On Wed, 01 Mar 2023 17:29:44 -0500, A Friend <nope@noway.com> wrote:

>In article <c0kvvht87vnq6l73nofdm1tli2lbr2eo4a@4ax.com>, The Horny Goat
><lcraver@home.ca> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 1 Mar 2023 16:24:45 -0500, moviePig <pwallace@moviepig.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >On 3/1/2023 4:14 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
>> >> On Mar 1, 2023 at 12:30:55 PM PST, "moviePig" <pwallace@moviepig.com>
>> >> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> On 3/1/2023 2:48 PM, Ed Stasiak wrote:
>> >>>>> A Friend
>> Again - if I said "I'm rootng for everybody white" I'd be an evil
>> person damned to the fires of hell by the "progressives" and you and I
>> both know it. What's the difference - I don't see any valid difference
>> at all.
>
>
>There's a big difference between punching up and punching down. You
>appear to think it's all the same. It's not.
>
>This is a fake, manufactured controversy. We're all supposed to get
>upset about this. Nope. Not playing.

OK I think we can leave this one there then since from the way you're
talking we are unlikely EVER to agree on.

MY context is that I'm a Canadian in a country where both my country
and province have roughly a 1 - 1.5% black population. To us the main
issue is aboriginal peoples who are roughly 4.5 - 5% of the population
and even more outrageous claims are now coming forward.

Most people I know AREN'T bigots but equally that doesn't translate
into 'the minorities don't get to dictate what is bigotted and what
not" - in particular they don't get to set the rules of the game all
by themselves.

On Wed, 1 Mar 2023 17:36:56 -0500, moviePig <pwallace@moviepig.com>
wrote:

>On 3/1/2023 5:21 PM, The Horny Goat wrote:
>> On Wed, 1 Mar 2023 15:30:55 -0500, moviePig <pwallace@moviepig.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On 3/1/2023 2:48 PM, Ed Stasiak wrote:
>>>>> A Friend
>>>>>> moviePig
>>>>>>
>>>>>> In light of miscegenation, how about making "races" singular?
>>>>>
>>>>> Or we could not try to ginn up fake controversies in the first place.
>>>>
>>>> What's "fake" about it? This person openly made a blatantly racist
>>>> comment on a global social media forum and not only has she not
>>>> been canceled, she's being celebrated for saying it.
>>>
>>> Is her comment more offensive than, say, "home-team" support?
>>>
>> Nobody thinks you're being a bigot for saying the New York Yankees
>> suck - at least nobody outside NYC.
>>
>> Skin color is something you're born with and not something you earn or
>> otherwise train for.
>
>Yeah, I'm trying to get into her frame of mind that (I hope/assume)
>allowed her to make that remark without serious racist overtones.
>
Whereas I take the words for face value as to what they say - and it's
NOT pretty which is why she shouldn't have said it into a live mike.

Adults are supposed to know better than that.

The Horny Goat <lcraver@home.ca> wrote:
>On Wed, 1 Mar 2023 17:25:28 -0500, moviePig <pwallace@moviepig.com> wrote:

>>No, context matters. E.g., listing someone's ethnicity on a medical
>>form is different from listing it on a job application.

>>The fact is that extolling the virtues of the dominant majority race is
>>likely to be viewed as "racist" against minorities ...whereas praising a
>>minority is likely to be viewed as mere self-esteem building. And, in
>>the public arena, it's not what you say but what people hear.

>While I agree with you I will never agree with you that there should
>be one set of rules for one group and another for another - to me
>that's the definition of bigotry and bigotry isn't something we should
>support regardless of what color one wears.

>That's the proverbial hill I - and I hope all decent people - would
>choose to die on.

You should utterly condemn moviePig. Medical form? "The next patient
I'll see is black. I won't listen to the patient. I won't examine the
patient for all symptoms. I won't take an adequate history. Instead,
I'll treat the patient based on my own preconceived notions. Good thing
I got this head's up." Care for black patients can be worse than for
white patients in the same facility. Checkbox on the form is meaningless
and fails to address the issue. Also, the doctor might notice skin color
during the examination regardless of the checkbox.

With respect to praise for an award given BECAUSE the person was black
-- what moviePig is actually arguing for -- is the opposite of
self-esteem building. That's letting the winner know that he was not
truly competitive and that he won for reasons other than being the best
in a fair competition.

How very paternalistic of moviePig.

On 3/2/2023 12:52 AM, The Horny Goat wrote:
> On Wed, 1 Mar 2023 17:25:28 -0500, moviePig <pwallace@moviepig.com>
> wrote:
>
>> No, context matters. E.g., listing someone's ethnicity on a medical
>> form is different from listing it on a job application.
>>
>> The fact is that extolling the virtues of the dominant majority race is
>> likely to be viewed as "racist" against minorities ...whereas praising a
>> minority is likely to be viewed as mere self-esteem building. And, in
>> the public arena, it's not what you say but what people hear.
>>
>>
> While I agree with you I will never agree with you that there should
> be one set of rules for one group and another for another - to me
> that's the definition of bigotry and bigotry isn't something we should
> support regardless of what color one wears.
>
> That's the proverbial hill I - and I hope all decent people - would
> choose to die on.

Of course, these aren't 'rules' in the sense of 'laws'. (Not yet
anyway.) Rather, they're merely an approximation of how things work.

'Politics' has been called "the art of the possible". I'm guessing you
don't want to be a politician, even a "good" one. Neither do I.

On 3/2/2023 12:57 AM, The Horny Goat wrote:
> On Wed, 1 Mar 2023 17:36:56 -0500, moviePig <pwallace@moviepig.com>
> wrote:
>
>> On 3/1/2023 5:21 PM, The Horny Goat wrote:
>>> On Wed, 1 Mar 2023 15:30:55 -0500, moviePig <pwallace@moviepig.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 3/1/2023 2:48 PM, Ed Stasiak wrote:
>>>>>> A Friend
>>>>>>> moviePig
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> In light of miscegenation, how about making "races" singular?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Or we could not try to ginn up fake controversies in the first place.
>>>>>
>>>>> What's "fake" about it? This person openly made a blatantly racist
>>>>> comment on a global social media forum and not only has she not
>>>>> been canceled, she's being celebrated for saying it.
>>>>
>>>> Is her comment more offensive than, say, "home-team" support?
>>>>
>>> Nobody thinks you're being a bigot for saying the New York Yankees
>>> suck - at least nobody outside NYC.
>>>
>>> Skin color is something you're born with and not something you earn or
>>> otherwise train for.
>>
>> Yeah, I'm trying to get into her frame of mind that (I hope/assume)
>> allowed her to make that remark without serious racist overtones.
>>
> Whereas I take the words for face value as to what they say - and it's
> NOT pretty which is why she shouldn't have said it into a live mike.
>
> Adults are supposed to know better than that.

Well, I'll agree that it's hard to see her words as constructive...

On Thu, 2 Mar 2023 10:51:47 -0500, moviePig <pwallace@moviepig.com>
wrote:

>Of course, these aren't 'rules' in the sense of 'laws'. (Not yet
>anyway.) Rather, they're merely an approximation of how things work.
>
>'Politics' has been called "the art of the possible". I'm guessing you
>don't want to be a politician, even a "good" one. Neither do I.
>
I've been attending municipal council meetings regularly for 20+ years
(to the point that I'm considered a regular pundit and am on a first
name basis with nearly the entire council (the one exception being one
elected last November for the first time)

I was going to run for office in 2008 but got cold feet. I'm too old
to be a first term councillor even if I were to be elected which
wouldn't be for 3 1/2 years in any case. No question I'd be better
than the two first time elected but I'm going on knowledge of issues
which as you know is not the most important thing for a candidate.

On Mar 2, 2023 at 5:04:32 AM PST, ""Adam H. Kerman"" <ahk@chinet.com> wrote:

> The Horny Goat <lcraver@home.ca> wrote:
>> On Wed, 1 Mar 2023 17:25:28 -0500, moviePig <pwallace@moviepig.com> wrote:
>
>>> No, context matters. E.g., listing someone's ethnicity on a medical
>>> form is different from listing it on a job application.
>
>>> The fact is that extolling the virtues of the dominant majority race is
>>> likely to be viewed as "racist" against minorities ...whereas praising a
>>> minority is likely to be viewed as mere self-esteem building. And, in
>>> the public arena, it's not what you say but what people hear.
>
>> While I agree with you I will never agree with you that there should
>> be one set of rules for one group and another for another - to me
>> that's the definition of bigotry and bigotry isn't something we should
>> support regardless of what color one wears.
>
>> That's the proverbial hill I - and I hope all decent people - would
>> choose to die on.
>
> You should utterly condemn moviePig. Medical form? "The next patient
> I'll see is black. I won't listen to the patient. I won't examine the
> patient for all symptoms. I won't take an adequate history. Instead,
> I'll treat the patient based on my own preconceived notions. Good thing
> I got this head's up." Care for black patients can be worse than for
> white patients in the same facility. Checkbox on the form is meaningless
> and fails to address the issue. Also, the doctor might notice skin color
> during the examination regardless of the checkbox.
>
> With respect to praise for an award given BECAUSE the person was black
> -- what moviePig is actually arguing for -- is the opposite of
> self-esteem building. That's letting the winner know that he was not
> truly competitive and that he won for reasons other than being the best
> in a fair competition.
>
> How very paternalistic of moviePig.

Imagine this being said about literally any other race. Every person in this
video would lose their job. They’d rightfully be called racists. They’d be
shunned. If they say it about white people they get praised by the Left. We
can’t continue this madness.

https://video.twimg.com/ext_tw_video/1629219796653862912/pu/vid/640x360/pPM8FzuGKhvNVH9Z.mp4?tag=12

I challenge moviePig to explain how any of this the sort of "lifting up" he
was going on about earlier in the thread.

On 3/2/2023 5:54 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
> On Mar 2, 2023 at 5:04:32 AM PST, ""Adam H. Kerman"" <ahk@chinet.com> wrote:
>
>> The Horny Goat <lcraver@home.ca> wrote:
>>> On Wed, 1 Mar 2023 17:25:28 -0500, moviePig <pwallace@moviepig.com> wrote:
>>
>>>> No, context matters. E.g., listing someone's ethnicity on a medical
>>>> form is different from listing it on a job application.
>>
>>>> The fact is that extolling the virtues of the dominant majority race is
>>>> likely to be viewed as "racist" against minorities ...whereas praising a
>>>> minority is likely to be viewed as mere self-esteem building. And, in
>>>> the public arena, it's not what you say but what people hear.
>>
>>> While I agree with you I will never agree with you that there should
>>> be one set of rules for one group and another for another - to me
>>> that's the definition of bigotry and bigotry isn't something we should
>>> support regardless of what color one wears.
>>
>>> That's the proverbial hill I - and I hope all decent people - would
>>> choose to die on.
>>
>> You should utterly condemn moviePig. Medical form? "The next patient
>> I'll see is black. I won't listen to the patient. I won't examine the
>> patient for all symptoms. I won't take an adequate history. Instead,
>> I'll treat the patient based on my own preconceived notions. Good thing
>> I got this head's up." Care for black patients can be worse than for
>> white patients in the same facility. Checkbox on the form is meaningless
>> and fails to address the issue. Also, the doctor might notice skin color
>> during the examination regardless of the checkbox.
>>
>> With respect to praise for an award given BECAUSE the person was black
>> -- what moviePig is actually arguing for -- is the opposite of
>> self-esteem building. That's letting the winner know that he was not
>> truly competitive and that he won for reasons other than being the best
>> in a fair competition.
>>
>> How very paternalistic of moviePig.
>
> Imagine this being said about literally any other race. Every person in this
> video would lose their job. They’d rightfully be called racists. They’d be
> shunned. If they say it about white people they get praised by the Left. We
> can’t continue this madness.
>
>
> https://video.twimg.com/ext_tw_video/1629219796653862912/pu/vid/640x360/pPM8FzuGKhvNVH9Z.mp4?tag=12
>
> I challenge moviePig to explain how any of this the sort of "lifting up" he
> was going on about earlier in the thread.

If you're referring to me saying that "praising a minority is likely to
be viewed as mere self-esteem building", then I'd ask where in your
video is any minority being praised.

The Horny Goat <lcraver@home.ca> writes:

> On Tue, 28 Feb 2023 00:25:22 +0000, BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:

>> If a white celebrity said this, she would be unemployed and
>> unemployable within minutes.
>>
>> https://video.twimg.com/ext_tw_video/1630359598195507200/pu/vid/480x640/q9p9rEpVuv3XXWBz.mp4?tag=12
>
> Definitely a better dressed bigot than David Duke.... but for sure a
> bigot

Haven't you ever noticed that he doesn't quote original sources, so as
to strip away original context? He goes to Dropbox and other
repositories where evidently bits and pieces are prepared for eager
propagandists. In this case the quoted woman was on the red carpet
talking about the Emmys, which in five years could only bring itself to
give out two nominations for _The Wire_, and those were for two of the
white writers (they didn't win either). If the best TV series ever made
couldn't garner even one nomination, let alone a win, for even one of
its majority black cast, then it's the Emmys that are the bigoted
elephant in the room.

-Micky

On Tue, 14 Mar 2023 03:32:36 +0000 (UTC),
MDuPree@theworld.com.snip.to.reply (Micky DuPree) wrote:

>Haven't you ever noticed that he doesn't quote original sources, so as
>to strip away original context? He goes to Dropbox and other
>repositories where evidently bits and pieces are prepared for eager
>propagandists. In this case the quoted woman was on the red carpet
>talking about the Emmys, which in five years could only bring itself to
>give out two nominations for _The Wire_, and those were for two of the
>white writers (they didn't win either). If the best TV series ever made
>couldn't garner even one nomination, let alone a win, for even one of
>its majority black cast, then it's the Emmys that are the bigoted
>elephant in the room.

So if I understand you correctly you're saying lack of Emmys is proof
of racism?

Not that there haven't been plenty of shows that did plenty well
through the years despite lack of awards - Star Trek is a great
example (and they're one show that tried very hard to have a diverse
cast)

In article <tuopsk$7tu$4@pcls7.std.com>,
MDuPree@theworld.com.snip.to.reply (Micky DuPree) wrote:

> The Horny Goat <lcraver@home.ca> writes:
>
> > On Tue, 28 Feb 2023 00:25:22 +0000, BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:
>
> >> If a white celebrity said this, she would be unemployed and
> >> unemployable within minutes.
> >>
> >> https://video.twimg.com/ext_tw_video/1630359598195507200/pu/vid/480x640/q9p
> >> 9rEpVuv3XXWBz.mp4?tag=12
> >
> > Definitely a better dressed bigot than David Duke.... but for sure a
> > bigot
>
> Haven't you ever noticed that he doesn't quote original sources, so as
> to strip away original context?

Have you ever noticed DuPree never actually responds directly to me, but
rather through other people's posts that quote me?

> He goes to Dropbox and other
> repositories where evidently bits and pieces are prepared for eager
> propagandists. In this case the quoted woman was on the red carpet
> talking about the Emmys

Which was obvious from the clip and didn't need your 'splainer. Believe
it or not, we can think and comprehend things for ourselves, DuPree. We
don't need you enlightened ones to 'splain thing for us.

On 3/14/23 12:00 AM, BTR1701 wrote:
> In article <tuopsk$7tu$4@pcls7.std.com>,
> MDuPree@theworld.com.snip.to.reply (Micky DuPree) wrote:
>
>> The Horny Goat <lcraver@home.ca> writes:
>>
>>> On Tue, 28 Feb 2023 00:25:22 +0000, BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:
>>
>>>> If a white celebrity said this, she would be unemployed and
>>>> unemployable within minutes.
>>>>
>>>> https://video.twimg.com/ext_tw_video/1630359598195507200/pu/vid/480x640/q9p
>>>> 9rEpVuv3XXWBz.mp4?tag=12
>>>
>>> Definitely a better dressed bigot than David Duke.... but for sure a
>>> bigot
>>
>> Haven't you ever noticed that he doesn't quote original sources, so as
>> to strip away original context?
>
> Have you ever noticed DuPree never actually responds directly to me, but
> rather through other people's posts that quote me?
>
>> He goes to Dropbox and other
>> repositories where evidently bits and pieces are prepared for eager
>> propagandists. In this case the quoted woman was on the red carpet
>> talking about the Emmys
>
> Which was obvious from the clip and didn't need your 'splainer. Believe
> it or not, we can think and comprehend things for ourselves, DuPree. We
> don't need you enlightened ones to 'splain thing for us.

Now that's irony. You and your sockpuppets exhibit the exact same
behavior. Did "Irish Mike" nee "Mike Kelly" supplant "Ed Stasiak" then?

> trotsky
> > BTR1701
> >
> > Which was obvious from the clip and didn't need your 'splainer. Believe
> > it or not, we can think and comprehend things for ourselves, DuPree. We
> > don't need you enlightened ones to 'splain thing for us.
>
> Now that's irony. You and your sockpuppets exhibit the exact same
> behavior. Did "Irish Mike" nee "Mike Kelly" supplant "Ed Stasiak" then?

No, I'm still here.

On Mon, 13 Mar 2023 21:00:49 -0800, BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:

>Which was obvious from the clip and didn't need your 'splainer. Believe
>it or not, we can think and comprehend things for ourselves, DuPree. We
>don't need you enlightened ones to 'splain thing for us.

That's the thing - I try real hard to like Micky but every now and
then the mask slips and she reveals that despite all she thinks folks
like us are hard core biggoted knuckle-draggers whose best possible
course of action by us would be to die as quickly as possible so she
and her crowd could remake society in her own image.

As for dying - we all do eventually but for myself "Not just yet!"

(And as a recent widower I've had plenty of time to reflect on that)

The Horny Goat <lcraver@home.ca> writes:

> On Tue, 14 Mar 2023 03:32:36 +0000 (UTC),
> MDuPree@theworld.com.snip.to.reply (Micky DuPree) wrote:

>> Haven't you ever noticed that he doesn't quote original sources, so
>> as to strip away original context? He goes to Dropbox and other
>> repositories where evidently bits and pieces are prepared for eager
>> propagandists. In this case the quoted woman was on the red carpet
>> talking about the Emmys, which in five years could only bring itself
>> to give out two nominations for _The Wire_, and those were for two of
>> the white writers (they didn't win either). If the best TV series
>> ever made couldn't garner even one nomination, let alone a win, for
>> even one of its majority black cast, then it's the Emmys that are the
>> bigoted elephant in the room.
>
> So if I understand you correctly you're saying lack of Emmys is proof
> of racism?

I'm saying that if not one of the cast in the best long-form series in
the English language even gets nominated, it's not a long jump from
there as to why.

> Not that there haven't been plenty of shows that did plenty well
> through the years despite lack of awards - Star Trek is a great
> example (and they're one show that tried very hard to have a diverse
> cast)

Oh, _The Wire_ did well critically, and it has a cult fan base, but yes,
being ignored by a particular awards academy that presumes to honor the
best means something's off about that academy. While _Star Trek_ is
interesting and culturally important, I'd hesitate to call it
Emmy-worthy, but let's say for the sake of argument that it is. Its
lack of Emmys would most likely be indicative of a prejudice by the
academy against science fiction in general back in _Star Trek's_ heyday
(and probably still). If someone from a science fiction show were
similarly on the red carpet at the Emmys with a microphone stuck in
their face, and they said, "I'm rooting for all the science fiction
shows," I wouldn't take it as a bias against all the other genres. I'd
take it as someone being tired of being ignored by the academy simply
because of the genre they're in.

Personally, I think the Oscars and the Emmys are ridiculous. Many of
the members admit to not watching most of the nominated works. But
those awards do mean something to the people in the game, often
monetarily. So when people get exasperated by "the game," it neither
surprises nor bothers me.

-Micky

The Horny Goat <lcraver@home.ca> writes:

> That's the thing - I try real hard to like Micky but every now and
> then the mask slips and she reveals that despite all she thinks folks
> like us are hard core biggoted knuckle-draggers whose best possible
> course of action by us would be to die as quickly as possible so she
> and her crowd could remake society in her own image.

"Folks like us"? Are you really saying that you're like BTR? Because I
had not put you in the same category as him, and I haven't wished death
on anyone, not even Trump. What exactly is "my crowd"? Where is this
coming from? From you? Or from BTR?

-Micky

On Tue, 28 Mar 2023 03:22:34 +0000 (UTC),
MDuPree@theworld.com.snip.to.reply (Micky DuPree) wrote:

>Oh, _The Wire_ did well critically, and it has a cult fan base, but yes,
>being ignored by a particular awards academy that presumes to honor the
>best means something's off about that academy. While _Star Trek_ is
>interesting and culturally important, I'd hesitate to call it
>Emmy-worthy, but let's say for the sake of argument that it is. Its
>lack of Emmys would most likely be indicative of a prejudice by the
>academy against science fiction in general back in _Star Trek's_ heyday
>(and probably still). If someone from a science fiction show were
>similarly on the red carpet at the Emmys with a microphone stuck in
>their face, and they said, "I'm rooting for all the science fiction
>shows," I wouldn't take it as a bias against all the other genres. I'd
>take it as someone being tired of being ignored by the academy simply
>because of the genre they're in.

"I'm rooting for all the science fiction shows" is a TOTALLY different
comment from "I'm rooting for everybody black" and you are
disingenuous to make the comparison.

Again - my rule of thumb is if it would be shocking to change the text
to "white", "black", "Asian" or anything else then it's racist and
shouldn't be said and with the exception of child actors, any actor
working in Hollywood should be mature enough to not need that said -
they should understand it without being told.

As for Star Trek specifically I have two points to make:
- there have been numerous ST shows through the years - ST:TOS,
ST:TNG, DS9, Enterprise, Strange New World, Discovery, ST: Picard, ST:
The Animated Series, ST: Voyager, Prodigy, Lower Decks (animated) -
have I missed any?

My whole point in listing these is to illustrate that each of these
shows are more or less continuous with the exception of the gap
between the original series and The Next Generation (though some of
that is covered by the movies). Thus it's reasonable to assume that
the producers of the various series will have evolved as social mores
have changed over the 60 years of Star Trek.

One thing common to all the shows is that all the Star Trek shows have
had a fairly diverse cast.

>Personally, I think the Oscars and the Emmys are ridiculous. Many of
>the members admit to not watching most of the nominated works. But
>those awards do mean something to the people in the game, often
>monetarily. So when people get exasperated by "the game," it neither
>surprises nor bothers me.

I agree - but if it is deemed acceptable to say that nominations and
awards should include race as a factor in judging awards, then they
are racist and should be shut down immediately.

In my world, racial preferences in the name of "equity" or anything
else is contemptible with respect to nominations or awards.

On Tue, 28 Mar 2023 03:27:29 +0000 (UTC),
MDuPree@theworld.com.snip.to.reply (Micky DuPree) wrote:

>The Horny Goat <lcraver@home.ca> writes:
>
>> That's the thing - I try real hard to like Micky but every now and
>> then the mask slips and she reveals that despite all she thinks folks
>> like us are hard core biggoted knuckle-draggers whose best possible
>> course of action by us would be to die as quickly as possible so she
>> and her crowd could remake society in her own image.
>
>"Folks like us"? Are you really saying that you're like BTR? Because I
>had not put you in the same category as him, and I haven't wished death
>on anyone, not even Trump. What exactly is "my crowd"? Where is this
>coming from? From you? Or from BTR?

You're right - I don't think of myself in BTR terms but in any case,
I'm against quotas or preferences of any sort. And while I have genres
I like, you'd be surprised at what I've viewed and read through the
years.

I'm about as non-woke as it gets and when I said "folks like us" I
meant literary and as a viewer.

Micky DuPree <MDuPree@theworld.com.snip.to.reply> wrote:
>The Horny Goat <lcraver@home.ca> writes:

>>That's the thing - I try real hard to like Micky but every now and
>>then the mask slips and she reveals that despite all she thinks folks
>>like us are hard core biggoted knuckle-draggers whose best possible
>>course of action by us would be to die as quickly as possible so she
>>and her crowd could remake society in her own image.

>"Folks like us"? Are you really saying that you're like BTR? Because I
>had not put you in the same category as him, and I haven't wished death
>on anyone, not even Trump. What exactly is "my crowd"? Where is this
>coming from? From you? Or from BTR?

BTR1701 makes Micky DuPree lits-o-haet and I don't... What is this world
coming to?

lcraver@home.ca wrote:
> MDuPree@theworld.com (Micky DuPree) wrote:

>>Oh, _The Wire_ did well critically, and it has a cult fan base, but yes,
>>being ignored by a particular awards academy that presumes to honor the
>>best means something's off about that academy. While _Star Trek_ is
>>interesting and culturally important, I'd hesitate to call it
>>Emmy-worthy, but let's say for the sake of argument that it is. Its
>>lack of Emmys would most likely be indicative of a prejudice by the
>>academy against science fiction in general back in _Star Trek's_ heyday
>>(and probably still). If someone from a science fiction show were
>>similarly on the red carpet at the Emmys with a microphone stuck in
>>their face, and they said, "I'm rooting for all the science fiction
>>shows," I wouldn't take it as a bias against all the other genres. I'd
>>take it as someone being tired of being ignored by the academy simply
>>because of the genre they're in.
>
>"I'm rooting for all the science fiction shows" is a TOTALLY different
>comment from "I'm rooting for everybody black" and you are
>disingenuous to make the comparison.

Really, dude? You've only now noticed DuPree doing this?

--
Let's go Brandon!

On Mar 27, 2023 at 10:00:58 PM PDT, ""Adam H. Kerman"" <ahk@chinet.com>
wrote:

> Micky DuPree <MDuPree@theworld.com.snip.to.reply> wrote:
>> The Horny Goat <lcraver@home.ca> writes:
>
>>> That's the thing - I try real hard to like Micky but every now and
>>> then the mask slips and she reveals that despite all she thinks folks
>>> like us are hard core biggoted knuckle-draggers whose best possible
>>> course of action by us would be to die as quickly as possible so she
>>> and her crowd could remake society in her own image.
>
>> "Folks like us"? Are you really saying that you're like BTR? Because I
>> had not put you in the same category as him, and I haven't wished death
>> on anyone, not even Trump. What exactly is "my crowd"? Where is this
>> coming from? From you? Or from BTR?
>
> BTR1701 makes Micky DuPree lits-o-haet and I don't... What is this world
> coming to?

DuPree hates me and killfiles me, then disingenuously replies to me through
other people's posts.

BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:
>On Mar 27, 2023 at 10:00:58 PM PDT, ""Adam H. Kerman"" <ahk@chinet.com>
>wrote:
>
>> Micky DuPree <MDuPree@theworld.com.snip.to.reply> wrote:
>>> The Horny Goat <lcraver@home.ca> writes:
>>
>>>> That's the thing - I try real hard to like Micky but every now and
>>>> then the mask slips and she reveals that despite all she thinks folks
>>>> like us are hard core biggoted knuckle-draggers whose best possible
>>>> course of action by us would be to die as quickly as possible so she
>>>> and her crowd could remake society in her own image.
>>
>>> "Folks like us"? Are you really saying that you're like BTR? Because I
>>> had not put you in the same category as him, and I haven't wished death
>>> on anyone, not even Trump. What exactly is "my crowd"? Where is this
>>> coming from? From you? Or from BTR?
>>
>> BTR1701 makes Micky DuPree lits-o-haet and I don't... What is this world
>> coming to?
>
>DuPree hates me and killfiles me, then disingenuously replies to me through
>other people's posts.

But she hates you more than she hates me. She does the same piggybacking
act with me but won't put me on her lits-o-haet.

On Mar 28, 2023 at 11:37:34 AM PDT, ""Adam H. Kerman"" <ahk@chinet.com>
wrote:

> BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:
>> On Mar 27, 2023 at 10:00:58 PM PDT, ""Adam H. Kerman"" <ahk@chinet.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Micky DuPree <MDuPree@theworld.com.snip.to.reply> wrote:
>>>> The Horny Goat <lcraver@home.ca> writes:
>>>
>>>>> That's the thing - I try real hard to like Micky but every now and
>>>>> then the mask slips and she reveals that despite all she thinks folks
>>>>> like us are hard core biggoted knuckle-draggers whose best possible
>>>>> course of action by us would be to die as quickly as possible so she
>>>>> and her crowd could remake society in her own image.
>>>
>>>> "Folks like us"? Are you really saying that you're like BTR? Because I
>>>> had not put you in the same category as him, and I haven't wished death
>>>> on anyone, not even Trump. What exactly is "my crowd"? Where is this
>>>> coming from? From you? Or from BTR?
>>>
>>> BTR1701 makes Micky DuPree lits-o-haet and I don't... What is this world
>>> coming to?
>>
>> DuPree hates me and killfiles me, then disingenuously replies to me through
>> other people's posts.
>
> But she hates you more than she hates me. She does the same piggybacking
> act with me but won't put me on her lits-o-haet.

I think she secretly has a crush on you.

On 3/28/23 12:43 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
> On Mar 27, 2023 at 10:00:58 PM PDT, ""Adam H. Kerman"" <ahk@chinet.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Micky DuPree <MDuPree@theworld.com.snip.to.reply> wrote:
>>> The Horny Goat <lcraver@home.ca> writes:
>>
>>>> That's the thing - I try real hard to like Micky but every now and
>>>> then the mask slips and she reveals that despite all she thinks folks
>>>> like us are hard core biggoted knuckle-draggers whose best possible
>>>> course of action by us would be to die as quickly as possible so she
>>>> and her crowd could remake society in her own image.
>>
>>> "Folks like us"? Are you really saying that you're like BTR? Because I
>>> had not put you in the same category as him, and I haven't wished death
>>> on anyone, not even Trump. What exactly is "my crowd"? Where is this
>>> coming from? From you? Or from BTR?
>>
>> BTR1701 makes Micky DuPree lits-o-haet and I don't... What is this world
>> coming to?
>
> DuPree hates me and killfiles me, then disingenuously replies to me through
> other people's posts.

Holy fuck is that ever the pot calling the kettle black.