Recent posts

#41

Off the Record / Re: Elon Musk: Always A Douche

Last post by Zoupa - Today at 12:03:32 PM

Musk is now sharing Pizzagate content. 

Somehow I don't think we're going to Mars, guys.

#42

Off the Record / Re: NHL Hockey thread

Last post by Grey Fox - Today at 11:57:04 AM

And the NHL deserve all those insane rumours that we start left & right. Be transparent about absences and injuries, ffs.

Good on whoevers mom got to bang CP.

#43

Off the Record / Re: NHL Hockey thread

Last post by Barrister - Today at 11:40:48 AM

Chicago Blackhawks locker room in shambles

https://twitter.com/theicebb/status/1729298211498602635

That's such a weird rumour.

For those that don't know, long-time NHLer Corey Perry has "stepped away from the Chicago Blackhawks to attend to personal matters".   The team, and Perry, haven't commented any further than that as to why.

So of course the internet has gone wild.

The Chicago Blackhawks won the NHL draft lottery back in the spring, and as a result they got the first overall draft pick and selected 18 year old phenom Connor Bedard.  Bedard has been playing very well so far this season with 10 goals and 7 assists in 19 games (as an 18 year old rookie).

But anyways, the rumour is that on a recent "Moms trip" (where the team flies everyone's mom out on the road) that Corey Perry (age 38) hooked up with Connor Bedard's mom.

#44

Off the Record / Re: Brexit and the waning days...

Last post by garbon - Today at 11:39:45 AM

If the HR group is good at what it does, employees will naturally view HR as being helpful to them.  And might even view HR as working in their interests.

Yes but that is how junior employees can screw themselves up. They forget that they aren't mates with HR and are a little too liberal in sharing their complaints, agitating for must haves without recognising that they don't have strict confidentiality with HR - and most of what they say will be repeated higher up in the business.

I think HR can be helpful for managers and up but for a junior, HR is best kept at arm's length.

#45

Off the Record / Re: [Canada] Canadian Politics...

Last post by Barrister - Today at 11:29:19 AM

I HATE HATE HATE this trend in politics - of ignoring what someone actually says, and instead attacking what people "on that side" are saying.  And this goes both ways.

I have to be honest I tend to ignore any article that has "rooted in" in the title - at best you'll get some interesting analysis of discourse. And I feel like we're already overburdened with commentary on the discourse

Edit: I actually think it's possibly a dangerous sign - you look at Russia as an extreme example where everything is about de-code and explaining discourse for the real meaning underneath. It's not healthy, especially in a democracy.

1) Your quote makes it seem like you're attributing BB's words to me.

2) When people are taking to the streets in the name of fighting "radical gender ideology" (we had one protest n town just this weekend - using the same approach as the convoy sympathy protests we had during that time), when they're protesting at schools and doxxing teachers because they hate "radical gender ideology", when legislation is being passed to ensure trans kids don't get support - again in the name of fighting "radical gender ideology" - you think it's "not healthy in a democracy" to link those things to a politician who makes "fighting radical gender ideology" a speaking point?

Is this because the article used the term "rooted in"? Or is it because you're persuaded by BB's argument that Pierre Poillievre doesn't actually mean anything specific when he says he think we should "fight radical gender ideology" even though actual specific policy changes are being argued for by people using those exact terms.

This is not a question about whether someone is using the right terminology due to whatever implications, this is a matter of concerted attempts to make life more difficult for LGTBQ+ folks (with a specific focus on those who are trans) via specific policy initiatives in the provincial and municipal levels (or equivalent jursidictions elsewhere in the world).

So I try not to wade into trans issues very much, because Sophie made it pretty clear she saw it as an attack on her.

But there's something really creepy and wrong going on out there when it comes to youth gender transition.

I wouldn't say that no youth should ever be allowed to transition, but numbers have absolutely skyrocketed over the last decade, in particular amongst female to male people.  There's a lot to suggest that puberty, in particular female puberty, can be difficult, but that many people who are transitioning would grow up to become lesbians once they accept their body.

I still find it shocking that the idea that kids should be allowed to transition, including medically, all without any input from their parents, is a position people seriously put forward.

Jacob, I think you would be one of the first ones to say that we should distinguish between the actions of some people (like the terrorists of Hamas) and the rightness of their cause (justice for Palestinians), so why you don't grant the same grace to those questioning "radical gender ideology" escapes me.  If there are people out there doxxing teachers that is wrong.

#46

Off the Record / Re: [Canada] Canadian Politics...

Last post by Barrister - Today at 11:19:54 AM

I HATE HATE HATE this trend in politics - of ignoring what someone actually says, and instead attacking what people "on that side" are saying.  And this goes both ways.

In this case what he's being judged on what he actually is saying:

- That the exploding car was a terrorist attack, which it wasn't.
- That it's the journalists who are making him look bad, when it wasn't.
- That "radical gender ideology is being imposed on children" when it isn't.

He said "there are media reports this is a terrorist attack.  Can you give us more information".  (Not exact words, but pretty close).

There were media reports.  Hate on Fox News all you want, but the news side is generally well respected (as opposed to the opinion side).  It was clear that the authorities WERE treating it as a terrorist attack until proven otherwise.

#47

Off the Record / Re: Brexit and the waning days...

Last post by crazy canuck - Today at 11:05:33 AM

And yes. HR are fucking awful. Getting past the HR gatekeeper is always a challenge.

It always fascinates me (maybe because I've never dealt with them, being a government slave) that HR is talked about almost as if they are an entity independent of the company they work for.   

If a company has fucking awful HR...isn't that company responsible and thus also fucking awful?

People hate HR because they work fir the company, not the employee.

In the context of hiring they're bad because they don't really know what's a good resume vs a bad one. They don't really know what roles entail.

I don't think anyone in the company works for the employee...bar maybe the employee.

Though I do think naive, junior employees often think HR is there to help them.

Well, you are correct that everybody in fact works for the company, that's rather simplistic when thinking about the role that HR plays within a successful company. A good HR department will not just do the bidding of the operations side od the business, but will both reduce legal liability and increase productivity and reduce turnover by helping to company engage in best employment practices.

If the HR group is good at what it does, employees will naturally view HR as being helpful to them.  And might even view HR as working in their interests.

#48

Off the Record / Re: [Canada] Canadian Politics...

Last post by Jacob - Today at 10:57:46 AM

I HATE HATE HATE this trend in politics - of ignoring what someone actually says, and instead attacking what people "on that side" are saying.  And this goes both ways.

I have to be honest I tend to ignore any article that has "rooted in" in the title - at best you'll get some interesting analysis of discourse. And I feel like we're already overburdened with commentary on the discourse

Edit: I actually think it's possibly a dangerous sign - you look at Russia as an extreme example where everything is about de-code and explaining discourse for the real meaning underneath. It's not healthy, especially in a democracy.

1) Your quote makes it seem like you're attributing BB's words to me.

2) When people are taking to the streets in the name of fighting "radical gender ideology" (we had one protest n town just this weekend - using the same approach as the convoy sympathy protests we had during that time), when they're protesting at schools and doxxing teachers because they hate "radical gender ideology", when legislation is being passed to ensure trans kids don't get support - again in the name of fighting "radical gender ideology" - you think it's "not healthy in a democracy" to link those things to a politician who makes "fighting radical gender ideology" a speaking point?

Is this because the article used the term "rooted in"? Or is it because you're persuaded by BB's argument that Pierre Poillievre doesn't actually mean anything specific when he says he think we should "fight radical gender ideology" even though actual specific policy changes are being argued for by people using those exact terms.

This is not a question about whether someone is using the right terminology due to whatever implications, this is a matter of concerted attempts to make life more difficult for LGTBQ+ folks (with a specific focus on those who are trans) via specific policy initiatives in the provincial and municipal levels (or equivalent jursidictions elsewhere in the world).

#49

Off the Record / Re: [Canada] Canadian Politics...

Last post by crazy canuck - Today at 10:51:42 AM

Carney, and others would be leaders, should make sure they are candidates for the next partial election

There are different errors of Ignatieff but I think being in parliament for only 2 years prior to becoming leader was a big one for public perception of him. 

I think that's the case for people who come from relative obscurity. But it wasn't true for Harper who hadn't been an MP for many years and it's probably not going to be true for Carney.

#50

Off the Record / Re: [Canada] Canadian Politics...

Last post by crazy canuck - Today at 10:50:45 AM

Yeah and you could slightly adjust it. I get GF's point - but, to Jake's point, not sure asset management is a great immediate background for someone planning a political run.

I think BB is engaging and wishful thinking. Ignatieff was unknown to Canadians outside of elite academic circles.  The conservative attack ads were very effective because nobody knew whether what they were saying was accurate or not.

Carny is well known. The conservatives won't be able to tell Canadians who he is from their perspective. Canadians already know who he is.