Need to let loose a primal scream without collecting footnotes first? Have a sneer percolating in your system but not enough time/energy to make a whole post about it? Go forth and be mid: Welcome to the Stubsack, your first port of call for learning fresh Awful youā€™ll near-instantly regret.

Any awful.systems sub may be subsneered in this subthread, techtakes or no.

If your sneer seems higher quality than you thought, feel free to cutā€™nā€™paste it into its own post ā€” thereā€™s no quota for posting and the bar really isnā€™t that high.

The post Xitter web has spawned soo many ā€œesotericā€ right wing freaks, but thereā€™s no appropriate sneer-space for them. Iā€™m talking redscare-ish, reality challenged ā€œculture criticsā€ who write about everything but understand nothing. Iā€™m talking about reply-guys who make the same 6 tweets about the same 3 subjects. Theyā€™re inescapable at this point, yet I donā€™t see them mocked (as much as they should be)

Like, there was one dude a while back who insisted that women couldnā€™t be surgeons because they didnā€™t believe in the moon or in stars? I think each and every one of these guys is uniquely fucked up and if I canā€™t escape them, I would love to sneer at them.

Last weekā€™s thread

(Semi-obligatory thanks to @dgerard for starting this)

  • bitofhope@awful.systems
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    Ā·
    13 days ago

    Losing every swing state and failing to even win the consolation trophy of the popular vote after even Hillary fucking Clinton managed that much is something Iā€™d call getting your ass handed to you. The US election system is terrible, but itā€™s the game they were playing and Trump won hands down.

    Also, not that itā€™s the point but I have to note that technically most election victories are decisive, in the sense that they resolve the winner with little to no ambiguity (which is usually the case, even when the margin is narrow). In that sense, the only way Trumpā€™s victory is not decisive is if you contest the legitimacy of the whole election.

    • V0ldek@awful.systems
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      Ā·
      13 days ago

      Also, not that itā€™s the point but I have to note that technically most election victories are decisive, in the sense that they resolve the winner with little to no ambiguity (which is usually the case, even when the margin is narrow). In that sense, the only way Trumpā€™s victory is not decisive is if you contest the legitimacy of the whole election.

      This is such pedantry that you might as well say ā€œthe Merriam-Webster dictionary defines decisive asā€¦ā€

      • sc_griffith@awful.systems
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        Ā·
        edit-2
        13 days ago

        considering trump has spent the last four years pretending he won the previous election I actually do wonder if part of the subtext is ā€œwe acknowledge you won for real realsies and we cannot talk shit about you as a fake presidentā€

      • bitofhope@awful.systems
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        Ā·
        edit-2
        13 days ago

        Yea I know, had to get that digression out of my system, especially since you said ā€œin any sensible meaning of the wordā€ and all. Sorry, I didnā€™t mean to nuh-uh you on semantics, just point out something that tickled my pedantry sense.

        Edit: I also brought it up because IMO ā€œdecisiveā€ is a bit of an odd choice to describe election victory, unless referring to some grander context where the election marks a major historical turning point in national or international politics in favor of the winning side.