• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

"OCCUPY WALL STREET"

Status
Not open for further replies.
Rocket Scientist said:
It's just amusing that you added the ''you know that, right?'' given the fact that even you didn't know for certain at first and had written G8 instead of G20 before the edit.

Eznark, you're just confusing at this point. You think that people using a service doesn't somehow help the service? Does the service have the right to feel entitled to it's own reality and manipulation of facts it provides it's users? Come on man, don't go for snarky remarks like ''entitlement, ho!''.

If Twitter thinks it's smart business (it isn't) to manipulate the way in which it's users can use the service, then it's well within their right to do so. That said, if they do engage in such behavior I would hope there would be a mass exodus from Twitter. I doubt it would happen though. Did a ton of people flock to Bing when Google bowed to China?

It's absolutely moronic that people are using Twitter to complain about Twitter supposedly manipulating stats. Go to Facebook or Google+ or whatever and stop using the evil Twitter for your little gatherings.
 
The whole point of trending topics is to show what's trending on the site. I would find it hard to believe that there isn't a law or service agreement that would be broken if the service decided to manipulate the results. If a news service manipulated articles, Google manipulated results in an unfair way, they would face persecution. I find your position really weird and frightening, but if that's how you feel then so be it.
Slayven said:
The simple fact that Twitter sells trending spots should tell you all you need to know.
The fact that there are paid for trending spots also shows that they can't just simply manipulate all trending items.
 
Rocket Scientist said:
The whole point of trending topics is to show what's trending on the site. I would find it hard to believe that there isn't a law or service agreement that would be broken if the service decided to manipulate the results. If a news service manipulated articles, Google manipulated results in an unfair way, they would face persecution. I find your position really weird and frightening, but if that's how you feel then so be it.

The fact that there are paid for trending spots also shows that they can't just simply manipulate all trending items.

Why? I'm saying that if they are indeed doing it, everyone who uses the service should stop doing so.
 
Well, I just mean the fact that you say they have the right to do what they want is frightening. I don't think they have the right and if they feel like they do, they should be sued and fined for manipulating, distorting, censoring whatever. I simply don't feel they have the right to do any of those things. We expect them not to, they offer their services with the pretense that they do not manipulate, distort or censor.
 
Rocket Scientist said:
It's just amusing that you added the ''you know that, right?'' given the fact that even you didn't know for certain at first and had written G8 instead of G20 before the edit.

Eznark, you're just confusing at this point. You think that people using a service doesn't somehow help the service? Does the service have the right to feel entitled to it's own reality and manipulation of facts it provides it's users? Come on man, don't go for snarky remarks like ''entitlement, ho!''.

It doesn't change the fact that he was wrong about the picture and it invalidated his entire statement.
 
Manos: The Hans of Fate said:
It doesn't change the fact that he was wrong about the picture and it invalidated his entire statement.
If you read my comment you will see I never commented on that or claimed the opposite. You do know that, right?
eznark said:
I hope Twitter does get sued. I've been wanting to sue Letterman for those blatantly false Top Ten lists for years!
I don't like what you're doing. It's just inappropriate in a normal discussion. I shouldn't have expected anything else from Gaf.
 
lawblob said:
Government encouragement to make subprime loans /= bundling millions of subprime loans and trading them as crooked securities with crooked backing from Moody's.

Give me a break, dude.

If the bad loans were never made, such loans would never been bundled and sold. One event happened before the other. Many members of Congress were doing far more than "encouraging" such loans as well. Also, even without the bundling of the mortgages, there still would have been a burst of the real estate bubble and ensuing recession- it just would have been more concentrated. The bundling caused "the pain to be spread around"- shifting many of the losses to the investment banks from the commercial banks (see Bear Sterns and Lehman Brothers). Even much of the trading wasn't done by the upper management of those companies either; many 20-something new hires at the time were not properly monitored while making the very risky trades. So actually, the losses from mortgage backed securities massively hurt much of Wall Street.

Ultimately, the blame goes around to most of the country- and to many others in other countries as well. Whoever took a subprime mortgage and could not eventually pay it- was apart of the problem. Whoever took loans for multiple houses and condos and needed to eventually foreclose- was apart of the problem. The government officials promoting these loans- were apart of the problem. The loan managers giving these people such mortgages- were apart of the problem as well. The whole financial industry, which is not simply just "Wall Street" and comprises of millions of jobs across numerous sectors in just the US itself- was apart of the problem. Anyone whose taken on debt- be it credit card or student loan- and could not meet the payments on time- was apart of the problem. The people that always pay their bills on time were the ones who got screwed/getting screwed.

As to issue of state and federal government debts, those problems were inevitable- the financial crisis simply expedited the process the purchasers of such debt to "call out" governments' irresponsible practices of the last few decades.
 
Manos: The Hans of Fate said:
It doesn't change the fact that he was wrong about the picture and it invalidated his entire statement.


it's still a dumb image macro that sets forth about as complex of an argument as propaganda. Just because you put words on a picture doesn't mean the words = the correct interpretation of the action. Either that or the person who made it just thought it would be funny (which it is!) and not meant for internet argument evidentiary purposes.
 
Ripclawe said:
Yeah.. No thanks

Once you have LaRouche douches in the crowd its time to give up. My most memorable moment of interning on the hill was seeing my chief of staff come out to angrily throw out some LaRouche kids who wouldn't leave our staff alone.
 
brucewaynegretzky said:
Once you have LaRouche douches in the crowd its time to give up. My most memorable moment of interning on the hill was seeing my chief of staff come out to angrily throw out some LaRouche kids who wouldn't leave our staff alone.
Those idiots are like cockroaches. I remember them always staking out near the Bala Cynwyd Post Office, they were always there like clockwork going off about the most nonsensical shit.
 
Haha, God bless the NYPD.

PROTEST-blog480.jpg

"ABOLISH CAPITALISM"
And people wonder why most don't take these idiots seriously?
 
Manos: The Hans of Fate said:

For months the protesters had planned to descend on Wall Street on a Saturday and occupy parts of it as an expression of anger over a financial system that they say favors the rich and powerful at the expense of ordinary citizens.

As it turned out, the demonstrators found much of their target off limits on Saturday as the city shut down sections of Wall Street near the New York Stock Exchange and Federal Hall well before their arrival.

By 10 a.m., metal barricades manned by police officers ringed the blocks of Wall Street between Broadway and William Street to the east. (In a statement, Paul J. Browne, the Police Department’s chief spokesman said, “A protest area was established on Broad Street at Exchange Street, next to the stock exchange, but protesters elected not to use it.”)

Organizers, promoters and supporters called the day, which had been widely discussed on Twitter and other social media sites, simply September 17. Some referred to it as the United States Day of Rage, an apparent reference to a series of disruptive protests against the Vietnam War held in Chicago in 1969.

The idea, according to some organizers, was to camp out for weeks or even months to replicate the kind, if not the scale, of protests that erupted earlier this year in places as varied as Egypt, Spain and Israel.

Bill Steyert, 68, who lives in Forest Hills, Queens, stood near the barricades at Wall Street and Broadway and shouted, “Shut down Wall Street, 12 noon, you’re all invited,” as tourists gazed quizzically at him.
Talking to a reporter, he elaborated, “You need a scorecard to keep track of all the things that corporations have done that are bad for this country.”

Nearby, Micah Chamberlain, 23, a line cook from Columbus, Ohio, held up a sign reading “End the Oligarchy” and said he had hitchhiked to New York. “There are millions of people in this county without jobs,” he said. “And 1 percent of the people have 99 percent of the money.”

Throughout the afternoon hundreds of demonstrators gathered in parks and plazas in Lower Manhattan. They held teach-ins, engaged in discussion and debate and waved signs with messages like “Democracy Not Corporatization” or “Revoke Corporate Personhood.”

Organizers said the rally was meant to be diverse, and not all of the participants were on the left. Followers of the right-wing figure Lyndon LaRouche formed a choir near Bowling Green and sang “The Star Spangled Banner” and “The Battle Hymn of the Republic.” Nearby, anarchists carried sleeping bags and tents.

At one point in the early afternoon, dozens of protesters marched around the famous bronze bull on lower Broadway. Among them was Dave Woessner, 31, a student at Harvard Divinity School.

“When you idealize financial markets as salvific you embrace the idea that profit is all that matters,” he said.

A few minutes later about 15 people briefly sat down on a sidewalk on Broadway, leaning against a metal barricade that blocked access to Wall Street. For a moment things grew tense as officers converged and a police chief shoved a newspaper photographer from behind.

After a police lieutenant used a megaphone to tell those sitting on the sidewalk that they were subject to arrest the protesters got up and marched south.

Mr. Browne said no permits had been sought for the demonstration but plans for it “were well known publicly.”

Mr. Browne said two people in bandanna masks were taken into custody for trying to enter a building at Broadway and Liberty Street that houses Bank of America offices. A third person fled.

As a chilly darkness descended, a few hundred people realized one of the day’s objectives by setting foot onto Wall Street after a quick march through winding streets, trailed by police scooters.

At William Street, they were blocked from proceeding toward the stock exchange, and the march ended in front of a Greek Revival building housing Cipriani Wall Street. Patrons on a second-floor balcony peered down.

As some of the patrons laughed and raised drinks, the protesters responded by pointing at them and chanting “pay your share.”
Here.
 
While I don't condone this particular call for occupation, I do find it kind of baffling that with all the financial and political turmoil ripping away at America, the population for the most part is so apathetic to the point where I wouldn't be able to name one important demonstration or riot that has taken place in the last few years. And no, the Rally to Restore Sanity and/or Fear does not count.

Europeans are going through very similar problems but have found a voice and a cause to rally. Why have Americans not?
 
140.85 said:
Haha, God bless the NYPD.
"ABOLISH CAPITALISM"
And people wonder why most don't take these idiots seriously?
One person is holding a picture of what I think is a man named Troy Davis. I've read a few articles on him claiming there's is good evidence that he was wrongfully convicted and is set to be killed in a week or so. Any Gaffers have any opinions on that? I'm always so confused when it comes to these things. I'd like to think that the police, prosecution and judges do their job correctly, but this case stinks to hell and back.
 
Salvor.Hardin said:
While I don't condone this particular call for occupation, I do find it kind of baffling that with all the financial and political turmoil ripping away at America, the population for the most part is so apathetic to the point where I wouldn't be able to name one important demonstration or riot that has taken place in the last few years. And no, the Rally to Restore Sanity and/or Fear does not count.

Europeans are going through very similar problems but have found a voice and a cause to rally. Why have Americans not?

There is frustration at the political system. But I think the belief in the economic system remains well grounded. There is no groundswell towards anti-capitalistic systems on the whole.

As for the European situation, which rally are you referring to? The Greek protests are seen here as an anarchist project and no one takes it seriously. More in depth analysis usually tend to put the protests in a worse light (youths and Greeks protesting entilemens cuts in a country that's lived well beyond their means). People also assume trade unions are impossibly powerful and protest at the drop of a hat as evidenced with the frequent general strikes in France over any attempts to restructure government obligations to entilements. That kind of inflexibility is seen very negatively here.
 
Salvor.Hardin said:
While I don't condone this particular call for occupation, I do find it kind of baffling that with all the financial and political turmoil ripping away at America, the population for the most part is so apathetic to the point where I wouldn't be able to name one important demonstration or riot that has taken place in the last few years. And no, the Rally to Restore Sanity and/or Fear does not count.

Europeans are going through very similar problems but have found a voice and a cause to rally. Why have Americans not?
The situation is far from "financial and political turmoil ripping away at America," but riots and demonstrations would only cause that to occur, rather than solve it. I would also assume many Americans are not as apathetic as you suppose they are, but rather find that there are more productive ways to improve their lives than these pointless rallies. I agree that there are times where rallies/demonstrations are appropriate, but in this case, there's no reason. In this new age of media, it is not as if you need a rally to have your voice heard. So while some may hope to solve their economic problems by choosing to blame the government or some other force, they usually don't have much to offer in terms of a solution, others choose to acknowledge that there are certain groups at fault, but decide to look forward and actively work towards a solution. It's the same case with politicians, who would rather spend all their time blaming their opponents instead of working towards a solution.
 
Salvor.Hardin said:
Europeans are going through very similar problems but have found a voice and a cause to rally. Why have Americans not?
Most of their rallies were against measures taken to fix their problems. Rallies by 6-year-olds who want to eat ice cream for supper are not useful.

The comparison of these guys to protesters across the Arab nations are poor. In Tunistan they knew what the country needed and their protest sent a clear and effective message.

This isn't communicating anything but anger. Everyone will interpret it to match their own political beliefs or ignore it and nothing will be accomplished.

People should have been out there when the Republicans were threatening not to raise the debt ceiling, and when the cost saving measures of Obamacare were thrown out to get the bill passed. People should have voted better in the 2008 elections so Congress would be less of a mess.

Instead, Tea Party protesters took the day. They protested long and hard for exactly the wrong things. Their protesting should not be applauded, as it's misguided and has caused significant long term damage to the economy and the government's ability to reduce it's debt. They could stage the exact same protest. They hate that the government propped up the banks and are full of anger. But their solutions would fuck everyone.
 
Lax Mike said:
The situation is far from "financial and political turmoil ripping away at America," but riots and demonstrations would only cause that to occur, rather than solve it. I would also assume many Americans are not as apathetic as you suppose they are, but rather find that there are more productive ways to improve their lives than these pointless rallies. I agree that there are times where rallies/demonstrations are appropriate, but in this case, there's no reason. In this new age of media, it is not as if you need a rally to have your voice heard. So while some may hope to solve their economic problems by choosing to blame the government or some other force, they usually don't have much to offer in terms of a solution, others choose to acknowledge that there are certain groups at fault, but decide to look forward and actively work towards a solution. It's the same case with politicians, who would rather spend all their time blaming their opponents instead of working towards a solution.

By all means, please explain how one can use new media to get their voice heard. Post on NeoGAF? Youtube? Reddit? You can do all of that but the truth is none of that is visable to the majority of people. A public demonstration in the largest city in the county in its financial district to call for financial reform is much more effective.


Slavik81 said:
Most of their rallies were against measures taken to fix their problems. Rallies by 6-year-olds who want to eat ice cream for supper are not useful.

The comparison of these guys to protesters across the Arab nations are poor. In Tunistan they knew what the country needed and their protest sent a clear and effective message.

This isn't communicating anything but anger. Everyone will interpret it to match their own political beliefs or ignore it and nothing will be accomplished.

People should have been out there when the Republicans were threatening not to raise the debt ceiling, and when the cost saving measures of Obamacare were thrown out to get the bill passed. People should have voted better in the 2008 elections so Congress would be less of a mess.

Instead, Tea Party protesters took the day. They protested long and hard for exactly the wrong things. Their protesting should not be applauded, as it's misguided and has caused significant long term damage to the economy and the government's ability to reduce it's debt. They could stage the exact same protest. They hate that the government propped up the banks and are full of anger. But their solutions would fuck everyone.

You're absolutely right, people should have been out during the debt ceiling deal. I'd just like to say that it is not true that these demonstrators are only communicating anger. Teach in's have been occurring and as we speak, consensus is being built around the message for this movement. One that has appeared on twitter frequently is to overturn citizens united v. FEC and limit campaign contributions from individuals to under $100. Join the discussion if you've got any more ideas. #ourwallstreet.
 
Suddenly a big group has collected and they're making a ton of noise. Cars and boats are honking melodically (in solidarity, I presume). I think they were relegated to Battery Park, though, which is well away from where they can really be thought about. Last night they were driven out by the police, which is why they're in Battery Park tonight. Is that legal for the police to interfere with a peaceful gathering like that?
 
Utako said:
Suddenly a big group has collected and they're making a ton of noise. Cars and boats are honking melodically (in solidarity, I presume). I think they were relegated to Battery Park, though, which is well away from where they can really be thought about. Last night they were driven out by the police, which is why they're in Battery Park tonight. Is that legal for the police to interfere with a peaceful gathering like that?

Yes its legal. Typically cities are allowed to restrict the area where people can protest as long as they enforce it neutrally.
 
brucewaynegretzky said:
Yes its legal. Typically cities are allowed to restrict the area where people can protest as long as they enforce it neutrally.
I think there was also a permit issue (and the group not getting one), which are done neutrally, to avoid the legal issues you mentioned.

An important tip people, no matter how fuck the govt/capitalists you are or if you're an indie filmmaker, you always get the permits. I remember Lloyd Kaufman mentioning it in his How To Make A Movie book, stating otherwise cops can legally kill your shoot and/or arrest you. Same applies to protests.
 
brucewaynegretzky said:
Yes its legal. Typically cities are allowed to restrict the area where people can protest as long as they enforce it neutrally.
That is miserable, authoritarian bullshit, and it violates the first amendment. It's nearly as bad as China's policies (though only nearly).

All Americans have to brag about in the first- and second-world are our unalienable freedoms, which will always deflate unless we demand them. It's an ongoing, eternal struggle between society's demand for order, and the ruling class that said order creates. Unfortunately, it must always be a struggle, as long as life meets any difficulty.
 
Utako said:
That is miserable, authoritarian bullshit, and it violates the first amendment. .

Actually it comes straight from first amendment jurisprudence.... The first amendment doesn't let anyone say whatever they want whenever they want no matter how much your uninformed highschool history teacher said so.
 
At William Street, they were blocked from proceeding toward the stock exchange, and the march ended in front of a Greek Revival building housing Cipriani Wall Street. Patrons on a second-floor balcony peered down.

As some of the patrons laughed and raised drinks, the protesters responded by pointing at them and chanting “pay your share.”
This creates some interesting imagery.
 
brucewaynegretzky said:
Actually it comes straight from first amendment jurisprudence.... The first amendment doesn't let anyone say whatever they want whenever they want no matter how much your uninformed highschool history teacher said so.
Way to be condescending, but it is indeed a violation of one's right to peaceably assemble, no matter how much you want to crawl up into a ball and tell yourself it's all OK.
 
Utako said:
Way to be condescending, but it is indeed a violation of one's right to peaceably assemble, no matter how much you want to crawl up into a ball and tell yourself it's all OK.
No, it's not, matter how much you want to ignore the law on the issue.
 
Utako said:
Way to be condescending, but it is indeed a violation of one's right to peaceably assemble, no matter how much you want to crawl up into a ball and tell yourself it's all OK.
You can peaceably assemble, but you can't restrict traffic, interfere with businesses doing their operations, or create a safety issue. If your assembly is going to do any of those things you have to get a permit so that people can be prepared.
 
Manos: The Hans of Fate said:
Do you have a law degree or are you even a law student? I'm just wanting where your amazing knowledge knowledge of the First Ammendment comes from?
Bookmarking this thread. I'll be back in a few years with a law degree so I can finally correctly interpret the high-minded content of the first amendment:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.


Slayven said:
You can peaceably assemble, but you can't restrict traffic, interfere with businesses doing their operations, or create a safety issue. If your assembly is going to do any of those things you have to get a permit so that people can be prepared.
That is extremely reasonable, but unfortunately it is applied unreasonably to this event.
 
Utako said:
Bookmarking this thread. I'll be back in a few years with a law degree so I can finally correctly interpret the high-minded content of the first amendment:
Great, so we can look forward to intellectually discoursing with you on the matter in 2015.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom