Uh, why are all the examples negative or deemed "subversion" if not attacking the readers? I'm all for calling people on what they do dumbly, I can even see some pleasure in where a dumb person is put in their place, but is back biting criticism really the only thing we care about documenting? To the point "yeah, that was bad, this is why" or even, gasp "I'm sorry!" are somehow atypical?
Edited by 69.47.43.173 That's why he wants you to have the money. Not so you can buy 14 Cadillacs but so you can help build up the wastesI organized all of the examples. The system for adding new examples is clearly outlined in hidden comments on the page itself. If someone wants to change the system, they're welcome to and can ask me for help in doing so, but they would still have to re-categorize every example. And there are a bloody lot of them. Ugh.
"In the land of the insecure, the one-balled man is king." - HavenSo, did Buckley take his message down, or what? Or is this an outdated 2-year-old assumption?
Edited by 94.2.216.3
Regarding the whole "attack video" thing on Traviss, I actually managed to track one of them down via wayback machine, but I'm not sure I can link it, since it involves a guy killing people in effigy.