forty2

Thanks for following up and sharing this; sincerely. There’s not enough of this kind of emotive sharing with Gamestop. I agree that a lot of the ‘movement’ borders on being cult like in the blindly following kind of way.

I touch base on reddit monthly or so to keep tabs because the same thing you find sad, I find absolutely fascinating. All the dynamics at play…from shifts in sentiment, conspiracy-style interlopers, systemic corruption to the highest levels of bureaucracy, and sometimes actual information about the mechanics lubricating the movement of stocks and money.

I’ve been told I’m an emotionless rock though, so it might account for our differing perspectives on how people spend money.

Talking points: That bunch of retail traders made a bad choice and ego won’t allow them to bail out. That it was ‘luck’ for a few people a few years ago.

It may have been a bad choice for you and that’s why I wonder why you posted what you did instead of your own opinion baked through your own experience. More powerful words generally come from personal experience.

I’m not here arguing with you about the stock, it being a good/bad investment isn’t what I’m on about. I guess I’m more hung up on why you said what you did.

Like, what was it that compelled you to post such a banal response to this post? It’s so sad that people are holding stock in a company with a ton of cash, a motivated and aligned management team, and very little debt?

Sounds like you’re painting a brush and saying that any person holding Gamestop makes you sad. It’s a pretty broad assertion that, honestly, feels like it has a story behind it.

Just because a few people got lucky…? My dude, instead of parroting media talking points do the reading so you know what’s actually keeping folks holding the stock.

The modern CEO has been bred to appease the shareholders, but not any shareholders…just the ones with enough skin in the game and enough influence/power to destroy lives, CEOs included.

The game is fully rigged, the only ones who have any real free will are the hedgefunds and investment houses. Keep those entities happy and your little company thrives.

As a CEO, you’re just the colonial general sitting in the big house exploiting a workforce and shipping the value/profits back to the homeland.

Just look at Bezos…ex hedgefund guy builds digital platform to buy/sell books, and then AWS happens, and then literally thousands of brick and mortar stores close down giving amazon a monopoly in lots of regions. Visionary entrepreneur my ass…modern day colonizer and profiteer is closer to the truth.

Bezos will be a trillionair in this decade, his shareholders basically have a infinite money supply, and like Walmart; Amazon employees are getting their hands chopped off because they didn’t produce enough rubber for the King/Queen/HFT-Firm

It’s so nuts…

Speaking to shareholders, about ‘shifting’ the model, in an open and public medium.

He’s literally talking to people who want their money to grow, about changing how the money grows…if you read between the lines it’s basically

"Hey we know this is a growing concern, here in the c-suite we see it coming too. Rest assured, we’re going to pander to public sentiment so our shareholder profits remain intact. Our hope is that in doing so we attract more talent to exploit thereby maintaining that upward trajectory we all know and love.

Remember ‘unlimited PTO’? Yeah, we’ll give these guys the same treatment."

But because these statements are public as are the financials etc, they won’t just outright say it. I’ll bet you quarterly and annual filings have the same type of stuff in the section disclosing current and foreseeable risks.

Yep, you got it. Tax credits for things like RnD and green initiatives, depreciation of assets like buildings and machinery , and the evergreen strategy of exploiting tax loop holes

Shareholders aren’t the same as stakeholders. Shareholders are always stakeholders, but stakeholders aren’t always share holders.

Stakeholders are people with any kind of interest in the company doing well, this includes people like employees, suppliers, and customers. Basically anyone that benefits from a business doing well.

I feel like he might be arguing for the kind of change that the current “anything to keep the stock price going up so the shareholders stay happy” model desperately needs.

Probably a bunch of lipservice to keep shareholders happy by addressing risk that they all foresee…namely the shifting temperament towards large corporations by the people who’s value is being stolen for shareholders gains.

Soft to start, but I reckon he’ll get harder the more vigorously I shake him. Who knows though, he may just jiggle around semi-limp like a just-came-2min-ago dick

Don’t forget Trump, I’d be using all three remaining arms to shake him vigorously during the handshake. Diplomatically, of course.

By being overqualified for handshakes and using that as a power move to establish dominance via awkwardness

Too true man, but sadly not enough people have broken out of the walled gardens and still get their info from FB, Insta, X, etc…

Comparing what I see on here vs what friends on traditional social media see…there is a start contrast in the volume of pro Israel comments and such. Probably a function of number of users

Israel has been running a very effective crowd sourced propoganda arm for years and years…they even had an app at one point directing sympathizers in what to say, where to say it, and what to look out for.

Good news for us is that the sheer volume of pro Palestine posts and comments make it so the bots and bad faith actors can’t really keep up and brigade all of them in a sustained way.

NYT manufacturing consent…here it is in real time

Reminder that this happened, and the ‘testimony’ of Nayirah was instrumental to W. for the support he wanted for the Gulf War.

I see through your ‘cunning’ plan Biden

Just another Tuesday day ending in “day”

FTFY

This brand of positivity you’re embodying is the most infectious one, and if I can feel it in your writing I imagine hearing it spoken from you would be some next level inspiration.

I’ve lost some people close to me over the years and what saddens me most is how I’ve forgotten so much about them beyond what they looked like. All of them except one…Gordon left behind audio recordings as his last messages to each of us in the group of friends.

Every time I hear his voice, it brings back so much about him that just can’t be said. His cadence, intonation, and overall manner of speaking have helped keep an entire person in my memory.

I wonder if that’s an option for you. I can say from experience that the lasting impact of audio is…powerful. Being able to actually hear my friend…i can imagine him speaking to me, and it’s in his voice because his voice is not forgotten.

Your family hearing your thoughts, in your voice…and being able to hear you speak long after your time…man, I can’t think of a better way to highlight your true personality and make it a lasting one.

Yan consumed alcohol with others in his room on the night of the 17th, and then he defecated in the bathtub of the room he was staying in on the 18th

So wait…this wasn’t a party and booze incident? Bro pooped the canoe, in privacy, the next day. I wonder if it was premeditated.

I’m so going to drop a fat Chernobyl mutation of a shit in that sassy tub tomorrow

• Yan (hopefully)

Wasn’t this some aspect of the qanon stuff? I swear I’ve heard this shit in those fringes

My point is that that standard is fucking horrible on either side.

Without question. This is the scary part when it comes to “after the conflict”. There is an entire population of people for whom violence on this level has been normalized; but vilifying the people caught up in their respective propaganda machines and the machinations of their respective governments isn’t going to mend fences down the line. At the geo-political level, they may shake hands and even settle differences one day…but the familiarity with intense violence will need to be reckoned with and reconciled for the general population on both sides.

I agree with you on both points. Whats missing is the difference in definition of “war crime” and “atrocity” by the average citizen. These polls weren’t conducted solely on politicians, dignitaries, intellectuals, and the like.

If you don’t recognize an act as a war crime any more because of your lived experience. Are you able to willfully apply (or not apply) that label correctly?

Again, thinking about why the poll reflects the attitude towards Hamas + atrocities. Its not a matter of tit-for-tat I think; that is, its not “well they’ve been committing these ‘atrocities’ against us, so us doing it to them is valid/justified”. I think its “things have been happening and i don’t know what a war crime is, so when we do the same thing to them it can’t be a war crime…can it?”

In order for “deliberate denial of atrocities” to apply, you have to recognize an atrocity first and then deliberately deny it. Undoubtedly, the case amongst most intellectuals inside Gaza is that they recognize it very well. But I’d argue it isn’t true for the average citizen on either side of the fence. I’m talking about the people that are watching all this unfold from inside the border, Israelis and Palestinians. Shop keepers, taxi drivers, etc.

In fact, I’d wager that if a similar poll was conducted on Israeli citizens they’d most likely have a similar response to “did the IDF commit atrocities”. Its status quo over there. I’m not debating if these people are right or wrong in their thinking, I imagine there’s a whole conversation to be had around the notion.

So while it is definitely not right to say that Hamas did not commit war crimes or that they aren’t responsible for atrocities, I think its important to understand (and not vilify) that the very definitions we’re using for those terms may not be consistent inside that particular region. And that this should play into our accounting for why only 10% of Palestinians think Hamas committed war crimes.

That’s it. That last line, that’s all I’ve been trying to say

Dude, maybe I’m not explaining myself properly because I feel like we’re talking about two different things.

You said you “understand why Palestinians support terrorism while locked in a purgatory of occupation and imprisonment” if you understand this, then do you think their (meaning the average person) definitions of certain terms may be different to what we see?

If my definition of normal is not your definition of normal then can you judge the “normalcy”?

Again, I’m not saying this excuses behavior. But I do think it sheds light on why the poll is at 10%. The average Palestinian has seen copious amounts of indiscriminate violence (as has the average Israeli resident), do you reckon they might have a different bar for what constitutes a war crime or atrocity based on what they’ve been seeing around them for years?

Personally, I think this low poll numbers speaks more to what people are defining as an atrocity over there. Shits gotten so bad that murder is common.

As for talking points…man, I want to apologize for that. I felt myself getting emotionally invested in this back and forth and really shouldn’t have said that. I think “apologist” just triggered me because it’s gained a bit of a stigma

You’re missing the point. For whatever it’s worth, I do agree with what you’ve written here. But what I’m talking about is perspective in understanding why the opinion polls shows the numbers they do.

What I’m NOT talking about is it being an excuse for behaviour. Surely you can understand why attitudes and opinions might differ between geographic regions and due to history.

Get off your soapbox, and try to understand why people think the way they do. You may come closer to actually understanding the nuances of reality instead of cocooning yourself in talking points. It’s all about relative perspective if you want to understand numbers being thrown around

Edit:

Just to be more clear, what I’m talking about is the difference between

“Hundreds of Israeli civilians had it coming for the crime of existing, I’m glad that they were gunned down by a terrorist attack, this isn’t a war crime in the least.”

And

“Hundreds of civilians have been killed for years, I’ve seen it happening and nothing has changed over a reasonable period of time. I guess this isn’t a war crime.”