Do you have adblock enabled?
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.

(The New York Times)   Good News Everyone- all those newspapers you've been keeping in your attic may turn out to be important after all- and you should keep those wrappers and potato chip bags, too, just in case   (nytimes.com) divider line 60
    More: Interesting, crisps, wrappers  
•       •       •

11278 clicks; posted to Main » on 17 Mar 2013 at 6:46 PM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-03-17 08:50:25 PM  

cptjeff: Silly_Sot: Fark simply needs to stop linking at all to any site with a login requirement.

And yet for some reason, fark elects to link to websites that deliver high quality content rather than bowing to a few idiots who can't bother to have a free account on one of the most important sites pages on the internet and don't want to take the 30 seconds to create one.

The rest of us don't have to suffer just because you're lazy. I enjoyed the article. It was an interesting look at a treasure trove of historic documents popping up in a completely random place. But I hear E! News doesn't require a login, why don't you bum around there for a while? Go ahead, I'm sure you'll get the same quality of writing and insight as you'll get from the New York Times.


Do you work for the NYT or do you just enjoy shilling for corporations in your spare time? I'm pretty sure they don't need you to defend them.
 
2013-03-17 08:53:54 PM  

untaken_name: cptjeff: Silly_Sot: Fark simply needs to stop linking at all to any site with a login requirement.

And yet for some reason, fark elects to link to websites that deliver high quality content rather than bowing to a few idiots who can't bother to have a free account on one of the most important sites pages on the internet and don't want to take the 30 seconds to create one.

The rest of us don't have to suffer just because you're lazy. I enjoyed the article. It was an interesting look at a treasure trove of historic documents popping up in a completely random place. But I hear E! News doesn't require a login, why don't you bum around there for a while? Go ahead, I'm sure you'll get the same quality of writing and insight as you'll get from the New York Times.

Do you work for the NYT or do you just enjoy shilling for corporations in your spare time? I'm pretty sure they don't need you to defend them.


I've seen their annual report. Believe me, they need us to shill and defend...
 
2013-03-17 09:04:52 PM  

untaken_name: cptjeff: Silly_Sot: Fark simply needs to stop linking at all to any site with a login requirement.

And yet for some reason, fark elects to link to websites that deliver high quality content rather than bowing to a few idiots who can't bother to have a free account on one of the most important sites pages on the internet and don't want to take the 30 seconds to create one.

The rest of us don't have to suffer just because you're lazy. I enjoyed the article. It was an interesting look at a treasure trove of historic documents popping up in a completely random place. But I hear E! News doesn't require a login, why don't you bum around there for a while? Go ahead, I'm sure you'll get the same quality of writing and insight as you'll get from the New York Times.

Do you work for the NYT or do you just enjoy shilling for corporations in your spare time? I'm pretty sure they don't need you to defend them.


I just don't like people who take being unengaged as a point of pride, that's all. If you don't want to spend the time registering for an account, fine. Be an idiot. But please don't whine about how awful it is that you might have to put in a modicum of effort once in a while. I've had an account on the NY Times website for something like a decade. 30 seconds once and I'm set. In the time you spent on this thread whining, you could have had an account and been reading an interesting story. But instead, you decided to make sure everybody else knew that the world wasn't bending over backwards for you. Well, boo hoo. If you don't want to go through that massive pain of providing a first name and an e-mail address, that's your problem. I really don't care, it's your loss. But when you start yapping about how unfair it is that you have to do so, it's just annoying, and not worth the electrons it's printed on.
 
2013-03-17 09:45:04 PM  

Bennie Crabtree: Something I love about newspapers, is that their content can't be easily redacted by corporate sponsored editors from the Ministry of Truth, and no government is interested in changing their content now. Yes, knowledge needs to be updated, but digital content has no protection at all against revisionism, whereas print media give excellent snapshots of bias and public imagination/memory. Digital media is fundamentally undemocratic - it is too susceptible to manipulation to be trusted. It turns every bit of text into one of Stalin's family photographs, ready for revisions from anywhere, at any time.


This, this, and more this. Digital media can be edited, corrupted and not to mention lost forever if the software used to create it disappears. And you must have an electronic device (with the proper OS and software, etc.) powered by electricity to view/read digital media. If you want to keep those precious digital memories, suck it up and print them out as physical media. Don't get so caught up in the convenience of digital media that you forget how ephemeral is really is.
 
2013-03-17 10:41:42 PM  

untaken_name: Do you work for the NYT or do you just enjoy shilling for corporations in your spare time? I'm pretty sure they don't need you to defend them.


I got around the pay wall in about 5 seconds....Just takes some click and hitting the backspace key. The NYT pay wall is not exactly very much of a wall.
 
2013-03-17 10:47:07 PM  
Note to subby. Submit the article not the login screen.
 
2013-03-17 10:53:16 PM  

cwolf20: Note to subby. Submit the article not the login screen.


Note to cwolf: Don't be a moron.
 
2013-03-18 12:44:44 AM  

cptjeff: I just don't like people who take being unengaged as a point of pride, that's all. If you don't want to spend the time registering for an account, fine. Be an idiot. But please don't whine about how awful it is that you might have to put in a modicum of effort once in a while. I've had an account on the NY Times website for something like a decade. 30 seconds once and I'm set. In the time you spent on this thread whining, you could have had an account and been reading an interesting story. But instead, you decided to make sure everybody else knew that the world wasn't bending over backwards for you. Well, boo hoo. If you don't want to go through that massive pain of providing a first name and an e-mail address, that's your problem. I really don't care, it's your loss. But when you start yapping about how unfair it is that you have to do so, it's just annoying, and not worth the electrons it's printed on.


I did none of the things you're complaining about. I simply don't understand why one person whining about other people whining is any more relevant than the original whiners. I also would like to note that I do not believe that my whining about your whining about other people's whining is relevant. You seem to think yours is. My take is that you believe yourself to be superior to people who do not have an account with the NYT and you enjoy bragging about yourself and your supposed superiority at any opportunity. But maybe I'm wrong. There's always that possibility.
 
2013-03-18 12:45:52 AM  

WhyteRaven74: untaken_name: Do you work for the NYT or do you just enjoy shilling for corporations in your spare time? I'm pretty sure they don't need you to defend them.

I got around the pay wall in about 5 seconds....Just takes some click and hitting the backspace key. The NYT pay wall is not exactly very much of a wall.


I wasn't commenting in any way on the paywall. Not sure why you quoted me. I was commenting on the large number of long posts this poster has made encouraging people to sign up for the NYT. It made me wonder if he was employed selling subscriptions to it or something. That's all.
 
2013-03-18 01:07:43 AM  

untaken_name: My take is that you believe yourself to be superior to people who do not have an account with the NYT


I do consider myself superior to the people who don't have a free account, refuse to spend the 30 seconds it takes to create one, and come on here and spend the time they could have used to actually create an account whining about it instead. If you don't have an account, I don't care. If you refuse to create one, I don't care about that either. It's your loss. Where I do begin to care is when you start holding yourself up as some bastion of purity because you don't have an account and because you refuse to get one.


untaken_name: WhyteRaven74: untaken_name: Do you work for the NYT or do you just enjoy shilling for corporations in your spare time? I'm pretty sure they don't need you to defend them.

I got around the pay wall in about 5 seconds....Just takes some click and hitting the backspace key. The NYT pay wall is not exactly very much of a wall.

I wasn't commenting in any way on the paywall. Not sure why you quoted me. I was commenting on the large number of long posts this poster has made encouraging people to sign up for the NYT. It made me wonder if he was employed selling subscriptions to it or something. That's all.


I'm encouraging you to get the free damn account so you can read the article rather than being a moron and whining about how you have to sign up for an account. You do not have to pay them money to register.

I'm offended by the idiots, yourself included, who decided shiat on a thread because you were too stupid to figure out how to read an article and wanted to advertize that fact rather than, you know, reading and discussing the article. I explicitly told people how to get around the paywall- it I was shilling for the Times, would I have done that? Seriously, have you ever bothered using trying to use that brain thingy? I'm not a shill, I just hate that every thread attached to a NYT article turns into a bunch of slobbering morons talking about how they couldn't read it because they were either too paranoid to give out an e-mail address or were too pants on head retarded to figure out how to get around the paywall, despite simple instructions in the thread or on google.
 
Displayed 10 of 60 comments

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

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report