Overall, the "news" they post is laughable.
I think Glenn Beck and Fox news is 99% garbage. But, at the same time they can make points that I agree with 1% of the time. If Glenn Beck came out in support of Gamergate I wouldn't be screaming omg messiah save us, everything he said in the past is forgiven derpaherpaderp!! I would consider his opinion on this subject. I wasn't aware I had to fully discredit someone because I didn't like their opinion on other topics. But I guess I should just stick my head in the sand when someone I don't like talks. I mean, I rather listen and judge their character further but that'd be immature
idk some people deserve a head-in-the-sand response, because if you acknowledge the one decent opinion they have, they/others feel that validates all their other opinions.
it's okay to listen to them but don't let them know you are
Whoa, now lets just calm down for a second here. I do both and I fully admit what I'm doing. :)
Hell, I even told you that's exactly what I was doing in your case right then and there. Don't act like this is some major discovery.
Both might be appropriate depending on the content of the message. If you post something along the lines of "I lost my baby boy this week, and now i'm sad and want to eat ice cream", then the trigger warning isn't needed, because nothing has really been said. But the warning is appropriate if your post goes into details that could be particularly upsetting to some people who have had a similar experience. Slapping a trigger warning onto everything you say is stupid, but it's definitely good in some situations.
I came up with another one too.
We get a lot of "DML: Family" threads (debate my life).
Without the trigger, it's usually in-laws being overbearing. With it, it usually either means lose of a family member or something to do with molestation in the family.
In the end though, again, it's about being polite. It might not make any sense to you, but if it gives another person comfort to type seven letters, then I am all for it.
Again, this is making sense to me. Trigger warnings going on stories is logical. Trigger warnings going on specific words is pants-on-head crazy.
Also, nobody on earth should be able to look at that "twitter log" showing a screencap SECONDS after the threats got posted from an unsearched, unlogged twitter account and say "Yep, looks legit." You can't say those suspicions don't count because of their source. Since when do we discredit points because of the source? Isn't it shit-tier debate to say someone's wrong because of who they are and not what they said?
Sometimes it's okay to let the boy get eaten by the wolf for being such a little shit in the past.
If you have severe PTSD where seeing words causes you to go into a panic attack... maybe browsing the internet is not a good idea. You know, hate machine, et al.
I guess trigger warnings are inevitable considering how seriously ya'll nigga's take spoiler warnings here.
All I'm saying is maybe you should avoid the things that cause you stress till you fix the stress. You don't go on a rollercoaster if you have heart problems.
i don't pretend to know shit about this, but since you guys were going on about it, figured i'd drop it off here:
http://www.cracked.com/blog/5-things..._ibsrc=fanpage