Everyone should vote and participate. It's our nation's low political participation that allows politicians to be so unaccountable. If more people were politically active, involved, and educating themselves, we'd have much better politicians and laws. I blame our education system for not teaching people how important voting is.
I think the problems you cite are made much worse by our weak political participation. When people participate, they're forced to be somewhat aware of what's going on. By not participating they allow themselves to disconnect, which let's politicians get away with more and more.
The root cause is education, if people were more educated they'd feel more empowered and more informed and be more likely to participate--with better results. I think the two party system allows people to be uninformed and just vote on a reflect.
Or maybe it's politicians' tendency toward accountability to the highest bidders' interests instead of constituents' that leads to low participation and feelings of disenfranchisement?
Perhaps I had the wrong impression, but I thought the correct response to a factually incorrect post was to point out the correct information in a reply, not to downmod the post. This is more inclusive (as everyone is misinformed at times) and is more useful to the community (because it provides them with the correct information).
Actually your comment is the one that is technically inaccurate, why would Apple wait a year and a half to launch an SDK. All I pointed out was that Apple's big launches come in 3 year cycles, it wouldn't fit for a TV SDK to launch now, or anytime soon.
From the guidelines: "Resist complaining about being downmodded. It never does any good, and it makes boring reading."
So far, the only device (that I'm aware of) from Apple that had a wait between the product launch and the sdk launch was the original iphone. Everything else, as far as I know, had an sdk launched way before the product was launched.
As for your downvotes: I'm sorry, but as has been stated previously, we value technical accuracy.
Wow. You simply got modded down and someone indicated why (who might not have been someone who actually downmodded you), but instead of tactfully asking why or restating your position in a better way or just changing course, you said "nuh-uh", and reverted to personal attacks, trying to 'reveal' someone's identity to dig up info on someone to disparage them, and insulting the community at large?
While I too find it odd that your original comment was downmodded (has it been edited?), I don't think that a personal attack is an appropriate response. It doesn't seem like younata was being a jerk (from my reading of the comments), but your response is a bit vitriolic even if he was.
From your comment history, I speculate that you - like me - are a long-time reader and only an occasional poster. These posts stand out as being unusually negative. I'd urge you to strongly consider changing your tone (and perhaps deleting your posts in this thread). Don't let this one altercation drive you away from the community.
Long time reader, yes, hardly every comment, though.
I take offense here: As for your downvotes: I'm sorry, but as has been stated previously, we value technical accuracy.
It's needlessly smug, flippant and dismissive, as well as hypocritical seeing as how he's accusing me of being wrong about a product that is yet to exist (so we're both speculating) all the while he agrees with the point I originally made, but is too stupid to realize it.
The written word does not communicate tone well. We easily project our own emotions onto what someone else said because it lacks vocal tone and facial cues. This is even more pronounced when the writing is a criticism.
I saw no smugness or flippancy in the statement. I do, however, find your reaction unacceptable, and I flagged the comment which has since been deleted. We try to be civil here, so give other people the benefit of the doubt when it comes to your perception of their tone. It makes for a nicer place.
Except he has no revenue model and is essentially just a big digital ponzi scheme. Who is going to foot the bill for Facebook? Advertising? Please...the click through rate is 1000x more effective for Google adwords than Facebook. It's passive vs. active advertising. Anyone involved in marketing or advertising knows this and will stay away. Only the naive would consider using Facebook to advertise. Zynga/Credits seem to be their newest revenue model...but seriously how long can that sustain itself? Persistent profitability..I don't see it.
