Rand0m her0

im saying if i had the choice to vote for him or a candidate that has policies that I think would harm the nation I would vote for him you are being ridiculously childish and trying to make the argument that Lys and I support white supremacy and neo nazis. a socialist will do far more harm to our country than a racist would. and with that im done with this conversation Stop saying that you support neo nazis. Stop defending white supremacists.

If I lived in his Iowa district, and he supported those 7 things listed, I would still vote for him if he likes mayonnaise, hates cats, changes the TV channel when he sees something that disgusts him, drives a Japanese car, sends his kids to private school, chants "Lock her up", takes donations from the Koch brothers, or really likes it when his wife spanks him. Supporting Steve King is far better than supporting anyone involved with the Democrat party. Let me know when he does something illegal. this is making me laugh way more than it should. lol but you are 1000000% right on the money here Seriously brewers, go spend five minutes looking up steve king. He's got 20 years of littreal white supremist bullshit. Over the last couple weeks his bullshit has gotten sufficient egregious that Steve Stivers has (as of literally today) called him on it. Drop the party lulz bullshit and actually bother to look. Lys is *literally* defending and supporting a neo nazi, a white supremacist and an anti semite. That is not hyperbole. The claim is trivially verifiable. There is nothing funny here. id rather have a terrible person who supports policies that will help our country be a better place than a super nice guy who has terrible ideas that will harm our country hold the political office. I dont vote for someone I want to be friends with. I vote for who I want to make an impact on our nation. Let ,me be ridiculously clear, your saying that you will support an open white supremist and a neo nazi?

If I lived in his Iowa district, and he supported those 7 things listed, I would still vote for him if he likes mayonnaise, hates cats, changes the TV channel when he sees something that disgusts him, drives a Japanese car, sends his kids to private school, chants "Lock her up", takes donations from the Koch brothers, or really likes it when his wife spanks him. Supporting Steve King is far better than supporting anyone involved with the Democrat party. Let me know when he does something illegal. this is making me laugh way more than it should. lol but you are 1000000% right on the money here Seriously brewers, go spend five minutes looking up steve king. He's got 20 years of littreal white supremist bullshit. Over the last couple weeks his bullshit has gotten sufficient egregious that Steve Stivers has (as of literally today) called him on it. Drop the party lulz bullshit and actually bother to look. Lys is *literally* defending and supporting a neo nazi, a white supremacist and an anti semite. That is not hyperbole. The claim is trivially verifiable. There is nothing funny here.

Fine, holocaust denial, white supremacism and and support of neo nazis isn't a deal breaker for you. There's not even a response to be given to that quite frankly. You're happy to support a neo nazi just because he has an R next to his name and mouths the right words. Thanks for being an example Lys.

Regardless of trump's personal beliefs he's perfectly cheerful to pander to them (bit of a tip, the word globalist entered the political lexicon as a result of neo nazi groups. As in "globalist cabal of jewry".). He's steadfastly refused to denounce the current rise of neo nazi violence, he's refused to denounce the multiple endorsements by white nationalist and neo nazis groups including littrealy the KKK, and he's not had a shortage of white nationalists and adjacent people on his election team and as advisors in his time in office. There's been almost one act of neo nazi or white supremacist terrorism a month for the last year. There's been two such terrorist attacks in the USA this week alone. Every US intelligence and defense organization is of opinion that the single greatest threat of domestic terrorism is from far right groups. The FBI has spent the last decade warning of neo nazi groups infiltrating law enforcement organizations. And all Trump has done is to keep offering them seat at the table. The closest comparison to his actions are various middle eastern governments that could give a shit about terrorist causes and will stand up to say "terrorist bad" and then 5 minutes later discuss funding for the political wing of a terrorist groups. That is very much an objective failing on his part, and if you think it isn't I'd care to see you actually defend it instead of hand waving it away. As for the rest of the republican party, i'd be very curious to see you defend things such as the last 20 years of support for guys like steve king. Look at what he's said, look at what he does, look as his history and come up with a single good reason for the GOPs support of him and all the various favours and positions he's been granted in his tenure. Congrats, not only are you defending a white supremacist, you're doing so blindly. The fact he has an R next to his name on the TV is enough for you. You'd rather blindly insult me than taking any amount of time at all to look into what he's said and done over the last 6 months (never mind the last 20 years). You'd rahter defend a nazi than even consider the idea that the republican party isn't universally perfect or that the party infrastructure has spent significant resources on enabling someone like him. And you've got the cheek to call someone a snowflake.

Someone defending a littreal neo nazi deserves profanity. If you have a problem with that but not with lys conduct in this thread I would recommend reviewing your priorities. If you take offense to my language with dealing with someone defending a holocaust denier, I would recommend reviewing your priorities. Defense of nazi ideology and support of neo nazis and other similar shite has been more than enough to see people not only removed from this alliance, but seen the alliance go to significant lengths to remove them from the game permanently. I have members of my family who survived those camps. More didn't. I will not extend the benefit of civilly to someone defending a holocaust denier, especially not someone who insults me for being opposed to it. If you find that more offensive than Lys's comments, if you think my lack of civility is more of an embasrement for the alliance than Lys's public support of an avowed white supremacist and a holocaust denier, I have nothing to say to you.

Oh go CENSORED your lying self lys. You're So far up your own CENSORED you can't even say "nazi bad" because doing so would mean you couldn't "own the libs" or whatever. Steve king is a neo nazi. He's said it. There's video of him denying the holocaust. After he did that a Holocaust memorial group paid for him to take a trip to Auschwitz, and while he was there he's on CENSORED camera denying the holocaust *after being to Auschwitz*. While he was in europe on that trip, he took some time to show up to an austrian nazi party gathering, one that was literally founded by a member of the SS, and took his time to talk to them about the decline of western civilization to complain about the decline of western civilization. The city of toronto had Faith Goldy, running for mayor recently. She's a public and avowed neo nazi and despite the fact that she was running for a position in a city in an entirely different country Steve king felt the need to endorse the sack of CENSORED. THIS IS CENSORED HE'S DONE IN THE LAST 6 MONTHS. Theres two decades of him pulling this CENSORED. How CENSORED up are you that you need to defend that. Like literally what is so wrong in your head that you'll jump to the defense of a avowed white supremacist, someone who's gone on record to defend one of the worst regime that half a million americans gave their lives stop, someone who's repeatedly denied that the holocaust occured just because he has an R next to his name. UnCENSORED your CENSORED.

Are you okay RH? The last one that tilted this far on the snowflake meter was Ice Wolf... and we never saw him again. Brexit put him on the edge, and Trump getting elected kicked him right over. I would hate to see that happen to you. Iowa keeps electing Steve King and Vermont keeps electing Bernie Sanders. That means we must continue listening to what they have to say. Do you own a gun? Sounds like you're about ready to go shoot up a Republican baseball team. I would advise against it. if you think pointing out that the republican party literally has neo nazis in office and running for office under their banner is "snowflakey" and that the republican party shouldn't be criticized for shit like 20 years of support of steve king, you're off your rocker. There is no equating him to bernie sanders. Bernie sanders is a person who's politics you dislike, Steve King is a white supremacist piece of shit who has spoken out on multiple occasions to defend the third reich. Bernie sanders has spoken in favour of higher taxes. Steve King has spoken out in favour of genocide.I've family who survived the nazi camps. I've family who died fighting the nazis and i'd prefer you no defend someone who literally denies that the nazis conducted the systematic murder of millions of people thank you very much. There is no "both sides". Don't fucking even make that comparison. The republicans could have ran him out of the party any time in the last 20 years. It's not like they haven't realized what a PoS he is. he doesn't win because "iowa keeps electing him" he wins because he's run in very safe republican seats, the republican party has declined him any real challenge in the primaries, they've kept throwing the party resources behind him and they've gone out of their way to protect him from the consequences. Seriously Lys, you're literally defending an avowed white supremacist, nazi party apologist, genocide denier and neo nazi icon. The hell is wrong with you.

Yea no. The republican party *literally* has neonazis in office right now ansd sevrael more running for office. Steve King is a right wing, white nationalist anti semitic holocaust denier. Steve Bannon is a right wing, white nationalist, anti semite. Much of the "alt right" leadership are neo nazis. The unite the right rally for example was organized by Jason Kessler who littrealty advertises himself as a neo nazi. The Proud Boys, which certain chunks of media have spent so much breath defending are a right wing violent neo nazi gang. Corey Stewart, Paul Nehlen,Arthur Jones are all running for election under the Republican ticket and all of them are avowed nationalists and white supremacist. Nazis the lot of them. The american right has one hell of a nazi problem right now, and the republican party is utterly unwilling to confront it. Regardless of it's malice or incompetence Trump can't get his shit together enough to disavow support from the fucking KKK. He can't get his shit together enough that when fuckwits start chanting neo nazi slogans at his rallies, he just smiles and nods, and when you're in his position that's tantamount to encouraging it. A synagogue got shot up by a neo nazi and the republican party can't manage to explicitly and unambiguously condemn neo nazis in the wake of that. With the amount of far right terrorism on going (jfc there were three attacks *this week*), that's utterly unacceptable. and that's without touching on shit like fox news cheerfully spreading conspiracy theories about them being false flag operations. So yea no, the criticism is well earned, and the label deserved. If any R supporter doesn't like that, start getting your party to clean up the trash and stop being the neo nazi party of choice. Because again, freaking cyber nations could all come together to go stomp nazis out of the game, and there's no freaking universe in which the bunch of quasi fascist, totalitarian , hyper militaristic dumbfucks that this game consists of should be more effective at dealing with nazis then the freaking Republican party

What's your point? The only thing you make clear in that post is your hatred for Fox News. You served up a claim. Sauce it.

Uh huh. So a pair of judges that have remained pretty much entirely neutral on the topic of trump campaign affiliation with the russians and ceratinyl have no political influence or say on the investigation at all....and one of whom was on trump's short list of SCOTUS nominations. So what have they done? Can you name one thing that doesn't use fox news as a source. Because the only thing they have in common is that they're to the left of fox new's ideology (and never mind that Amy Coney Barrett is pretty firmly center right politically with a nice base of support from the evangelical wackwing) and women.

Criminals need to be locked up... the fact that the criminals also happen to be political opponents of Trump, is completely coincidental. Everyone involved in the conspiracy to frame Trump for Russian collusion is a criminal, and cannot be locked up fast enough. Criminals are locked up because they belong there. It's not exclusive to political party. The guy that sent the fake bombs is a fanatical Trump supporter. He didn't hurt anyone except himself, and has been locked up because he's a criminal. The guy that shot up the Jews is a Nazi, and is not in any way a Trump supporter. He has been locked up, until they probably put him to death, because he's a criminal. Naturally you will do your level best to conflate the two because lying is the primary weapon of Progressives. I suggest you guys take the moral high ground and just scream at some people while they're having dinner. uhuh. And who would these criminals be lys? Cause there's something like half a dozen different people who we've seena trump crowd chant "lot him/her/them up" about while he waved and smiled. And what's real curious is that it tends to happen right after trump drop some dog whistles about (((globalists))) (pro tip, globalist in far right circles is code for jew). You have littreal neo nazis in congress with an R next to their name. YOu've got half a dozen more running as republican in this midterm. You've had literal neo nazi steve bannon in the fucking whitehouse. And the GOP literally can't even bring themselves to criticize them except in the most mealy mouthed bullshit way. We've had damn close to one incidence of right wing or neo nazi fuck terrorism a month for the entire past year and the only damn thing that the entire party can muster is a half hearted "boooooth siiiiides". This freaking game with all the endless dumbfucks that are in it could get their shit together enough to shitstomp the nazis out of the place whenever they showed up. Which means we live in a universe where freaking cyber nations has it's collective shit together better than the GOP does right now.

we shouldnt have to take it but the sad part is they are gonna label the entire party as nut jobs just like that guy and group us all together. I dont think it will make a huge dent in the actual polls, but with the senate coming down to one seat, who knows, maybe this tips the scales and fires up some dems When you've got a crowds of trump supporters who've turned "lock them up" as a response to any criticism of the republican party, and trump is sitting at the fucking podium encouraging them to do that....yea that's exactly what the party gets painted as. Trump has literally stood up at rallys and encouraged people to call for the extra judicial imprisonment of his political opponents. What this fuckhead was is bascioly the antropmohizetion of right wing media in the USA. There is a reason why, over the last year we've come close to one attack by right wing fringe actors every month. This guy's vaniefsto was bascily a collage of the last year of fox news and trump tweets. We've had a year of a resurange of littreal neo nazi fucks murdering people, and the right wing media spends it's time complaining about how mean people are to the nazis. Trump has spent a bunch of his time in office claiming that the only reason he lost the popular vote was "millions of undocumented immigrants voting" and spreading other such conspiracy bullshit. You've had littreal neo nazis on Trump's executive team. You've had the entire right wing media spreading conspiracy theories. You have shit like r/the_donald that is *still* throwing shitfits about how this is all a left wing false flag operation. You have trump on national TV throwing around neo nazi dog whistles. This guy here? This guy is the republican party right now, and as long as the republican party and it's media apparatus sits around encouraging those beliefs and ideas there will be more like him, and the parties base, the party will only sink deeper into the lunatic fringe. If you feel personally attacked by that consider...consider not voting for the fuckwits who pander to them. This is the kind of party where Russell Walker, Arthur Jones, Paul Nehlen all won their primaries, and several more that the GOP literally needed to bar from participation. It doesn't even matter about platform, when you're the neo nazis party of preference, consider that shit has gone very wrong somewhere in the GOP. Vote for whatever policy you want, but don't deny the american "right" and the republican party is in a real fucked up place right now.

tl;dr 4 articles were published, 6 of them rejected as irreparable bullshit, 7 were rejected but were told would require heavy revision before publishing. As well, they accomplished this by effectively shotgunning massive amounts of bullshit at a large number of journals. Congrats, they've shown that basic social engineering attacks are still effective if you make enough attempts at them. In further scientific revelations: Water Wet, Gravity pulls down, Fire hurts. Every single research journal*is predicated on A the idea that people are submitting in good faith and B that the journals should pretty much never make decisions on if the material submitted is accurate. When a journal judges content, it is looking for 1: Is the paper well written 2: Is the experimental model described in the paper good and 3: is it relevant to the topic of the journal. It's not the journals job to decide on the accuracy or applicable of what it publishes outside of those grounds, it's job is to disseminate those results to the scientific community, which then collectively decided on the validity. You'll notice that almost immediately after these papers got through, there were multiple sources raising concerns about them, at which point their "experiment" fell apart. It is not that hard to fake a semi plausible experiment, especially if you go to the extent that these people did by completely and utterly falsify their data. Even in cases where the methodology is imperfect, the fact the result that exists at all can still be of interest. It can guide future research, it can encourage people with better resources to reattempt the experiment. A paper is not published because it is some great light of absolute truth. What a paper says is "this is what we found, this is how we found it, do with that as you will". and they usually do that by examining a special case that can, maybe give light on the more general case. Most papers never lead to any sort of scientific consensus and are usually forgotten. Because of that expectation of good faith, peer review is an imperfect watchdog for malicious attempts to publish like this. Some people are better able to sniff out bullshit. Different people doing peer review look for different things. Two people may take a look at the same results and disagree with them, however one may take a hard line and shoot the paper down, the other may take the balance of probability and decide that while they don't believe the conclusions are accurate, there is insufficient reason to dismiss them. Nobody doing peer review is looking for "This paper was completely and utterly faked" because down that path lies madness. Like anything else, if you make a concentrated attempt to bullshit hard enough and spread that around far enough, you will eventually get some of it though. Given enough time and given enough attempts, something will inevitably sneak through the cracks. This is true of everything and is pretty much the most basic form of social engineering based attack on any system. For this "experiments" conclusion to hold any water, what would need to be shown is that there is a conspiracy to fake results (Pro Tip: there isn't), that these faked results are widely cited and taken as foundation (They don't exist in the first place) and that no one has spotted the issue. Instead what the experiment shows is that by and large the process of filtering bullshit works, and what limited bullshit does make it through is swiftly recognized and called out as bullshit and ridiculed to such an extent that their entire experiment was almost immediately derailed. It shows the exact opposite of their conclusion.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GDflVhOpS4E It's God Damn Bastion and the fact none of you posted it is a travesty. If you need this explained to you, don't talk to me until you go play the game. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zuLIRFodowM Ai war...it's an interesting take on the RTS. Theres No PVP although the co-op multiplayer is fantastic and is pretty much the only RTS game where the AI will fuck your shit up. Tl;dr Interstelar human superpowers went to war and each side had a uber powerful AI organizing it's war machine. The AIs go full skynet and start working together to wipe out humanity. After a while humanity is back down to a couple worlds and the AIs pick a fight in the other galaxy presenting an optunerity to maybe pull something off while most of their forces are distracted. Recover, marshal your forces and survive still constant attacks from the AIs as you prepare and attempt a surgical attack on the old homeworlds in an attempt to destroy the AIs themselves and know that if the AIs ever decide you're an actual threat worth dealing with that they could crush you out of existence with ease. If you poke the bear, it wakes up and kills you. But you need to poke the bear to win. Fun fact, if you win on max difficulty without cheese, you've found a bug. I don't mean that you exploited a bug in order to win. Winning is a bug and the dev would like you to tell them how so they can patch the game to make that not work. Anyways the entire soundtrack is flipping amazing. But when you making a run on one of the AI homeworld with that playing and they start flipping every possible shit as they realize what's about to go down and you can only hope like hell to hold on and power through every free AI unit in the galaxy and *not* in the galaxy being sent at you not to mention all the ridiculous bullshit between you and the homeworld https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZcoqR9Bwx1Y See bastion. If Megalovania needs explaining, don't talk to me. It's been three years, you have no excuse.

Very good point. It was a Facebook post, answering some guys question... not a press release. Rowe is just as relevant now as he has always been, which has always been "not very". The last show I saw him on he was Mike Baxter's brother on "Last Man Standing". It was a public facebook post by a man who's spent two decades managing his own public image and trading on his public image for money, and is *specifically* a person who's current income derives from his role with facebook. He knew exactly what he was doing, his motivations are transparent. He posted that, at this time of the year, on that venue because he knew exactly what and how much media traffic it would generate and that it would get his name front and center. Mike Rowe isn't some bumbling idiot, he's a person with a carefully managed public image. And what he is doing there is cashing in on the name of someone who was murdered, someone who he has almost certainly never met and definitely was not a close friend of in order to leverage the current remembrance of grief and loss to promote his name and his brand. It is absolutely pathetic and utterly vile. He knew *exactly* what he was doing.

The phrase you're looking for is MUD. Stands for Multi User Dungeon and they were only the hottest online role playing game tech of the 1980s. I'm certain they still exist, although i have no clue at all what ones are good and active.

Aww look at mike rowe wanting to be relevant again. And cashing in on 9/11 for publicity too. Because really really gotta sink that fucking low. jfc that's despicable.

Now are they doing the games, or the books. Because the book material was...less amazing.

Well the problem there isn't if a bunch of team owners came to that conclusion on their own, but if instead they actively worked together in order to deny him a position. Given some of the utter shit fuckery they NFL has done in the past in order to manage league PR, there is a good reason to expect that they may have done so. I mean let's be frank, the sheer number of shitheel players with media circus around them that NFL teams have been willing to rehabilitate means that the league dumping him doesn't really pass the smell test. If the league is attempting to enforce that, that is all kinds of illegal. There's also literally no way to drag information about that to light outside of the legal process. There's a fair chance the lawsuit dies in discovery, however the discovery process is about the only way to settle the matter. Unless we want to say Kaepernick should take the NFLs word that they're totally not engaging in shit fuckery this time we swear, he has more than enough cause to pursue legal action this far at least. And if the discovery process does turn out to be a directed ban, hopefully he takes the NFL for every cent it's worth because fuck that bullshit.

So literally nothing? Like this entire article says that "at some point some unknown source told us that some other unknown source told the FBI that this happened, the intelligence office that was the supposed source of this information is not commenting on it and the FBI says the claims are baseless. Yea about the only way this could more classic fox news is if the proposed hacking team was a group of illegal immigrants.

Then why are you posting here when you could be watching fox news talking about it, nodding along and telling your wife that if she'd stuck with that industry she'd have deserved it too.

She talked about when, and supplied dates. Their relationship was well known, and everyone knew who she was talking about. There was no way for him to stay silent, and it would just go away. I don't watch his show very often, and I don't watch "Fear" at all. I do know he's very popular within that world, and it effected many people. If anyone has a bad relationship... just get out of it, and move on. He's actually married to Patti Hearst's daughter now... yeah, that Patti Hearst. There was absolutely no reason to do this to him. No one cares except that stupid mob that jump on every opportunity to destroy someone's life. It's a bunch of online babies that never grew up. Given that after about two weeks, it went away...yea it probably would have gone away. Chloe Dykstra is bascily a semi amatuer model, and wasn't exactly hitting up all the media looking to sell the story. She posted a rant, unlisted [ie, you had to go out of your way to find it] about an ex being a shitty boyfriend. Hardwick is the who turned around and published a retaliatory hit piece via a god damn press release, and then proceeded to sell a bunch of their text messages to TMZ. That's the point it became a Big Thing. And that's about the time AMC wanted to make sure they weren't going to get any of this shit one them. It's also about the time Hardwick shut up, probably because AMC told him to stop selling shit to TMZ and go sit in the corner while mommy and daddy talk. And hey, know what happened when AMC started "investigating him?" Dykstra's response was to tell them to go away and bother someone else. . It wasn't some epic hit piece, Dykstra had no interest in making it into some dog and pony show, and it didn't turn into one until Hardwick decided to make it one. And when you're in a prominent media job highly tied into the face of a major television network and quite a few of its major products, any personal drama that involves *you* selling shit to TMZ will result in said network making sure their own ass is covered. I guarantee AMC would have vastly prefered to handle it quietly, they will have lost money of their own by pushing back the new season. Instead, and I can't state this enough, he wrote a drama laden press release and *sold shit to TMZ*. You've said "well what do you expect of hollywood/the media " quite a few times like it's an explanation for sexual harassment and abuse, but apparently it's waaaay to unreasonable to expect a major TV network to cover it's own ass at the expense of others?

If by put through hell you mean Hardwick decided the letter which never mentioned him was about him, turned the entire thing into a public shitfit and embarrassment to AMC, which means they put the premier of the second season of his show on hold for three weeks while they sorted out said shitfit. Also yea, it took a couple weeks, not "months of hell", and said "weeks" was almost entirely a product of him deciding to A release his own statement that was bascily a hit piece on Dykstra turning the thing ot a mess and then B release a bunch of shit to TMZ for them to publish. When you go out of your way to turn the thing into a public shitfit....yea your gonna end up mildly inconvenienced. If your a network personality and turn anything into public shitfit with international notoriety and the networks gonna put your shit on hold for a while. That ain't new, the network wants to make sure none of that will get on them. Also it's hardly like there was a police investigation and he was cleared of charged or something. Even assuming it was about Hardwick (and Dykstra still hasn't said so, the closest is that she in no way wants his career disrupted as a result of said letter), the letter at worst presents a picture of a shitty jealous and demanding boyfriend, and it's hardly like AMC has published a detailed report on if Hardwick was shit boyfriend or not. And since even Hardwick has gone on record about how his relationship is Dysktra was a mutually dysfunctional mess, he probably was a bit of a shitty boyfriend.

So now, you're saying there can be no moral panic, because I have no first hand experience, and the mediums reporting on it are politically biased. Well, if you want to have it like that, then you have to discard anything Buzzfeed and the HuffPo are reporting on this matter, because they too have a vested political interest in convincing you that it is NOT a moral panic. Either way, I did not bring up this case to support the argument for the existence of a moral panic, but because Dark Fox asked whether I know of any case when someone was fired based on an accusation alone. I provided one. But even if this particular story isn't true, the general pattern is that A accuses B of sexual harassment, and B is immediately suspended/fired/placed on paid leave pending an investigation. What I'm not seeing, are employers saying: "Well, there may be truth to this, but we will believe in the principle of innocent until proven guilty. We will conduct an investigation, and if the accusation proves true, we will immediately fire B." If you know of any such case when an employer acted this way, please share. It's almost like the later case isn't going to make national media. It's almost like many of the prominent cases are ones where the person's behaviour has been a known issue for decades. It's almost like companies tend to announce that people are being removed *after* concluding the investigation, not before. It's almost like an inveistgation where HR goes "uh yea, we've got like 3 decades worth of reports on this guy, but the CEO told us under no uncertain terms to drop the matter" doesn't take very long. A moral panic looks like crank physicists on the TV floating theories about repressed memories of ritual satanic abuse. A witch hunt looks like senator mccarthy percedingin over a commission in part with the FBI to ferret out suspected communists. It looks like the FBI demanding that it's employees sit in it's homosexual detection device in order to determine if they will continue to be employed there. This? This is a couple dozen semi prominent assholes, quite a few of whom have outright admitted to it being removed after their company decides that the accusation is sufficiently credible to be worth removing them. If you think a company is going to pay out a massive golden parachute in order to remove someone who's making them money on a "moral panic" you're kinda off your tit. And as said, I guarantee either your buddy is making up shit, whoever told them that story was making up shit, or your buddy is in no way party to all the details. I will bet money that person either had a longer history or was one of a long line of people in the legal industry fired for bullshit reasons because their employers didn't want to keep them around any more. You can find people fired in the 80s for jumped up sexual harassment claims in those industries simply because it one of the reasons where EI doesn't pay out, and that was an era when molesting the secretaries was considered just another job perk. Also no, no we do not need to treat every source as equal. Sexual harassment in these industries are so prevlevant there are literally hundreds of studies that attempt to quantify exactly how bad it is. Something like one person in five will experience it at some point. No one is inventing sexual harassment. So you know, pretending that buzzfeed is the only source is just a wee bit disingenuous. Of course that's utterly irrelevant. You seem to think there's some big moral panic. It's not on me or anyone else to disprove your claim, it's on you to prove it. Your moral panic does not get to exist by default until disproved, and you shouldn't expect people to prove the negative. The null hypothesis is true until you demonstrate otherwise.