“All of the stores in the SoHo retail district including Chanel, Louis Vuitton and Marc Jacobs was shuttered in the days following the disaster. Many uptown stores were closed as well, with condolences taped to their front doors.”
Gotta say, standards were slipping, whoever proof-read that should be ashamed of themselves!
😉
My point would be clearer if the underline or bold function worked without all the spurious crap text that gets added! 🤬
@thols2 yes I have actually which is how I can emaphise with someone who may be* going through the motions.
Seems empathy isn't your strong suit in that case.
*the tweets you linked to don't actually paint a complete picture or even half of obe, there's no context and no conclusion. Yet we're supposed to be outraged about something by filling in the gaps with whatever we imagine to have happened?
Yet we’re supposed to be outraged
@squirrelking
No, you're not supposed to be outraged. You need to tone it down for your own sake. It's just strange that a media organization would have someone on the ground during one of the biggest news stories in living memory but not actually make use of that. It's not outrageous, there's no need to start getting all hot under the collar about trauma and empathy, etc. It's just a very strange and trivial story to publish given the magnitude of the events. That's all, don't blow it up into something that it's not.
I think if somebody from a cycling mag was there and wrote an article from a cyclist’s perspective it might feel more poignant to people who read cycling mags than the wall to wall stuff that was written at the time.
If a cycling mag journalist was out doing a bike test and something of that magnitude happened nearby, I would expect them to report on the major news story happening around them. "The bikes shops were all closed," would not be what I would expect them to be concerned with.
That’s all, don’t blow it up into something that it’s not.
Too late - the op did that.
Must agree the strangest thing about the whole article is that someone cross posted it onto a cycling forum.
Must agree the strangest thing about the whole article is that someone cross posted it onto a cycling forum.
If you browse through the chat forum, you're going to be outraged. There's all sorts of stuff that has no place on a cycling forum. Political discussions, rugby and football discussions, woodworking and DIY tips. Utterly shocking! SHOCKING!!! Why don't you start a petition to have the chat forum closed, nothing in it ever seems to be bike related. (Although you could just ignore stuff that you think isn't interesting, much easier.)
You really are completely incapable of listening to any voice that doesn't parrot back what you want to hear.
And far from being "uninterested" I find your reaction a fascinating insight into the attitudes and behaviour of the "maga cult" and shows that behaviour isn't just restricted to that group (a behaviour that I am sure you have many times highlighted and criticised)..
No, you’re not supposed to be outraged. You need to tone it down for your own sake. It’s just strange that a media organization would have someone on the ground during one of the biggest news stories in living memory but not actually make use of that.
Do we know the name of the journalist? Are we sure that they didn't write anything else? Do we know if her enetry to the hospital was conditional on her not acting as a journalist. Do we have any source, other than Twitter, to confirm that the basic story is as described here.
Personally I think it is a very odd story to bother with 21 years later. I still thimk it's amazing that the rewason the box cutters got on the planes was that US internla flights had such poor security checks
https://www.npr.org/2021/09/10/1035131619/911-travel-timeline-tsa
You really are completely incapable of listening to any voice that doesn’t parrot back what you want to hear.
Needs an anechoic chamber in the house… 😉
The irony of this thread is that thois2 now also understands what it is like to misjudge the mood of their audience.
Classic stw pile on. Why critise the op so much?
It’s light hearted, I haven’t exactly made fun of his Mum.
Anyway, I admire his commitment. Always good to see someone doubling down on their position.
Classic stw pile on. Why critise the op so much?
I have to totally agree. I hadn't previously clicked on the thread as the comment in thread title didn't interest me, but as the thread was still live after several days curiosity got the better of me.
Having read it I agree that whilst the OP's point isn't imo really valid - I don't understand why the fashion reporter's comments should be considered unacceptable 21 years later, I also don't understand the apparent outrage the OP has caused.
Okay it seems that most people don't agree with the OP, but why give thols such a hard time? IMO thols has argued the point in a reasonable although apparently unconvincing manner, why, ironically, the need for all the outrage? All that does is intimidate people into not posting stuff which they feel might not be met with 100% approval.
Btw when I consider insensitive remarks concerning 9/11 I always automatically think of this......" Ground Zero, so this is the place where the first guy got AIDS" A classic example of Family Guy genius.
Ernie, snap only came in cos the thread was still going, why the pile on, because when it became apparent the OPs opinion hadn't resonated with the wider forum instead of stepping back they continued to argue the point and started trading insults.
A lot of people can actually see the damage this click baity web stuff does to individuals who are at the heart of the story, truth in general and many of the populations wider ability to filter real news from the guff.
Personally I didnt even read the report as fashioned centred, it was also clearly snippets so my cynical mind immediately assumed there was more context missing from the what was posted.
Anyway, shame, I usually like thols2 contributions.
when it became apparent the OPs opinion hadn’t resonated with the wider forum instead of stepping back they continued to argue the point
That reads like you should only share an opinion on here, or defend it if it chimes with an STW consensus? That seems a bit sinister to me. FWIW, though I think thols' contributions are usually intelligent and considered, I disagree with him on this one. I don't think he deserved the classic STW pile on though. Challenge? Yes, but maybe tone down the vitriol a little*. There is a general groupthink vibe across the forum sometimes which sees people getting unreasonably angry if someone dares to see things differently from the accepted STW group view. Probably not unique to this forum but I don't think it's healthy.
*edit to say, not directed at @stumpyjon, even though I quoted you, but more generally at the tone of posts in the thread.
I wasn't judging, just answering Ernies question about why there was a pile on. Try the political threads for a proper pile on. The volume of posts from some forumite effectively drown out others views.
Edit: ooh stealth edit, noted and thank you. You make a fair point, what happened was just a reality of forums, it was a weird hill to choose to die on in the case of the OP, there's plenty more important issues to take on the forum consensus over.
Try the political threads for a proper pile on. The volume of posts from some forumite effectively drown out others views.
I know, which is why I and I suspect a lot of others, steer well clear despite (in my case) an interest in the subject. It spills over into threads on any contentious or topical subject too. The accepted group view is quickly established and anyone who disagrees is quickly shouted down.
I think this thread is a bit different to be honest, the consensus formed from more normal forumites, on the political threads it tends to the be the same 5 posters screaming at everyone else and posting consecutively so it can be difficult to find the dissenting voices yet alone for them to articulate their ideas without being told they are wrong or having their personal character attacked.
It doesn't always happen though, take the Andrew thread, a number of people jumped on the populist bandwagon accusing him of abusing his daughter in public, there was rather a lot of group think until Ernie had the guts to challenge the group view which gave others with less backbone (me included) the opportunity to also provide an alternative opinion of that specific event.
I do fully agree about walking away from the political threads, I'm not as strong as you and get sucked in from time to time. The irony is the noise on those threads just makes me more entrenched in my unpopular views. The bigger irony is I think my views have moved more to the left as I've got older directly as a result of the more intelligently argued posts on STW political threads, I've certainly started to have some empathy for people worse off with me which has impacted my voting habits. I think my visceral hatred for the current Tory party has also been stoked by what I've picked up from here rather than MSM.
I wasn’t involved in the pile on but I was really disappointed when I opened this thread for several reasons.
1. The title suggested some very different content.
2. The OP was amplifying a twitter pile on, for an article that was written 21 years ago by a person who (afaik) has very little significance. Seems really mean and pointless.
3. The OP and the twitter pile on crowd accused the writer of writing a vacuous piece about fashion during the fallout of 9/11, rather than writing about the experiences of those that went through it. But the extract they quote disproves their point:
Along with the trauma counsellors, I listened to these men and women describe how they had run for their lives.
I left the building and sat on a curb to write down what I had heard.
Whether there was a follow on piece that recounted those captured stories or whether the writer felt bound by the same confidentially the trauma counsellors had, who knows. Perhaps the experiences were too horrific to publish.
4. Finally, this paragraph seemed full of imagery and emotion and brought back the memories many people have of that event. Which suggests a writer less vacuous than the stereotype of a fashionista that these people have decided to direct their anger at.
the air began to fill with fine gray dust, like snowflakes. Only they weren't snowflakes, they were ashes. Ashes of the bond traders, the couriers, the insurance agents and receptionists who were in those buildings.
Feel free to ignore this post and go back to insulting each other. I recognise that this forum and other public internet spaces seem to fulfil a need many people have to anonymously vent anger. Ordinarily it’s easy to ignore threads like that, but like I said, the topic title drew me here under false pretences.
I think this thread is a bit different to be honest, the consensus formed from more normal forumites, on the political threads it tends to the be the same 5 posters screaming at everyone else and posting consecutively so it can be difficult to find the dissenting voices yet alone for them to articulate their ideas without being told they are wrong or having their personal character attacked.
It doesn’t always happen though, take the Andrew thread, a number of people jumped on the populist bandwagon accusing him of abusing his daughter in public, there was rather a lot of group think until Ernie had the guts to challenge the group view which gave others with less backbone (me included) the opportunity to also provide an alternative opinion of that specific event.
I do fully agree about walking away from the political threads, I’m not as strong as you and get sucked in from time to time. The irony is the noise on those threads just makes me more entrenched in my unpopular views. The bigger irony is I think my views have moved more to the left as I’ve got older directly as a result of the more intelligently argued posts on STW political threads, I’ve certainly started to have some empathy for people worse off with me which has impacted my voting habits. I think my visceral hatred for the current Tory party has also been stoked by what I’ve picked up from here rather than MSM.
Agree with all of that! The challenge to the groping accusation on the Andrew thread was a rare, but welcome example of a less popular view being given some credence. It would be good to see more of that.
My views have also drifted to the left as I've aged, which I think is the opposite of what conventional wisdom says happens! However, in the real world, I still have friends and acquaintances that don't share those views. They are mostly good people who I still get along with, but I have to recognise that a different upbringing and life experiences have led to them coming to a differing political view to me. I think it's important to at least try to understand why and not assume that my take is the 'correct' one. I think most people do this - they see the good in people despite differences in views, but that tolerance seems to evaporate when they go on line.
