Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org>
Newsgroups: sci.electronics.design
Subject: Re: OT: 'Peer Reviewed' Papers - a new scam!
Date: Wed, 29 May 2024 13:05:51 +1000
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 45
Message-ID: <v3662n$vsci$1@dont-email.me>
References: <v333v5$4hl8$2@dont-email.me>
 <6656385e$6$1258324$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>
 <v35h2b$ood3$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Wed, 29 May 2024 05:06:00 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="aadcd11aabf832e072bbfc3a4de4d04c";
	logging-data="1044882"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18Y2OXYYyNoeV8kVKbh4fy5zKjJczKQZx4="
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:fbL2nfAJd1EUIfsla2ZBmQ1zoJ4=
In-Reply-To: <v35h2b$ood3$1@dont-email.me>
Content-Language: en-US
Bytes: 3187

On 29/05/2024 7:07 am, Cursitor Doom wrote:
> On Tue, 28 May 2024 16:02:38 -0400, bitrex wrote:
> 
>> I'm unsure if there have been any significant recent developments in
>> conservative philosophy recently, but if there's been like, some
>> paradigm-shifting discoveries in the field of wingnutology I'm open to
>> reading the journals that contain them.
>>
>> But my impression has been that wingnutology is not shall we say a
>> "highly nuanced philosophy" and that's one of the keys to its
>> popularity, it doesn't need an academic journal to understand.
>>
>> Love guns, love Trump, have a long list of commies, queers, and
>> degenerate enemies that need to get waxed, and you've basically got at
>> least a bachelors of arts in the field at this time. what more is there
>> to know about it. Park your pickup in a EV parking spot is the
>> equivalent of a masters degree. Kick a queer or homeless person straight
>> in the head and you got your PhD, easy.
> 
> That's precisely the problem with you elitist types. You believe no one
> should be allowed to express any political opinion unless they have a
> degree from somewhere like Columbia or Brown. 

The bar is set a bit lower. You merely have to know a bit about what you 
are talking about, which you can't manage.

> Your sort  believe it's only permissible to espouse a view if it's couched in suitably nuanced terms -
> which conveniently excludes anyone with populist, Right-wing sensibilities
> who didn't have a privileged upbringing. So much for "inclusiveness" eh.

You have populist right-wing sensibilities, yet you use a low-frequency 
word like nuanced.

You are also addicted to fatuous right-wing nonsense to a degree that 
suggests that you are probably clinically insane, but not flamboyant 
with it, so you don't have to locked away to prevent you physically 
attacking other people. Subverting them with vicious fantasies, doesn't 
  - as yet - constitute a recognised crime against the community.

Trump may yet do enough damage to change that.

-- 
Bill Sloman, Sydney
>