Belgian_Draft

Oh, ok....so you feel that just because I said "doesn't make it right" that I believe "does make it wrong". Sorry if you got confused. It may come as a shock but I am a bit more open minded than that and understand that each case is different. I have never intentionally implied that censorship is always bad. My only intent was to show that regardless of whether we agree with the change, Disney's action was still censorship. Others seem to feel it is only censorship if they don't agree with it. HAMMER: Originally employed as a weapon of war, the hammer nowadays is used as a kind of divining rod to locate the most expensive parts adjacent the object we are trying to hit.

But you did so in a discussion (you started) about whether it was censorship by your definition, not whether it was OK. So why didn't you say so to start with? We could have been talking about that instead. A) I'm failing to understand what the point is you are trying to make with the first question. Or maybe there is no point? And, also, it's not my definition. It is Merriam-Webster's. Their dictionary is well excepted by a few people around he world. B) Nobody asked? Yep, I guess that's it. HAMMER: Originally employed as a weapon of war, the hammer nowadays is used as a kind of divining rod to locate the most expensive parts adjacent the object we are trying to hit.

You did and I did. Really? Where? 44, 45 44 was your post, not mine. I'm not sure what you see in 45 that says i think censorship is always bad. Care to explain? HAMMER: Originally employed as a weapon of war, the hammer nowadays is used as a kind of divining rod to locate the most expensive parts adjacent the object we are trying to hit.

congratulations - you just took the word censorship and, by pissing and moaning about the definition of it rather than talking about the content of the thread - you've pretty much made the word completely pointless now - we can return to why Disney's choice is shortsighted, stupid and blind. I call their editorial choice by a new word - "fizdiggering" Uh, no. Sorry. I called it censorship. Other here needed help understanding just what censorship is. It was not just a case of a techinical detail but of the very basic definition and idea of censoring. HAMMER: Originally employed as a weapon of war, the hammer nowadays is used as a kind of divining rod to locate the most expensive parts adjacent the object we are trying to hit.

Yes. Two further questions, then: A) Why did you point out that the owners were not the creators if it makes no difference to the point you were making? B) Do you have a problem with Disney's actions? A) Because, to me, the author or originator is changing his own creation to (hopefully) reflect their own ideas and beliefs. Somebody else changing the work is altering the original intent and idea of the artist/creator, possibly going against ideals held by the author/creator. B) Yes. HAMMER: Originally employed as a weapon of war, the hammer nowadays is used as a kind of divining rod to locate the most expensive parts adjacent the object we are trying to hit.

You did and I did. Really? Where? HAMMER: Originally employed as a weapon of war, the hammer nowadays is used as a kind of divining rod to locate the most expensive parts adjacent the object we are trying to hit.

I'm completely against government censorship. You can check every single time it has ever been a topic on this forum and you'll see my views on it are completely consistent. That said, this isn't government censorship. It's a company doing what it thinks it has to do to sell it's own product. And let's make no mistake about it, it IS their product and always has been. They didn't buy it from anyone and are now making unauthorized changes; they created it,, they own it, they can do whatever the hell they want to with it. For once you are absolutely correct. Congratulations! But it is still censorship. They are just doing it to themselves. HAMMER: Originally employed as a weapon of war, the hammer nowadays is used as a kind of divining rod to locate the most expensive parts adjacent the object we are trying to hit.

Agreed on all points. After all, I never said censorship was always bad and nobody asked. HAMMER: Originally employed as a weapon of war, the hammer nowadays is used as a kind of divining rod to locate the most expensive parts adjacent the object we are trying to hit.

Yes. HAMMER: Originally employed as a weapon of war, the hammer nowadays is used as a kind of divining rod to locate the most expensive parts adjacent the object we are trying to hit.

Not really, I just read it sensibly. When you break a word down into a list of every possible connotation and examine them individually then you put yourself in danger of losing the actual meaning of the word. The people at Disney who made the changes are not the same people who originally wrote and produced the cartoon. It is the same as if the current copyright owners of Uncle Tom's Cabin re-wrote the novel to eliminate any passages that may offend the reader. I could have only posted the definition of consorshhip but I knew others, such as yourself, would argue what censoring meant. This ain't Clintonese. We all know what the meaning of "is" is. And now we all know what censorship is. Only problem now is that you don't like the definition. Well, tough. Deal with it. Your knowledge of intellectual property rights is truly astounding. Your lack of knowledge on even the simplest of subjects is astounding. I suppose you wouldn't call it censorship if the copyright owners of Uncle Toms Cabin removed the word "nigger" entirely from the book. Hell, you'd probably say it was needed. Yeah, about that . . . this is exactly what I mean . . . Uncle Tom's Cabin is public domain. Ok how would you feel if every government banned the word "nigger" from being published, read, downloaded or otherwise communicated as part of the book? Censorship is not connected with ownership. When I post on these forums I have a given amount of time to go back and censor my post. It's a form of editing. Just because a movie/book/etc. is censored by it's owner doesn't make it right. It is still censorship. HAMMER: Originally employed as a weapon of war, the hammer nowadays is used as a kind of divining rod to locate the most expensive parts adjacent the object we are trying to hit.

Not really, I just read it sensibly. When you break a word down into a list of every possible connotation and examine them individually then you put yourself in danger of losing the actual meaning of the word. Correct. There is a world of difference between self censorship and censorship imposed by external forces. If a person (company) has the right to say something, then they also have the right to NOT say something if they choose. Incorrect. HAMMER: Originally employed as a weapon of war, the hammer nowadays is used as a kind of divining rod to locate the most expensive parts adjacent the object we are trying to hit.

According o the definition given by M-W, yes. HAMMER: Originally employed as a weapon of war, the hammer nowadays is used as a kind of divining rod to locate the most expensive parts adjacent the object we are trying to hit.

Not really, I just read it sensibly. When you break a word down into a list of every possible connotation and examine them individually then you put yourself in danger of losing the actual meaning of the word. The people at Disney who made the changes are not the same people who originally wrote and produced the cartoon. It is the same as if the current copyright owners of Uncle Tom's Cabin re-wrote the novel to eliminate any passages that may offend the reader. I could have only posted the definition of consorshhip but I knew others, such as yourself, would argue what censoring meant. This ain't Clintonese. We all know what the meaning of "is" is. And now we all know what censorship is. Only problem now is that you don't like the definition. Well, tough. Deal with it. Your knowledge of intellectual property rights is truly astounding. Your lack of knowledge on even the simplest of subjects is astounding. I suppose you wouldn't call it censorship if the copyright owners of Uncle Toms Cabin removed the word "nigger" entirely from the book. Hell, you'd probably say it was needed. HAMMER: Originally employed as a weapon of war, the hammer nowadays is used as a kind of divining rod to locate the most expensive parts adjacent the object we are trying to hit.

Not really, I just read it sensibly. When you break a word down into a list of every possible connotation and examine them individually then you put yourself in danger of losing the actual meaning of the word. The people at Disney who made the changes are not the same people who originally wrote and produced the cartoon. It is the same as if the current copyright owners of Uncle Tom's Cabin re-wrote the novel to eliminate any passages that may offend the reader. I could have only posted the definition of consorshhip but I knew others, such as yourself, would argue what censoring meant. This ain't Clintonese. We all know what the meaning of "is" is. And now we all know what censorship is. Only problem now is that you don't like the definition. Well, tough. Deal with it. HAMMER: Originally employed as a weapon of war, the hammer nowadays is used as a kind of divining rod to locate the most expensive parts adjacent the object we are trying to hit.

Sorry, but you're both wrong. Unless you reject the definition of censorship as published by Merriam-Webster. Definition of CENSORSHIP 1a : the institution, system, or practice of censoring b : the actions or practices of censors; especially : censorial control exercised repressively 2: the office, power, or term of a Roman censor 3: exclusion from consciousness by the psychic censor www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/censorship Definition of CENSOR transitive verb : to examine in order to suppress or delete anything considered objectionable ; also : to suppress or delete as objectionable www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/censoring HAMMER: Originally employed as a weapon of war, the hammer nowadays is used as a kind of divining rod to locate the most expensive parts adjacent the object we are trying to hit.

Full story: Ammoland Oh dear, civilization as we know it is coming to an end! Actually, yes. You do realize that, with your comment, you have endorsed censorship? HAMMER: Originally employed as a weapon of war, the hammer nowadays is used as a kind of divining rod to locate the most expensive parts adjacent the object we are trying to hit.

8,775 firearm homicides in the USA last year. Maybe you should worry about the beam in your own eye, John. And 50,000+ killed by a doctor's mistake. HAMMER: Originally employed as a weapon of war, the hammer nowadays is used as a kind of divining rod to locate the most expensive parts adjacent the object we are trying to hit.

name them William Jefferson Clinton comes to mind. HAMMER: Originally employed as a weapon of war, the hammer nowadays is used as a kind of divining rod to locate the most expensive parts adjacent the object we are trying to hit.

In your haste to make another poster look bad you forgot one thing....he has already taken a lower paying job when he couldn't find work. Damn it's funny watching you try to look intelligent. Speedracer, have you had your resume reviewed by a professional? You stated that you are highly skilled, highly qualified, and highly educated. Not to say your resume is an example, but I have read literally hundreds of resumes that were nothing more than the applicant proclaiming how good they are. Resumes that show the person is not only skilled but also knows the limit of their knowledge and are willing to learn always stand out. Others have posted about how many replies online listings get. I put a position online one time and will NEVER do that again. Close to 300 replies in 48 hours. No way could I reply to each one. Keep looking and don't forget to make follow up calls after submitting a resume to make sure they received it.It can make a HUGE difference. HAMMER: Originally employed as a weapon of war, the hammer nowadays is used as a kind of divining rod to locate the most expensive parts adjacent the object we are trying to hit.

Your comments seem to imply that all jobs are equivalent (IOW "a job is a job"). People who are looking for work should take the first thing that is available, regardless of training, pay, location, etc. Otherwise, they are not "honestly looking for work". I am not looking for work, but let's say I was for the sake of example. I have invested a lot of time and money in my education (BSc, Master's, PhD, five years of postdoctoral work, 15 years working in higher education and biomedical research). Is it unreasonable that I would look for work that uses the training I have invested all this time and effort to obtain? Is it unreasonable that I would look for a job that pays me for the skills I have worked hard to develop? Am I being dishonest if I pass over minimum-wage unskilled labor while seeking a position in biotech or higher education? At the moment, there are a few areas of the US where the employment situation is not so dire. Perhaps I could find a job in the energy sector in North Dakota. But, I have a lot of money invested in my house in (let's say) California, and if forced to sell to move to North Dakota I would have to accept less money than is owing on the mortgage, and so I would have to declare bankruptcy or have a foreclosure on my credit record. On the other hand, I have enough of a "rainy day fund" saved to survive for another six months or so, and I have good reason to believe that biotech is going to be hiring in my area soon. Am I being "dishonest" by deciding to try to hang on for a while where I am, and not default on my mortgage and uproot the family to move to North Dakota today in hopes of being able to find something once I get there? Your "a job is a job" attitude only applies to unskilled workers who have invested little or nothing in acquiring a specialized skill set, or to those relatively few whose skills are potentially in demand regardless of location (welders such as yourself, and perhaps nurses and truck drivers), and who have no significant financial ties to their community. Although people have always had to be prepared to move to get the top-end jobs, in a healthy economy educated people should not have to move across the country and discard all their training just to find a menial labor job. Don If you saved enough to live on and sustain the standard of living you want until you find a job, then there is nothing wrong at all with holding out for the job you want...as long as you aren't collecting welfare while you do so. But, if you are barely scraping by on welfare and foodstamps, you best take any job you can get regardless of education. In a healty economy people don't have to always move to get the job they want but the fact remains you can't get a job running a 50,000 acre ranch in New Jersey and there isn't much demand for a corporate lawyer in Spotted Horse, Wyoming. HAMMER: Originally employed as a weapon of war, the hammer nowadays is used as a kind of divining rod to locate the most expensive parts adjacent the object we are trying to hit.

My guess is there was something else in the mix as well that you're either not saying or you don't know about. Hard to say without knowing more, but I can make a few wild guesses. And that is all they would be. HAMMER: Originally employed as a weapon of war, the hammer nowadays is used as a kind of divining rod to locate the most expensive parts adjacent the object we are trying to hit.

Up until two months ago I was looking for someone to come into the shop after normal hours and clean equipment, sweep floors, carry out trash, clean restrooms, etc. It took me SIX MONTHS to find one of those 6 million "unemployed" who was willing to do menial unskilled work for $12/hr plus benefits. Want to guess again how many of those 6 million are honestly looking for work? Not very fucking many. HAMMER: Originally employed as a weapon of war, the hammer nowadays is used as a kind of divining rod to locate the most expensive parts adjacent the object we are trying to hit.

I've been known to be an asshat myself from time to time, usually when somebody I am paying to do a certain task isn't holding up their end of the agreement. That includes employees as well as suppliers, contractors, transportation companies, etc. Accepting less than what you pay for can be a quick route to failure. HAMMER: Originally employed as a weapon of war, the hammer nowadays is used as a kind of divining rod to locate the most expensive parts adjacent the object we are trying to hit.

Nope. Not even close. Just because you have one apocryphal example of one specific company doesn't mean anything. Unless you can come up with 6.2 MILLION jobs, your argument is silly. http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.nr0.htm Silly? Only if you are naive enough to believe that all unemployed actually want to work. Come back to the table when you have real numbers of those who want a job. Until then, I have legions of unfilled job openings to back up my argument. HAMMER: Originally employed as a weapon of war, the hammer nowadays is used as a kind of divining rod to locate the most expensive parts adjacent the object we are trying to hit.

Nonsense. Shear and utter nonsense. The please explain, ye All-Knowing One, why those jobs are left unfilled? There are jobs available in every part of the country, it's not a localized issue. Jobs are listed for a variety of reasons and only one of them is to actually hire somebody. FREQUENTLY, jobs are listed that don't actually exist. I know this is difficult for most people to wrap their heads around, but it's 100% true. Companies are NOT hiring. Bullshit. I got a call just last week from a major equipment manufacturer looking to hire welders. Experienced preferred but they will train. The jobs are there for those who actually WANT a job. HAMMER: Originally employed as a weapon of war, the hammer nowadays is used as a kind of divining rod to locate the most expensive parts adjacent the object we are trying to hit.