Ford better import this European auto
By adamg - Wed, 09/17/2008 - 9:16am.
No, not that diesel one that gets 65 m.p.g. The Ford Ka. Only problem, as Jules Crittenden notes, you couldn't pahk it in Hahvahd Yahd.
- Add new comment |
| 
| 
French Toast Alert Level: Guarded. Explanation.
Recent comments
Boston Blogs Network
- Coal sucks, still
- Very very small iPhone movie projector
- Nat Hentoff signs off, vows not to retire
- If I Could Talk to the Animals
- Cell-phone spam
- Of Bread, This I Know
- Taking Chance Home
- Indoor 10k Time Trial
- Man Arrested For Making Threatening Calls to WEEI
- 'Waaaaaaa! Our coach left for another job!"
Sponsors
Boston Condos
Boston Luxury Condos
Waterfront Midtown
Condos
Consumer United For FREE!
Sign up for our eNews updates and use the promo code "SAVENOWBLOG" for one-year free membership with Consumer United.
Member:
a creepy wingnut
For Crittendon, people with left of center politics who he calls "moonbats", and "vegetarian's" are one in the same.
Crittendon doesn't have much respect for people with center-left politics but I'm pretty sure he won't take kindly to being called a wing nut. He gets pissed off when you misspell his name.
Jules Crittendon is a wing nut who censors comments on his blog. My friend Neil tried to post comments and Crittendon deletes them every time. The comments Crittendon does not delete are from equally rabid wing nuts. I guess wing nuts in Massachusetts are a little touchy. I can imagine why. Still, for a journalist, Jules Crittendon is kind of a creep about it.
Jules Crittendon was an embed in Iraq and still thinks Saddam helped Bin Ladin plan 9/11. You can google up Jules and read the stories about how he pilfered Iraq for souvenirs and got caught at the US border by customs red headed. When US customs has a problem with American citizens stealing stuff from Iraq, you know it a problem. We're not talking mini soap and shampoo from a hotel bathroom.
He likes his politics with scantily clad women. Take a look at this post, Hotties for Ron Paul. ...Just saying.
Image
Ya know ...
Just because he posts photos like that doesn't mean you have to.
You can delete it, Adam
In fact, I think that would be a good idea.
Please delete
Holy keerist, man! I browse from work because the site is supposedly "work safe"! That's totally inappropriate to post and I hope you or Adam deletes it! If you want to link to crap like that, you should do it with a link and not the image! If you ever *do* link to something like that, you need to also put "NSFW" (not safe for work) next to the link!!
Good thing all of my bosses are currently in a meeting...
I've turned the image into a link to the image
Here's why:
Aside from the NSFW issues, it's a "hotlinked" image, i.e., one being called up from somebody else's site. There are potential copyright issues with hotlinking, potential bandwidth issues (drove me nuts when some Chinese spammer was hotlinking my site banner 60,000 times a day as part of some link click fraud scheme) and potential Goatse issues should the owner of the site the image is hosted on decide to replace the image with something a lot worse (that's a common technique for dealing with hotlinkers, in fact).
I apologize for this; I probably need to write up a policy for the (sadly antiquated) how-to section.
It's fine
Be honest. You didn't want the scantily clad women in a post and you found a justifying reason. It's fine, it's your call. No need to apologize.
At least you don't delete peoples' comments because you disagree, which is what Jules Crittendon does.
NSFW? I don't think its reasonable to adjust content so that people who are at work can read a blog... Universal Hub if they find the content acceptable for the privacy of their home. Work is not a disability and therefore no reasonable accommodation must be made. Plus if they're blogging when they should be working why enable that behavior?
The photo of the Dahm Triplets illustrates a point I am making in the comment. It is not gratuitous. Look at the other photos on Jules' "Hotties for Ron Paul" link if you doubt that assertion. Moreover, the Dahm triplets are more covered than most women wearing bikinis.
So my question is this: If the image was not hot linked,would you allow it or find another reason to not allow it? Fair question, yes? Think about it when you get a minute. I'm not going anywhere.
Retarded self-justification
If I were to go to a link called "Hotties for Ron Paul" while in a work setting, I'd be getting what I asked for. However, I didn't. I clicked on a link here about the Ford Ka and got 3 painted, naked women. That's not appropriate for this site and it's not good netiquette to post such a thing completely out of context on a site without some sort of warning. This site isn't a porn site or even close to it and so there's absolutely no expectation for the viewer to see an image like that here.
There are any number of situations where someone could be browsing the web and not want to see or expect an image like that to come up. NSFW is centered around the idea that things be "work appropriate" but in reality it's a catch-all acronym for "warning: R+ rated material linked here". It absolutely was gratuitous for this site, completely inappropriate to the conversation about a damn car, and you can try to shrug it off all you want but there are valid ways to accomplish what you wanted to point out (like linking to it with a warning instead). Learn some posting manners.
OK, let me make it simpler then
Two rules:
1) No hotlinking
2) No posting of NSFW images.
The hotlinking thing particularly bothers me because a) I make my living from copyrighted material, so am sensitive to copyright abuse and because b) As I mentioned, I was a victim of serious hotlinking myself and so am sensitive to the bandwidth issues.
But forget that. Let's talk about NSFW stuff.
There are two basic demographic fundamentals of Universal Hub visitors: Many have jobs working in offices during the day. And many read Universal Hub during the day (hey, everybody's entitled to take a break).
I don't feel like getting folks here in trouble with their HR departments ("So tell me, Bob, why you had a photo of painted naked women on your screen") or losing visitors just because somebody feels like posting a gratuitous booby shot (does your Crittenden rant really lose anything because it's no longer illustrated with a large-ish photo of painted naked women? No, I didn't think so).
At the same time, there is a pretty simple convention for dealing with possibly work-inappropriate images. You know, an NSFW tag - with a link. It's been in use for years, people know what it means and if somebody happens to be in a cube farm, or just likes living dangerously, they can click on your link and grow hair on their palms or whatever. If you feel like you simply will burst if somebody can't see some image of naked people or or mushrooms that look like certain body parts, use that.
Gracias.
Thanks.
"Learn some posting
Manners? I don't think so. Blogging etiquette? Absolutely. But it's not the same everwhere (just look at Jules site) and it was never clearly stated here at Universal Hub until I asked Adam.
So maybe you shouldn't be so judgmental or take it so personally.
It was my intention to offend no one... but if you're going to be a jerk about it we can back and forth.
So my question is this: If
Adam, Thanks for getting back to me. I appreciate it.
I didn't object to your removing the photo. I asked you a bunch of questions to get an understanding of your policy and you have provided answers.
I don't think you had ever clearly stated these explicitly but if you have, then maybe I should have know. Otherwise, I'm asking the right questions.
Don't mistake my arguments for disagreement with your policy. They are meant to challenge your thinking not your authority.
Also, NSFW is not an acronym I was familiar with until you mentioned it today. Your explanation about how you want "NSFW" material presented is clear but was not until you stated it here, "OK, let me make it simpler then".
Never had to spell it out before
This site's been up for 3+ years now. And, to be honest, the issue's never come up before.
I've actually ridden in one! Super cute!
My parents and I took a vacation to Mexico years ago and decided to rent a car, just to tour the area. My dad made the phone call to the rental place and upon getting off the phone, we asked what kind of car he'd rented.
"I don't know, he just said it was a cah."
"Well...What KIND of a cah?"
"He said cah!"
Come to find out, it was a KA. He asked for a cah and got one!
Naughty picture - don't look
Naughty picture - don't look at during work.
NSFW
Dahm Triplets censored PIC
wingnut oogler acknowledges U-hub homeboys
Jules didn't grow up here. Hey! "my Boston homeboys" Isn't Jules cool?
I'm sure he meant no slight to the women who post on U-Hub nor that we're gang members. It's just a friendly poke in the ribs.
It seems Jules has trouble keeping his mind from wandering when there are pretty women about. Here's a picture of Fox news anchor Megyn Kelly and another attractive women dressed for an evening out in Jules' post "Important News of the Day" and Jules' caption:
It's hilarious Jules Critendon can't keep his mind off Megyn Kelly's body long enough to realize she's not a just Fox mouthpiece for the Republican party. Watch this 2 minute YouTube clip of Megyn Kelly grilling McCain spokesman Tucker Bounds about the McCain campaign distortion of Obama's tax policy.
video
You sure seem obsessed with him
Where others might see "shoutout to my Boston homeboys" as a simple attempt at humorous thanks for linking to something he wrote, you see evidence of blatant sexism and racism. Yeesh.
sexism?
"I'm sure he meant no slight to the women who post on U-Hub"
Adam, Do I have to remind you that Jules posts images of scantily clad women on his website that you get pissed at me for posting here?
Did he post one standing next to that tiny car?
is there a rule
You've already pointed out what a cad you think he is.
Is there a rule about whether I can do it again? I assume it is my prerogative.
How many different ways are you going to complain about my comments on this thread?
Is there something I need to know about your relationship with Jules Crittendon? I understand you both work in journalism. Does this guy mean something to you more than the subject of a post?
The subject heading you're looking for is
"Dead horse, flogging a."
Since you asked, however, no, I have no relationship with Jules Crittenden. Never worked with him, never met him, never talked to him, not a clue what he looks like, etc. I do have his RSS feed in my aggregator, I ignore most of what he writes because he tends to write about national and international stuff and that's not my thing, especially not from the right (oh, and I gather from your repeated posts about him, he likes photos of half-naked women), but I happened to see his post about pahking a Ka in Havahd Yahd, felt that was worth linking to because I found it funny.
Fair enough
If I post more comments on this thread about Jules Crittendon's blog, his politics, or his creepy adoration of scantily clad women (pictures which you object to being posted at Uhub), I will use the subject:
Dead horse, flogging a
email notification on uhub
The email notification from U-Hub is still messed up. I turned off all notification on my account, I didn't subscribe to any threads in the first place, and I've received
seven11 emails today so far.Ugh, sorry
Will turn it off and try again.
Thanks.
I appreciate it.
14 16 emails 19 2933 more emails from u-hub,last one at
2:14pm 2:20pm 2:43 3:504:23email still coming
Adam,
FYI, It looks like you 'turned it off' because the options in 'My Acct' changed but the e-mails notifying me someone posted a comment on a Uhub thread are still coming, the most recent of 35 emails today arrived at 6:56 PM. See below.
If you're asking, I would prefer an opt-in notification system rather than an opt out, especially when the opt out isn't working.
Thanks Adam.
Ay, carumba!
Thanks for posting that - and my apologies.
The "watcher" stuff means it's coming from the third notification module I installed for testing. What's bizarre is I didn't set it to allow anybody to use it except me. Grr. I've turned it off, cleared out all the messaging related tables in the database, so, theoretically nothing should be escaping now. Now to see what's going on with the application permissions or your settings or both.
Thanks Adam. I do IT for
Thanks Adam. I do IT for work so I know what a pain it can be. Thanks for all your time and effort.
Subscription
Perhaps there's a special feature for quality-related alerts.
Many thanks, Adam
... for the recent links, always appreciated. Sorry if Ding Dong's links in comments offended any Boston prudes or got anyone in trouble. What are you guys doing websurfing at work anyway? Re the obsessiveness, I think Anonymous likes me. Pretty sure he's the same guy I had to block at my site. Trolls, or anyone with alternate viewpoints, are always welcome until they become crude, overly self-obsessed, start misrepresenting my positions, etc., and the troll apparently now known as Anonymous quickly made himself unwelcome. Having hit several of those points in addition to being an ill-informed, argumentative moron who doesn't know what a sockpuppet is. You're welcome to him, Adam.
Question to Adam's readers, re blog issues ... isn't "Anonymous" blogtalk for chickensh*t?
Not in this case because
Not in this case because it's a registered username. Anonymous is always the same anonymous here, but normally yes.
Additionally, resorting to name-calling doesn't bode well for you either.
JULES CRITTENDON - Dead horse, flogging a
The facts are in conflict with Jules Crittendon's assertions here. He deletes all comments from a poster once he's decided he doesn't like what they say. He changed Neil's account so that Neil's comments are held for the moderator and since then, Jules has never approved or accepted a comment from Neil, whether the comment is in agreement or to the contrary. I've been to Jules' blog too and I've seen it for myself. Neil is not a liar.
Jules Crittendon's blog is a conservative echo chamber and dissenting opinion is not welcome.
If you don't believe me or you don't believe Neil, try it yourself.
Jules, is the name-calling necessary? I watched Band of Brothers. For those who didn't (Chicken-shit n. (vulgar, slang) Contemptibly unimportant. Cowardly.) Nice.
It kind of makes my point, doesn't it?
His blog
His rules.
If you don't like it, stop going there.
I have a feeling that if you keep pushing this agenda here, you're going to learn the same lesson from adamg.
I don't go to blog except to
I don't go to Jules' blog except to observe what Neil was telling me. Thanks.