WTF? Why?

[Spekkio]

Ok, lemme break this down for your barney style...

hal posts a link of documents that have no offensive language, but have a banner stating that there is offensive language.

taxi1 posts some diatribe about racism in 1942...

I ask wtf that has to do with hal's complaint?

sonog chimes in with 'it isn't hard, this banner is associated with the entire catalogue.' At this point in the conversation, this implies that sonog believes that taxi1's link is part of the catalogue and the reason the banner exists on the declaration of independence and US Constitution pages.

I point out that the banner does not in fact exist on taxi1's link, thus refuting sonog's point.

You interject with some true but ultimately irrelevant facts about web page structure.

 

[Mos]

Ok, lemme break this down for your barney style...

hal posts a link of documents that have no offensive language, but have a banner stating that there is offensive language.

taxi1 posts some diatribe about racism in 1942...

I ask wtf that has to do with hal's complaint?

sonog chimes in with 'it isn't hard, this banner is associated with the entire catalogue.' At this point in the conversation, this implies that sonog believes that taxi1's link is part of the catalogue and the reason the banner exists on the declaration of independence and US Constitution pages.

I point out that the banner does not in fact exist on taxi1's link, thus refuting sonog's point.

You interject with some true but ultimately irrelevant facts about web page structure.

I'll start with the last point. What I shared is actually pretty damn relevant to this thread, as it answers the concerns voiced by several here about the banner supposedly indicating that the non-offensive documents have offensive language. They don't have offensive language. The banner doesn't indicate that they have offensive language because the banner has no association to the documents; it's placed there throughout the catalog in a manner similar to the catalog's menu bar and title.

I think taxi's response was relevant as there's an underlying question about why the archives would bother to have such a banner. I think you're conflating Sonog's response to you as being specifically to you. His point was relevant to the thread as a whole. I think you're caught up in the particulars of the dialogue at this point.

I do want to ask: do you currently think the intention of the National Archives was to use this banner to indicate the founding documents actually have harmful language?

 

[wink]

Lazy bureaucrats. If they did not mean to label these founding documents offensive, why didn't they put the banner on the docs they believe are offensive? On the home page maybe. Or maybe they are not so lazy and they did think some people would find the Declaration offensive. Now they are back tracking.

 

[nodropinufaka]

Everyone here been around the government for how long and you guys all act surprised or as if it’s a jab at the left or right.

It was a contract to build the website and the contractor did it to specs and added the blurb in accordance with the contract as a blanket statement for all docs in the site.

This isn’t that complicated

 

[nittany03]

Lazy bureaucrats. If they did not mean to label these founding documents offensive, why didn't they put the banner on the docs they believe are offensive? On the home page maybe. Or maybe they are not so lazy and they did think some people would find the Declaration offensive. Now they are back tracking.

Or you can do what most people dealing with government projects do when they're not looking to be offended: never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by incompetence.

 

[Jim123]

never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by incompetence.

That cuts deep

 

[HAL Pilot]

It’s been pointed out in the press and social media. Let’s see if they fix it. That will tell us if it is incompetence or malice and done on purpose by the woke.

 

[AllAmerican75]

Website warns the documents are “harmful.”

Guy “harmed” by those documents:

Man, fuck that guy. I'm angry that nothing bad really happened to him.

 

[taxi1]

When I clicked the link provided by @taxi1, I had no banner that the post might contain harmful or offensive language. So clearly this is specific to paritcular pages.

You can search on all kinds of things. Didn't get a hit on the c*** word, but that's about it. Actually I did, but it was someone's name. Definitely some hits on "fuck" and "whore".



Here's what I got when I searched on snowflake. Man, they archive fast.

 

[HAL Pilot]

Here's what I got when I searched on snowflake. Man, they archive fast.

Typical response from an actual libtard snowflake. Must be the deflection skills you learned during your two command tours.

BTW Fauci is calling for you. His ass is dry and needs more of your wet kisses.

 

[fc2spyguy]

don’t try to blame malice that which can be explained by incompetence when it comes to the government. Something I truly believe.

 

[wink]

don’t try to blame malice that which can be explained by incompetence when it comes to the government. Something I truly believe.

I genuinely believe that. But of course, incompetency is not a pass just because it could be worse. As HAL said, if it gets cleaned up then it is possible it was incompetence, poorly written contract requirements. If it doesn't then it is clearly agenda driven at the expense of a fair understanding of some of they documents in the Archive.

 

[Flash]

We’ve gone fully over the edge.

It's so true, yet again...just like giving women the right to vote, flappers, jazz, talkies, commies, bikinis, rock 'n roll, greasers, biker gangs, beat poets, peaceniks, commies again, marijuana, men with long hair, hippies, bell bottom jeans, disco, the ERA, porn, heavy metal, rap, the internet, commies yet again and Rule 34.

 

[nodropinufaka]

Typical response from an actual libtard snowflake. Must be the deflection skills you learned during your two command tours.

BTW Fauci is calling for you. His ass is dry and needs more of your wet kisses.

Oh no.

Please don’t tell me you’re anti vaccine and this virus is a hoax

 

[wink]

It's so true, yet again...just like giving women the right to vote, flappers, jazz, talkies, commies, bikinis, rock 'n roll, greasers, biker gangs, beat poets, peaceniks, commies again, marijuana, men with long hair, hippies, bell bottom jeans, disco, the ERA, porn, heavy metal, rap, the internet, commies yet again and Rule 34.

I would excise Commies (both times), the ERA, rap, disco, and biker gangs from the list. "Progress" can not be assumed to be in the right direction. Cultural phases are sometimes harmful. And not all harm is immediately known.