|
^ Sounds like Phillip may be referring to the reduction of sentences for illegal crimes committed, which is a much different thing then going back and making something that was legal suddenly illegal at a previous point in time and issuing a sentence, and/or imposing stricter sentences at a later point in the future, these I don't believe have ever been done in the US.
|
|
|
|
It's not like I didn't hint at it or anything  Well, I know for a fact that the factoids have had some recent updates.  ~ This was ibminer's effort.
I initiated the idea, but the content of the factoids themselves was somewhat of a joint effort!  Happy to help get BPIP some of the recognition it deserves. My understanding is anyone who can see the donators section including VIPs can request a permanent factoid slot with minimal limitations, but outside of that anyone can suggest factoids that would be useful to forum users. Whether they get added or not is probably based on how useful they actually are to the forum or its users. ..and here they are with links!  Hope you enjoy your cool glass of..  |
|
|
|
For your own benefit, don't make your murdering, criminal mindset a thing that is directed against any one person who you name. Then it becomes a threat that can be prosecuted in court, as though you were going to carry out your threat. Oh, and thanks for your comment.  Okey dokey, I just figured you wanted a discussion or something. My bad! LOL  |
|
|
|
Government DOESN'T go around killing pregnant ladies. They DON'T go around killing any ladies without some kind of extreme criminal activity on the part of the lady, first. When they execute people, it's to stop whatever crime they are doing. Other people will see the execution and think a few times before they do the same criminal activity. Society has set government up this way.
Take yourself for example. You have a neighbor who seems to be a good guy. He and you are friends. There's a knock at the door one day, and it's your neighbor. You open the door for him, and he has a gun and shoots you dead. In principle, wouldn't you wish for his execution so that he doesn't go around killing other friends? Maybe you wouldn't, but loads of other people would.
You are comparing a cowardly neighbor with (apparent) mental issues who has proven to be a threat to society by maliciously killing a friend of his who has been born for over ~35 years (OK maybe ~38 lol), to a female (or couple) making a decision about her (and/or the father's) unborn baby.. and you think both should carry the consequence of death by human?  If your motivation stems from a completely humanitarian perspective (i.e. no murder for anyone is right) then it makes 0 sense why you would want to execute people based on some criteria you have, as you would then be committing murder yourself, then the next guy that thinks like you (with his own criteria) will want to murder you.. when does it end? For this group, making murder OK via any criteria should lead to failure. Based on your execution comments, I assume this isn't you. You appear to believe in God.. so why would you think you, or any human, have the authority to determine when God's children come and go, no matter what crime you say they've committed? I obviously wasn't there, but I'd guess it was humans with this line of thinking that got Jesus nailed to the cross. Why would a God need your help killing people?  For those who don't believe in God, I'll assume we can agree there is a difference as to what effects society would encounter with the forcing of unwanted babies to be born. Forcing a baby to be born isn't always going to be positive for society. What odds would you give on whether the baby grows up to be positive to society or destructive to it? Many, many factors ultimately go into that, but it generally starts with the people raising that baby. And if those future parents already do not want or cannot handle the baby, for whatever reason, you are now trying to force that baby into a bad start in life, which one could argue isn't fair to the unborn child either. But really, none of us should be speculating on what the baby will or will not become and trying to decide, we should really just be allowing the potential parents (and potentially their God) to come to the conclusion for their unborn baby, and allow them to accept whatever natural consequences may or may not come from it. |
|
|
|
|
I believe you also receive an automated message back notifying you that you are on the person's ignore list.
edit: Actually it is more of a notification that appears, which blocks the message from ever sending, not really an automated message.
|
|
|
|
|
So after moving all of my BPIP stuff to another machine recently to accommodate another need I had (personally), the machine I moved everything to went down, and after a few days of troubleshooting I've just decided to use a different machine to get the parser running again, my parser is the only one doing flag log updates at the moment. Weekly parse of all flags will happen soon, once I can clear the lock on that job, but the checking of recent flags has resumed. My apologies for the gap in time the parser wasn't checking these.
|
|
|
|
Government and court have the authority to punish for murder and attempted murder. They do it all the time. Mostly doesn't involve the execution of the murderer, although some States DO have execution as punishment for some murders.
I get that some may have this authority currently.. I'm just curious why you as an individual would be OK with one set of human beings having this authority with their citizens, but not OK with another human being having this authority with their own baby. The point is to stop the murders, not kill people. If the mother and her doctor don't kill the new life inside her, there is no murder. No murder means no governmental punishment for the mother and doctor.
If your goal is to stop murderers - someone who kills another person.. it seems counter-productive to desire a process which creates larger groups of them. |
|
|
|
Why would you be OK with a government/court having the power to kill another human being.. but not be willing to give the same power to a person growing their own offspring inside of them? |
|
|
|
I'd prefer if the governments (on all levels) leave the decision to the individual carrying the baby, regardless of what the 14th amendment says. IMO, it is their right as a human being. If you believe a life born cannot take care of itself, then the individual(s) ultimately responsible for it, and potentially their God, should bear this decision. Would the majority of people I see protesting against abortions be jumping in line to adopt all the babies that will [apparently] be born [likely into bad situations] because of this? I don't think much will change myself, my wife on the other hand is ready to take to the streets in protest! Maybe it's because I'm not female?.. I just assume people will find ways to travel to states that allow it. She says nobody can afford it and brings up hanger abortions.. I can't argue.  Why it's a big deal?
No clue.. they can change whatever they want these days with the right people in office... |
|
|
|
Many diverse groups need to be validated on a public spectrum these days.. IMO triggered & fueled by media driven frenzies. For some reason the powers that be want to ignite a "systemic racism" torch.. even after recently having a black president voted in the US for 2 consecutive terms. The people in the 1800s would probably smack the shit out of the people crying today.. as those guys actually experienced systemic racism. At the end of the day, Juneteenth is not worth arguing over as it will lead to more division, which is ultimately what they want.. so I just *shrug* and move on. My family has always remembered slavery and the civil war.. through education.. we know the history. I don't need the government reminding me when to think about black people's history and the overwhelming majority of people I know think the same. The stuff people of every color have experienced for quite some time is some form of modern day slavery, but it's not systemic racism, it's a form of control over the majority of the working class in general. AND ALL I SEE IS PROPOGANDAAAAA PROPOGANDAAAAAAAaaaaaa  |
|
|
|
Just alerting you. Under temporary bans, https://bpip.org/TempBans Some users seem to have initially received a signature ban, and then they were completely banned afterwards. They still show up as though they have temp bans despite being permanently banned except for creeps. Maybe you forgot to update that part. The profiles haven't been updated in a while, you can tell by the 'Last Parsed' column on that page. I'm guessing the signature itself was still on the profile at the time of the parser seeing the user ban, so the parsers would have archived the profile and never went back to check for the signature after that. Manually refreshing each profile would update them and clear them off the list. edit: To clarify, I think most of these were parsed before the /TempBans page even existed (in 2021), so the page would have went by whatever signature was last parsed with the account. Nonetheless, 'refresh profile' on each page cleared them off. |
|
|
|
@Charles-Tim, dare not continue, not safe.
Well, personally I'd say it is as safe as it was yesterday..! Although I'm sure the flow of money going to major trusted certificate authorities would disagree with me. Looks like the SSL certificate expired, so we'll need to get it renewed.. but your communication to the site is as encrypted as it would have been yesterday. The browser notification is just alerting you to the date being expired, so the browser no longer officially trusts the certificate, and is warning you. I can tell you it's the same certificate that was on the site yesterday, it's just expired now. Regardless, as @Charles-Tim pointed out, I don't believe there would be anything of value to gain from compromising BPIP's SSL certificate. |
|
|
|
~ I consider virtually all software as experimental nowadays.
Fair point. It may also come down to what we are considering software. There are several instances of simplistic firmware, scripts, shared libraries, or even simple applications like notepad (even though a new version is apparently being released now.. which will likely introduce bugs ). On an individual basis, I'd probably see some of these as no longer experimental, although certainly the overwhelming amount of applications out there today are far from perfection, and it is continually spit out with seemingly subpar developers and lack of good quality assurance checks. So the difference between beta and stable is accepting the remaining bugs as "normal" Sadly, which probably includes bugs nobody is even aware of and/or have yet to be discovered.. but then I guess they are not 'normal' anymore, once discovered.. at least, we'd hope. |
|
|
|
Well, I know for a fact that the factoids have had some recent updates. That said, some of the factoid entries are provided to Donators/VIPs.. which might not be as easy to modify, but I'm not sure if this is one of them or not. Personally, I don't mind it being displayed as beta in a factoid, even to serve as some sort of historical reference. Although, I can't say I'd consider Core as beta, from a software perspective. Experimental..? Maybe on an economic, social, or political plane? |
|
|
|
Thank you all, I believe I corrected this the other day when it was reported so it should be parsing the seclog as of 5/28/22.. there was a lingering 'lock' on the seclog job, which stops a parser from running the job.. it did appear to stop on 2/25 as per the dates in the image below. The locking system will be looked at to try and circumvent this issue moving forward.  |
|
|
|
Well, I always enjoy seeing stats from BPIP! .. I'd like to see more links here though, maybe drill down to some of the posts behind the merit stats using the https://bpip.org/smerit.aspx page, even if just the last 30 days or so, maybe link to the BPIP profile page for each, etc.. but I don't want to come off as being too picky here! Regardless, the effort & recognition is appreciated. BTW - Male to female ratio seems slightly pessimistic.. I'd go closer to 1:10,000 for active profiles.. pure [optimistic] speculation on that one though. This is assuming we don't need to get into people who "identify" one way or the other.. then you'd probably be missing like 10+ more ratios with various terminologies. Anywho, let's just stick to the male/female ratio, I'm getting off-topic again. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
