If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Electronic Privacy Info Center)   Note to the White House: Remember that whole petition website you have to pretend you're giving the people a voice? The illusion doesn't work if you pull down petition you don't like   (epic.org) divider line 157
    More: Asinine, petitions, magic  
•       •       •

4652 clicks; posted to Politics » on 12 Aug 2012 at 11:14 AM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



157 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-08-12 12:11:35 PM  
The petition has almost 17,000 signatures. If we get 25,000 by August 9th, the government will respond.

9:02 pm Thursday, Aug 2

When you say you need somthing "by" a certain date or time, it typically means "before" that date or time.

tmyk.jpg
 
2012-08-12 12:16:07 PM  
Shame on you farkers for

Tymast: tenpoundsofcheese: Weaver95: tenpoundsofcheese: Another "surprise" from the President who promised transparency.

The only surprise actually is that people believed in his hopey changey schtick.

so...do you think we should cut back on TSA funding and chop down their regulations to something reasonable..?

Don't threadjack. This isn't about the TSA.

This is about the actions of President Hopey Changey administration becoming even less transparent and subverting the goal voice of the people by pulling down this petition

/you sound tired. you okay?

Obama should have used his presidential powers to keep the petition up past the date it was expired at, this is an injustice beyond anything that has been done before. You are absolutley right this needs a full investigation, Issa is asleep at the wheel here. This may call for UN intevention. Never before in the history of our country has something on a website been removed when it said it was going to be.


The petition was down for several days due to "maintenance" on the website, they should have given it more time. Besides, the 9th was just a date on a calendar.

It took 17 people to get the FCC to completely re-write how television is shown and censored.

1 million people sided a petition for GMO foods to be labeld, the court ruled it counted as one person. In short, this petition wouldn't have done anything, just another symbolic piece of crap.
 
2012-08-12 12:16:20 PM  
I will post this, as I did in the last thread about the petition. The terms of service for petition site states:

To avoid the appearance of improper influence, the White House may decline to address certain procurement, law enforcement, adjudicatory, or similar matters properly within the jurisdiction of federal departments or agencies, federal courts, or state and local government in its response to a petition.

Which means that even if it had succeeded, which it didn't, the White House could have easily ignored it.

I do agree that they should leave up the closed petitions, even if they fail.
 
2012-08-12 12:19:43 PM  
Any minute now, ArkAngel is going to come back into this thread, apologize for making a stupid assumption, and acknowledge that the petition was taken down because it had a set expiration date.

/Yep... any minute now.
 
2012-08-12 12:23:15 PM  

gilgigamesh: GAT_00: Also, just what kind of groundswell of support do you think you can claim when you can't even manage 25,000 people to agree with you out of 310 million Americans?

It only needed 2500 more signatures and that couldn't be mustered. In order to get the TSA to comply with a court order.

The next time I hear someone complain about getting groped I will come to their house and punch them in their nose.~


screw that, now that I know those petitions are binding I want to start one where everybody who signs it is exempt from all taxation. The only difficulty with my "Be Like Mitt" petition will be getting too many signatures!
 
2012-08-12 12:28:33 PM  

KiltedBastich: tenpoundsofcheese: Don't threadjack. This isn't about the TSA.

This is about the actions of President Hopey Changey administration becoming even less transparent and subverting the goal voice of the people by pulling down this petition

/you sound tired. you okay?

So much failure, so few actual meaningful statements. I repeat, notice that the petition expired after 30 days, exactly as it was supposed to according to the announced rules of the site. Everything is exactly as transparent as promised.

But of course you're too much of a dishonest partisan shill to admit that. So you just go on lying, we will go on laughing at you.


TEFA: At approximately 11:30 am EDT, the White House removed a petition about the TSA airport screening procedures from the White House "We the People" website. About 22,500 of the 25,000 signatures necessary for a response from the Administration were obtained when the White House unexpectedly cut short the time period for the petition. The site also went down for "maintenance" following an article in Wired that sought support for the campaign.

Please show what is incorrect.
 
2012-08-12 12:36:20 PM  

s2s2s2: KiltedBastich: tenpoundsofcheese: Don't threadjack. This isn't about the TSA.

This is about the actions of President Hopey Changey administration becoming even less transparent and subverting the goal voice of the people by pulling down this petition

/you sound tired. you okay?

So much failure, so few actual meaningful statements. I repeat, notice that the petition expired after 30 days, exactly as it was supposed to according to the announced rules of the site. Everything is exactly as transparent as promised.

But of course you're too much of a dishonest partisan shill to admit that. So you just go on lying, we will go on laughing at you.

TEFA: At approximately 11:30 am EDT, the White House removed a petition about the TSA airport screening procedures from the White House "We the People" website. About 22,500 of the 25,000 signatures necessary for a response from the Administration were obtained when the White House unexpectedly cut short the time period for the petition. The site also went down for "maintenance" following an article in Wired that sought support for the campaign.

Please show what is incorrect.


Unexpected because they had a set date when the petition would be taken down and stuck to it?
 
2012-08-12 12:43:24 PM  

Fart_Machine: Unexpected because they had a set date when the petition would be taken down and stuck to it?


What time was it to shut down? Is 11:30AM EDT a standard time?
I'm not really giving my thoughts to either side, but, "Nothing was going to happen anyway!" thinking is tiresome.
 
2012-08-12 12:44:49 PM  

EnviroDude: It is funny because the Democrats are supposed to be all " free speech" and we respect your ideas. Guess the TSA didn't like it much at all


You sound tired.

You musy be so bushed after taking such a big threadshiat.

Guess we wont be seeing again this thread.

/alts don't count.
 
2012-08-12 12:45:12 PM  

s2s2s2: KiltedBastich: tenpoundsofcheese: Don't threadjack. This isn't about the TSA.

This is about the actions of President Hopey Changey administration becoming even less transparent and subverting the goal voice of the people by pulling down this petition

/you sound tired. you okay?

So much failure, so few actual meaningful statements. I repeat, notice that the petition expired after 30 days, exactly as it was supposed to according to the announced rules of the site. Everything is exactly as transparent as promised.

But of course you're too much of a dishonest partisan shill to admit that. So you just go on lying, we will go on laughing at you.

TEFA: At approximately 11:30 am EDT, the White House removed a petition about the TSA airport screening procedures from the White House "We the People" website. About 22,500 of the 25,000 signatures necessary for a response from the Administration were obtained when the White House unexpectedly cut short the time period for the petition. The site also went down for "maintenance" following an article in Wired that sought support for the campaign.

Please show what is incorrect.


The expiry date was August 9th, and had always been August 9th, and was openly announced to be August 9th, as has been mentioned many times now in this thread, and it was taken down August 9th. What's so hard to understand about that?
 
2012-08-12 12:50:23 PM  

s2s2s2: Fart_Machine: Unexpected because they had a set date when the petition would be taken down and stuck to it?

What time was it to shut down? Is 11:30AM EDT a standard time?
I'm not really giving my thoughts to either side, but, "Nothing was going to happen anyway!" thinking is tiresome.


Was it shut down on the 9th or not?
 
2012-08-12 12:50:52 PM  

Fart_Machine: s2s2s2: Fart_Machine: Unexpected because they had a set date when the petition would be taken down and stuck to it?

What time was it to shut down? Is 11:30AM EDT a standard time?
I'm not really giving my thoughts to either side, but, "Nothing was going to happen anyway!" thinking is tiresome.

Was it shut down on the 9th or not?


Quiet, he's moving his monkey bars.
 
2012-08-12 12:55:04 PM  
That whole petition website is garbage. Typical political showmanship, nothing more.
 
2012-08-12 12:56:18 PM  

PeppaJack: That whole petition website is garbage. Typical political showmanship, nothing more.


i18.photobucket.com
 
2012-08-12 12:56:40 PM  

Fart_Machine: Unexpected because they had a set date when the petition would be taken down and stuck to it?


Which is an utterly moronic point to quibble about. 22,000 people wanted an answer from their government - why the fark shouldn't the government actually provide them with one?

If your aim is to show you're a transparent and responsive government, hiding behind arbitrary bureaucratic rules is a dick move, particularly in an election year when you're going to be talking about the importance of people engaging with the political process.

I really don't get why some people have such a knee-jerk need to defend 'their side' at all costs, even against legitimate criticism that the government should actually be doing something better than it is.
 
2012-08-12 12:57:17 PM  

Falcc: I'd never know tenpoundsofderp posted in a thread if nobody had that weird knee-jerk urge to point out that "hey, tenpoundsofderp just said something stupid, let's deride that guy's single threadshiat per thread that adds nothing to the conversation."


I believe there's a checkbox that allows you to ignore posts that mention ignored users, too.
 
2012-08-12 12:59:54 PM  
Note to the White House: Remember that whole petition website you have to pretend you're giving the people a voice? The illusion doesn't work if you pull down petition you don't like

Funny, I thought it expired.

A Farkette had a link trying to generate more signatures for this too. (Was still a couple thousand short after lunch last Thursday when I checked)
 
2012-08-12 12:59:58 PM  

The Numbers: Fart_Machine: Unexpected because they had a set date when the petition would be taken down and stuck to it?

Which is an utterly moronic point to quibble about. 22,000 people wanted an answer from their government - why the fark shouldn't the government actually provide them with one?

If your aim is to show you're a transparent and responsive government, hiding behind arbitrary bureaucratic rules is a dick move, particularly in an election year when you're going to be talking about the importance of people engaging with the political process.

I really don't get why some people have such a knee-jerk need to defend 'their side' at all costs, even against legitimate criticism that the government should actually be doing something better than it is.


... it's a petition system. It's not "arbitrary bureaucratic rules," it's the openly stated way in which the petitions work. You get x signatures in 90 days. It's not a knee-jerk defense of a side, it's something very simple that was going to happen happening exactly as expected.

You can read into it all you want, but every petition on there works in the same way.
 
2012-08-12 01:01:44 PM  

Party Boy: This was on reddit yesterday.

Here is what is on reddit today.Overly dramatic sensationalized subject gets over 2000 upvotes: "The White House has removed a petition about the TSA airport screening procedures from the White House "We the People" website. About 22,500 of the 25,000 signatures necessary for a response from the Administration had been obtained."
hmm.. that's weird of them.. So.. why would they do that?
[2] Answer found in comments all the way at the bottom.
They only had until the 9th to get the required signatures. Come on guys.
TL;DR: Reddit Politics foamed at mouth over White House taking down online petition as scheduled.


Thank you! That was really the last thing that needed to be said on this thread. I'm predicting we'll have over 500 comments by dinnertime.
 
2012-08-12 01:03:01 PM  

The Numbers: Fart_Machine: Unexpected because they had a set date when the petition would be taken down and stuck to it?

Which is an utterly moronic point to quibble about. 22,000 people wanted an answer from their government - why the fark shouldn't the government actually provide them with one?

If your aim is to show you're a transparent and responsive government, hiding behind arbitrary bureaucratic rules is a dick move, particularly in an election year when you're going to be talking about the importance of people engaging with the political process.

I really don't get why some people have such a knee-jerk need to defend 'their side' at all costs, even against legitimate criticism that the government should actually be doing something better than it is.


Not a side really. Just pointing out that it was clearly stated when the petition was to be taken down and now people like yourself are butthurt due to their own ignorance to say it was unexpected. But keep crying and shaking those tiny fists.
 
2012-08-12 01:03:09 PM  
Why is this on here? The petition expired before it got all the signatures. This is a well known fact.
 
2012-08-12 01:04:23 PM  

tenpoundsofcheese: Weaver95: tenpoundsofcheese:

Don't threadjack. This isn't about the TSA.

so do you think the TSA screening procedures should be changed or not? i'm curious as to what a Real American thinks about TSA gaterape. do you swallow your pride and let a government employee touch your junk...? or does a Real American fight against the TSA restrictions?

Threadshiating, how does that work?

If you want to discuss the TSA policies:
1. go find an article about it
2. write a funny headline
3. get it greenlit
4. discuss it on fark

wtf are you going off topic and threadshiating?


Oh, that is rich. The queen of threadshiatting condemning others for it.
 
2012-08-12 01:04:49 PM  
i.dailymail.co.uk

In training camps around the country, Young Republicans as young as six are conditioned to hone their knee-jerk outrage capabilities.
 
2012-08-12 01:05:22 PM  

The Numbers: Fart_Machine: Unexpected because they had a set date when the petition would be taken down and stuck to it?

Which is an utterly moronic point to quibble about. 22,000 people wanted an answer from their government - why the fark shouldn't the government actually provide them with one?

If your aim is to show you're a transparent and responsive government, hiding behind arbitrary bureaucratic rules is a dick move, particularly in an election year when you're going to be talking about the importance of people engaging with the political process.

I really don't get why some people have such a knee-jerk need to defend 'their side' at all costs, even against legitimate criticism that the government should actually be doing something better than it is.


For the same reason you do.
The petitions were all put up for a fixed length of time. Some incited sufficient comment to be of note - this one did not. The fact that you think the rules should have been bent to give more weight to your own personal point of view indicates who is really being blindly partisan here.
 
2012-08-12 01:06:06 PM  
Unfortunately the TSA has taken successful steps to reduce the visibility of the issue to the point where people either feel less violated or accept it.

A software upgrade added a customer-viewable screen that simplifies outcome of the results as "OK" or a cartoon stick figure identifying the area to be screened by hand.

It takes deeper thought to realize that regardless of how the scanner's output is obscured, the technology inside is still "seeing" your nude body as clearly as before, and there is no way to know if or when that data is seen as a clear, nude image by a person behind the scenes. It's a black box.

Toward the goal of reducing objections, the psychology is brilliant. The pretext that the software is analyzing the image without showing detail to anyone allows the customer to choose to believe in a possibility that no one is looking at your nude image, whereas before you knew you were being looked at every time by someone in another room. It makes people relax without changing anything.
 
2012-08-12 01:06:36 PM  
So they're going to put the unfinished petition back up, I hope.
 
2012-08-12 01:10:39 PM  
Epic.org?

What's next, LikeOMGGagMeWithASpoon.org?
 
2012-08-12 01:12:41 PM  

jso2897: That whole petition website is garbage. Typical political showmanship, nothing more.


Hey, who you calling old? :p
 
2012-08-12 01:15:40 PM  

Britney Spear's Speculum: Why is this on here? The petition expired before it got all the signatures. This is a well known fact.


Obama can use his time machine to plant false information about his birth, but he cannot do something about the petition? He simply does not care enough about the country if he wasn't able to intervene here.
 
2012-08-12 01:18:03 PM  

LasersHurt: The Numbers: Fart_Machine: Unexpected because they had a set date when the petition would be taken down and stuck to it?

Which is an utterly moronic point to quibble about. 22,000 people wanted an answer from their government - why the fark shouldn't the government actually provide them with one?

If your aim is to show you're a transparent and responsive government, hiding behind arbitrary bureaucratic rules is a dick move, particularly in an election year when you're going to be talking about the importance of people engaging with the political process.

I really don't get why some people have such a knee-jerk need to defend 'their side' at all costs, even against legitimate criticism that the government should actually be doing something better than it is.

... it's a petition system. It's not "arbitrary bureaucratic rules," it's the openly stated way in which the petitions work. You get x signatures in 90 days. It's not a knee-jerk defense of a side, it's something very simple that was going to happen happening exactly as expected.

You can read into it all you want, but every petition on there works in the same way.


Actually its pretty much the definition of arbitrary, bureaucratic rules.

This kind of thing shows the difference between a government with a genuine interest in engaging with the public and a government with an interest in appearing to engage with the public whilst trying to avoid actually engaging with them.
 
2012-08-12 01:18:43 PM  

tenpoundsofcheese: KiltedBastich: tenpoundsofcheese: Don't threadjack. This isn't about the TSA.

This is about the actions of President Hopey Changey administration becoming even less transparent and subverting the goal voice of the people by pulling down this petition

/you sound tired. you okay?

So much failure, so few actual meaningful statements. I repeat, notice that the petition expired after 30 days, exactly as it was supposed to according to the announced rules of the site. Everything is exactly as transparent as promised.

But of course you're too much of a dishonest partisan shill to admit that. .

That wasn't in the TFA.

In this case, they followed the procedures and had transparency.
Too bad, they can't keep up with it.


THREADshiatTER
 
2012-08-12 01:19:12 PM  

Fart_Machine: s2s2s2: Fart_Machine: Unexpected because they had a set date when the petition would be taken down and stuck to it?

What time was it to shut down? Is 11:30AM EDT a standard time?
I'm not really giving my thoughts to either side, but, "Nothing was going to happen anyway!" thinking is tiresome.

Was it shut down on the 9th or not?


So far I'm taking everyone hears word for it. I'm also not thinking there was going to be a flood of signatures before 11:59PM. I'm asking a question you haven't answered.
 
2012-08-12 01:20:59 PM  

GAT_00: Fart_Machine: s2s2s2: Fart_Machine: Unexpected because they had a set date when the petition would be taken down and stuck to it?

What time was it to shut down? Is 11:30AM EDT a standard time?
I'm not really giving my thoughts to either side, but, "Nothing was going to happen anyway!" thinking is tiresome.

Was it shut down on the 9th or not?

Quiet, he's moving his monkey bars.


My monkey bars were, and will remain at "What time of day was it scheduled to close?" until someone answers them. ANSWER THE MONKEY BARS, SHEEPLE!
 
2012-08-12 01:24:10 PM  
This isn't Nam.

There are rules.for petitions
 
2012-08-12 01:26:08 PM  

Epoch_Zero: This isn't Nam.

There are rules.for petitions


What was the exact deadline? It should include more than a date.
 
2012-08-12 01:27:07 PM  

jso2897: For the same reason you do.
The petitions were all put up for a fixed length of time. Some incited sufficient comment to be of note - this one did not. The fact that you think the rules should have been bent to give more weight to your own personal point of view indicates who is really being blindly partisan here.


You poor thing. It must be difficult accurately comprehending the world when you're so prone to making baseless assumptions.
 
2012-08-12 01:28:58 PM  
Come on, guys:

These machines see through your clothing. What could be more transparent than that?
 
2012-08-12 01:33:21 PM  

s2s2s2: Fart_Machine: Unexpected because they had a set date when the petition would be taken down and stuck to it?

What time was it to shut down? Is 11:30AM EDT a standard time?
I'm not really giving my thoughts to either side, but, "Nothing was going to happen anyway!" thinking is tiresome.


Like a poodle gobbling down its own vomit.
 
2012-08-12 01:34:15 PM  

s2s2s2: Epoch_Zero: This isn't Nam.

There are rules.for petitions

What was the exact deadline? It should include more than a date.


Perhaps there is a system, I don't know, let's make it electronic and widespread, which you can use to send a message to someone stating your displeasure at such a thing.

The world will be great when this is discovered.

thamike: [i.dailymail.co.uk image 634x800]

In training camps around the country, Young Republicans as young as six are conditioned to hone their knee-jerk outrage capabilities.


Well done good sir.
 
2012-08-12 01:38:07 PM  

s2s2s2: Fart_Machine: s2s2s2: Fart_Machine: Unexpected because they had a set date when the petition would be taken down and stuck to it?

What time was it to shut down? Is 11:30AM EDT a standard time?
I'm not really giving my thoughts to either side, but, "Nothing was going to happen anyway!" thinking is tiresome.

Was it shut down on the 9th or not?

So far I'm taking everyone hears word for it. I'm also not thinking there was going to be a flood of signatures before 11:59PM. I'm asking a question you haven't answered.


Since date is also determined by time do you have proof it was shut down prior to midnight EDT? Or are you just "asking questions"?
 
2012-08-12 01:40:02 PM  
If they really wanted to kill this petition they would have just messed with the count.
 
2012-08-12 01:42:11 PM  

gravy chugging cretin.: s2s2s2: Fart_Machine: Unexpected because they had a set date when the petition would be taken down and stuck to it?

What time was it to shut down? Is 11:30AM EDT a standard time?
I'm not really giving my thoughts to either side, but, "Nothing was going to happen anyway!" thinking is tiresome.

Like a poodle gobbling down its own vomit.


You prefer the vomit of others.

This one got more than 25K.
 
2012-08-12 01:42:31 PM  
Time limits: How the fark do they work?
 
2012-08-12 01:44:29 PM  

Fart_Machine: s2s2s2: Fart_Machine: s2s2s2: Fart_Machine: Unexpected because they had a set date when the petition would be taken down and stuck to it?

What time was it to shut down? Is 11:30AM EDT a standard time?
I'm not really giving my thoughts to either side, but, "Nothing was going to happen anyway!" thinking is tiresome.

Was it shut down on the 9th or not?

So far I'm taking everyone hears word for it. I'm also not thinking there was going to be a flood of signatures before 11:59PM. I'm asking a question you haven't answered.

Since date is also determined by time do you have proof it was shut down prior to midnight EDT? Or are you just "asking questions"?


The article says it came down at 11:30AM
 
2012-08-12 01:45:41 PM  

gameshowhost: Time limits: How the fark do they work?


I'd assume you should get the whole last day, unless otherwise specified.
Was it otherwise specified?
 
2012-08-12 01:45:46 PM  

spill_thrill: If they really wanted to kill this petition they would have just messed with the count.


Heh, you're new at this, aren't you?

See, we're dealing with a group of people that have been planning our current regime for literally half a century. They plant subtle clues and plan decades ahead, sometimes falsifying historical documents and public record for their own nefarious ends. They hide symbols in buildings and are all from the same genetic lineage going back to the dawn of civilization. They don't just go and mess with the numbers.

Change the numbers... wow...
 
2012-08-12 01:47:34 PM  

Britney Spear's Speculum: Why is this on here? The petition expired before it got all the signatures. This is a well known fact.


Because Fark's business model would collapse, otherwise.
 
2012-08-12 01:55:36 PM  

s2s2s2: Fart_Machine: s2s2s2: Fart_Machine: s2s2s2: Fart_Machine: Unexpected because they had a set date when the petition would be taken down and stuck to it?

What time was it to shut down? Is 11:30AM EDT a standard time?
I'm not really giving my thoughts to either side, but, "Nothing was going to happen anyway!" thinking is tiresome.

Was it shut down on the 9th or not?

So far I'm taking everyone hears word for it. I'm also not thinking there was going to be a flood of signatures before 11:59PM. I'm asking a question you haven't answered.

Since date is also determined by time do you have proof it was shut down prior to midnight EDT? Or are you just "asking questions"?

The article says it came down at 11:30AM


I suppose the only way to figure out if there were shenanigans going on would be to compare the cut off to other recent petitions on the site. Just browsing the other petitions listed doesn't seem to be the case.
 
2012-08-12 01:56:13 PM  

Generation_D: O no, they have angered the hive mind of Reddit.

And it will last until the next cat picture or facebook drama distracts them.


Said without a hint of irony.
 
2012-08-12 01:57:29 PM  

s2s2s2: gameshowhost: Time limits: How the fark do they work?

I'd assume you should get the whole last day, unless otherwise specified.
Was it otherwise specified?


It would probably depend on when the petition was initially submitted. I'm assuming not everyone puts their petition in at exactly midnight.
 
Displayed 50 of 157 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report