aren't any better (smarter), still the same.

     

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

18.  

    

    Anonymous Coward, Jul 30th, 2012 @ 7:59pm

    
    

    Re: Re: Re:

    Yes, Mike / Nina have nothing better to do than wait for you to post something retarded and based on no facts and then post an article a few hours later just to make you look like an idiot. /s
    
    You poor deluded troll. You really think the world revolves around or gives a shit about your "observations"? I got some bad news for you, Sunshine. It doesn't.
    
    Carry on indeed. We know you will. With the incessant comments that state nothing factual.

     

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

19.  

    

    Anonymous Coward, Jul 30th, 2012 @ 8:17pm

    
    

    Re: Re: Re:

    You're so vain you think this comic is about you.
    
    Gotta love over inflated ego

     

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

20. This comment has been flagged by the community. Click to show the comment.
     

    

    Anonymous Coward, Jul 30th, 2012 @ 8:38pm

    
    

    Re: Re: Re: Re:

    Yeah, just a co-winky-dink, right?
    
    Mike is so obvious it's painful.

     

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

21.  

    

    Anonymous Coward, Jul 30th, 2012 @ 8:42pm

    
    

    What Does Bipartisan Really Mean?
    
    It usually means the public is bent over and given what for...

     

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

22.  

    

    ahow628 (profile), Jul 30th, 2012 @ 8:46pm

    
    

    Congressional approval ratings

    I've got one digit for you: 9%.

     

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

23.  

    

    Anonymous Coward, Jul 30th, 2012 @ 8:51pm

    
    

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

    And you're so predictable I can't help but roll my eyes upon reading your garbage.
    
    Why are you even on this site? It's blatently clear you're a rabid ideologue with an anti-techdirt bais

     

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

24. This comment has been flagged by the community. Click to show the comment.
     

    

    Anonymous Coward, Jul 30th, 2012 @ 8:54pm

    
    

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

    haha.
    
    Rabid idealogue? Have you looked around this place? Mike is still harboring the idea that the silly first amendment challenges to copyright are valid - even after the court slapped Lessig down so hard that he hasn't been heard from on it since.
    
    Techdirt is an idealogue blog, plain and simple. Anyone who disagrees gets treated as you treat me: insults, name calling, and derogatory statements about my opinions.
    
    So much for free speech, right? You would rather shout down those who object and exile them from the site, rather than deal with the issues.
    
    Mike is proud of you. You ate his shit whole.

     

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

25.  

    

    Anonymous Coward, Jul 30th, 2012 @ 9:06pm

    
    

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

    Er, where did mike say that? I see him say that the proposed ways of enforcing it can stifle first amendment rights but that's not the same as what you're claiming.

     

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

26.  

    

    Anonymous Coward, Jul 30th, 2012 @ 9:09pm

    
    

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

    Also I call you a rabid ideologue becauce you post like one.
    
    Mike himself debates people on the issues and it's usually him who is on the recieving end of namecalling.

     

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

27.  

    

    RadialSkid (profile), Jul 30th, 2012 @ 9:12pm

    
    

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

    The only shit holes we eat around here are you.

     

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

28.  

    

    Anonymous Coward, Jul 30th, 2012 @ 10:39pm

    
    

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

    Actually, I have seen Mike's version of debating, there isn't much to it. Most of the time, it starts with "you don't understand economics" or "you have no idea what you are talking about".
    
    Mike talks a good game, but rarely addresses key issues.
    
    One of the good ones: You know that whole idea of infinite distribution, right? He says it takes the "supply demand" calculation down to the point where things have zero marginal costs. However, he rarely mentions that one of the things that comes with that supply / demand theory is a big asterix that says "this does not work properly with items that have no real marginal costs". In other words, the very theory he uses to support his views doesn't work. He knows it, he ignores it.
    
    First amendment and copyright - Mike's stand has always been that copyright should be knocked down by the 1st amendment. He learned that idea from Lessig, I think. Well, Lessig got his dick slammed in the dirt in the courts over this one, nearly a unanimous decision to send him packing. Yet, Mike has never come out and said "that is a dead issue, copyright is consitutional". He just let's it linger, because it doesn't work for him.
    
    Mike does have one very important skill. He knows how to baffle them with bullshit. He piles it so high, so wide, and spikes it with just enough verifiable fact as to make it look whole. It's not, but he's good at it, and good at presenting it.
    
    I bow down to his shit shoveling skills. They are near the top.

     

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

29.  

    

    apauld (profile), Jul 30th, 2012 @ 10:43pm

    
    

    Re: Re: Re:

    You were only aware because I told you fool. You suck ass at trolling.

     

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

30.  

    

    Wally (profile), Jul 30th, 2012 @ 11:03pm

    
    

    Bipartisanship...

    ........Is an excuse for poloititions trying to hide their own curruption.
    ........Something only the public can maintain
    ........Gives one side the power to endorse a weak candidate for the other to keep their pockets lined and thenselves in power (most republicans actually wanted Santorum, not Romney).
    ........'s true meaning is both public and congressional approval.
    
    Nina's cartoon depicts exactly how I feel about my government right now.

     

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

31.  

    

    Wally (profile), Jul 30th, 2012 @ 11:05pm

    
    

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

    This........

     

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

32.  

    

    Wally (profile), Jul 30th, 2012 @ 11:05pm

    
    

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

    .....has.....

     

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

33.  

    

    Wally (profile), Jul 30th, 2012 @ 11:06pm

    
    

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

    .....gotten.....

     

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

34.  

    

    Wally (profile), Jul 30th, 2012 @ 11:07pm

    
    

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

    .....way.....

     

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

35.  

    

    Wally (profile), Jul 30th, 2012 @ 11:08pm

    
    

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

    .....off.....

     

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

36.  

    

    Wally (profile), Jul 30th, 2012 @ 11:09pm

    
    

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

    .....subject!!!!!

     

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

37.  

    

    Anonymous Coward, Jul 31st, 2012 @ 2:18am

    
    

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

    You know, I don't really get involved in the debates between "trolls" and Techdirt fans and all I do is read them (most of the time I quickly skip to more insightful discussions).
    
    But take it from me:
    I see a few people who post here and who have ideas that disagree with Techdirt (and I assume you are one of them, at least in the context of thread).
    
    What I rarely if ever see from the people is constructive criticism. What I mostly see is name-calling, personal attacks, ignoring the other party's arguments instead of responding to them and in some cases complete lies and made up facts.
    Your posts in this thread are no different and I'm going to support this with a few examples:
    
    "Techdirt is an idealogue blog, plain and simple. Anyone who disagrees gets treated as you treat me: insults, name calling, and derogatory statements about my opinions."
    --- You are trying to make a point, which I am fine with, but you offer no evidence, not a single quote from other comments. It just doesn't persuade me so I see this discussion as nothing more than a verbal fight between you and the other posters. ---
    
    "So much for free speech, right? You would rather shout down those who object and exile them from the site, rather than deal with the issues."
    --- Now here, as a neutral observer of the regular exchanges between Pro- and Anti- Techdirt folk (or whatever you want to call yourselves), I have to disagree with your assertion. I've seen a lot of stuff posted here by the anti-Techdirt folk that was not constructive and sometimes offensive (personal attacks) yet none of it was deleted, removed or otherwise censored. To hear you say that people here are trying to censor you is absolutely not convincing to me and makes it harder to take you seriously. ---
    
    "Mike is proud of you. You ate his shit whole."
    --- Vulgarity really doesn't help me take you seriously. ---
    
    I was recently visiting another website where I heard the arguments of people who have opinions that are opposed to Techdirt's, and I found that some people were making really good points and this led me to rethink about copyright and related issues. However, nobody who has been posting on Techdirt has managed to do that yet, so maybe there's actually a problem with the way the anti-Techdirt folk are arguing.
    
    Now I'd like to clarify a few things:
    - I'm not trying to prove you wrong or argue against you. I'm only trying to offer you some feedback, because I think it would be great if we could have constructive discussions on Techdirt and hear both sides' ideas and arguments. And my feedback is: the people who disagree with Techdirt just aren't convincing even to a neutral party like me. And it's not your position that is the issue, it's the way you argue. Hopefully you will take this into consideration and things will change for the better.
    
    - There are pro-Techdirt folk who do the same mistakes I've said you're doing, however the reason I'm not calling them out is because there are enough pro-Techdirt folk who debate constructively. The issue with the anti-Techdirt folk is that ALL those who post here are not constructive, at least from what I have seen. And before accusing me of bias, please remember what I mentioned above: I've seen very interesting arguments supporting your opinions on other websites. Arguments which gave me something to think about. My problem is, I don't see those arguments or the same constructive debate here on Techdirt.
    
    - Finally, I'm aware that you feel persecuted here and thus it's normal for you to be quite defensive. However, you've reached a point where you no longer even convince neutral folk like me who want to hear both sides of the story and don't want to be biased. It would be good if you could get over the attacks you are receiving and remain constructive in your discussions so that neutral people could learn from you; but if you cannot do this, then perhaps it's time to give up and stop posting here - after all, if you've become so defensive that you can't convince anyone anymore, then why keep it up? It won't achieve anything.

     

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

38.  

    

    Steve, Jul 31st, 2012 @ 4:45am

    
    

    Re: What Does Bipartisan Really Mean?

    Doesn't FUBAR mean 'Fucked Up Beyond All Recognition'?
    It's an honest question by the way.

     

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

39.  

    

    abc gum, Jul 31st, 2012 @ 5:05am

    
    

    Re: Re: What Does Bipartisan Really Mean?

    Yes - also heard ... Repair rather than Recognition

     

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

40.  

    

    Anonymous Coward, Jul 31st, 2012 @ 7:27am

    
    

    When dems do something it's usually dumb (or naive).
    When the reps do something it's usually evil.
    Bipartisan means it's both dumb and evil.

     

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

41.  

    

    Anonymous Coward, Jul 31st, 2012 @ 1:46pm

    
    

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

    Looking at past posts by Mike, he also explains WHY you don't know what you're talking about whenever he says you don't know what you're talking about.
    
    Or posts links to when he explained it in an earlier post.
    
    Or links to where some else explained it.

     

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

Add Your Comment