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.

(io9)   In 1978 we launched a probe deep into space. After twenty years it was supposed to shut down. It didn't. Now it's back, ostensibly looking for its creator   (io9.com) divider line 84
    More: Interesting, investigation, shut downs  
•       •       •

8095 clicks; posted to Geek » on 17 Apr 2014 at 2:17 AM (49 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-04-16 11:34:32 PM  
Jackson Roy Kirk?
 
2014-04-17 12:19:41 AM  
Sounds like a trap.
 
2014-04-17 01:26:38 AM  
fta The story begins in 1978, when we launched a probe deep into space. Almost twenty years later, that probe was supposed to shut down.

But it didn't.


Farkin' NASA eggheads don't know when to quit
 
2014-04-17 01:29:04 AM  
Daisy, Daisy, give me your answer do.......
 
2014-04-17 02:42:53 AM  
They can't afford $125K at NASA
 
2014-04-17 02:48:53 AM  
If we don't have the technology to communicate with this probe anymore, then how the fark do we know it's still functioning?
 
2014-04-17 02:49:13 AM  
The satellite was hijacked by Robert Farquhar and he set it on a route that would bring it back after these many years.

Damned fine navigation skills if I do say so, but still ... hijacked satellite that isn't even mentioned by the io9 article.
 
2014-04-17 02:50:05 AM  

drjekel_mrhyde: They can't afford $125K at NASA


Not anymore.

That's what happens when you let Republicans vote on science.
 
2014-04-17 02:54:01 AM  
Where is it!??!

What a useless farking article -- no mention of where the spacecraft is, what it's doing out there and what its mission is, or even why its lifespan has long exceeded the length of the original mission. Come on, details, TFA writer.
 
2014-04-17 02:57:24 AM  
http://www.planetary.org/blogs/emily-lakdawalla/2014/02070836-isee-3.h tml
 
2014-04-17 02:59:48 AM  
First, it was hardly launched 'deep' into space. Second, those are some shiatty donation rewards. Hell, for the $3500 I gave, I could have been an extra in the Veronica Mars movie.
 
2014-04-17 03:08:07 AM  

Notabunny: fta The story begins in 1978, when we launched a probe deep into space. Almost twenty years later, that probe was supposed to shut down.

But it didn't.

Farkin' NASA eggheads don't know when to quit


Told you they were nerdcore.
 
2014-04-17 03:09:46 AM  

Ishkur: Where is it!??!

What a useless farking article -- no mention of where the spacecraft is, what it's doing out there and what its mission is, or even why its lifespan has long exceeded the length of the original mission. Come on, details, TFA writer.


details always seem sketchy for kickstarter scams.
 
2014-04-17 03:20:00 AM  

Weatherkiss: If we don't have the technology to communicate with this probe anymore, then how the fark do we know it's still functioning?


Pinky wave.
 
2014-04-17 03:34:11 AM  

Ghryswald: The satellite was hijacked by Robert Farquhar and he set it on a route that would bring it back after these many years.

Damned fine navigation skills if I do say so, but still ... hijacked satellite that isn't even mentioned by the io9 article.


I thought this was the one sent to check Haley's comet. You know, the one we've had an article or two on.
 
2014-04-17 03:37:54 AM  
In the year 1978, at the John F. Kennedy Space Center, NASA launched the last of America's Sun/Earth Explorer satellites. The payload, perched on the nosecone of the NASA rocket, was an unmanned exploration vessel: ISEE-3. This compact satellite was to experience cosmic mischief beyond all comprehension: an awesome brush with death. In the blink of an eye, its thrusters were activated by agents beyond imagination. ISEE-3 was blown out of its planned trajectory into an orbit a thousand times more vast, an orbit which was to return the ship full circle to its point of origin, its mother Earth, not in three months...but in 30 years.
 
2014-04-17 03:41:57 AM  

Weatherkiss: If we don't have the technology to communicate with this probe anymore, then how the fark do we know it's still functioning?


The bald Indian chick, silly.
 
Al!
2014-04-17 04:42:35 AM  

drjekel_mrhyde: They can't afford $125K at NASA


Correct.  It seems like you'd be surprised to learn that the science budget was miniscule before the cuts that have taken place, but it was.  I always like to refer to the Apollo program for budget comparisons: adjusted for inflation, it cost upwards of $130B to fund the program that sent man to the moon.  According to researchers, that program yielded over 30% return on investment (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budget_of_NASA#Economic_impact_of_NASA_ fu nding)  That return was realized in the economy, not at NASA.
 
2014-04-17 04:50:31 AM  

Al!: drjekel_mrhyde: They can't afford $125K at NASA

Correct.  It seems like you'd be surprised to learn that the science budget was miniscule before the cuts that have taken place, but it was.  I always like to refer to the Apollo program for budget comparisons: adjusted for inflation, it cost upwards of $130B to fund the program that sent man to the moon.  According to researchers, that program yielded over 30% return on investment (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budget_of_NASA#Economic_impact_of_NASA_ fu nding)  That return was realized in the economy, not at NASA.


The thing is, that whole affair was largely about teabagging the Russians. SpaceX is the far wiser investment. That being the case, I expect the FedGov to eventually swoop in and claim it for national security purposes. See: Weyland-Yutani. Which explains their utter incompetence.
 
Al!
2014-04-17 05:30:29 AM  

robohobo: Al!: drjekel_mrhyde: They can't afford $125K at NASA

Correct.  It seems like you'd be surprised to learn that the science budget was miniscule before the cuts that have taken place, but it was.  I always like to refer to the Apollo program for budget comparisons: adjusted for inflation, it cost upwards of $130B to fund the program that sent man to the moon.  According to researchers, that program yielded over 30% return on investment (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budget_of_NASA#Economic_impact_of_NASA_ fu nding)  That return was realized in the economy, not at NASA.

The thing is, that whole affair was largely about teabagging the Russians. SpaceX is the far wiser investment. That being the case, I expect the FedGov to eventually swoop in and claim it for national security purposes. See: Weyland-Yutani. Which explains their utter incompetence.


My point was the tiny budget yielding huge returns.  That $130B+ number was over 13 years.  Sure it was sticking it to our geopolitical competition, but regardless of the reasons it was a net gain for the US.
 
2014-04-17 05:37:13 AM  

Al!: robohobo: Al!: drjekel_mrhyde: They can't afford $125K at NASA

Correct.  It seems like you'd be surprised to learn that the science budget was miniscule before the cuts that have taken place, but it was.  I always like to refer to the Apollo program for budget comparisons: adjusted for inflation, it cost upwards of $130B to fund the program that sent man to the moon.  According to researchers, that program yielded over 30% return on investment (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budget_of_NASA#Economic_impact_of_NASA_ fu nding)  That return was realized in the economy, not at NASA.

The thing is, that whole affair was largely about teabagging the Russians. SpaceX is the far wiser investment. That being the case, I expect the FedGov to eventually swoop in and claim it for national security purposes. See: Weyland-Yutani. Which explains their utter incompetence.

My point was the tiny budget yielding huge returns.  That $130B+ number was over 13 years.  Sure it was sticking it to our geopolitical competition, but regardless of the reasons it was a net gain for the US.


Totally, I wasn't disagreeing. I still think SpaceX is the better investment. No design by committee bullshiat, far less politics getting in the way.
 
2014-04-17 06:03:07 AM  

Weatherkiss: If we don't have the technology to communicate with this probe anymore, then how the fark do we know it's still functioning?


It's possible that we are able to receive a signal from it without being able to send a signal to it.  We have pretty big receivers here on earth but the probe doesn't.

/we also have bigger transmitters too
//so what do I know?
///three slashies
 
2014-04-17 06:04:43 AM  
Obligatory;

imgs.xkcd.com
 
2014-04-17 06:07:46 AM  

Victoly: In the year 1978, at the John F. Kennedy Space Center, NASA launched the last of America's Sun/Earth Explorer satellites. The payload, perched on the nosecone of the NASA rocket, was an unmanned exploration vessel: ISEE-3. This compact satellite was to experience cosmic mischief beyond all comprehension: an awesome brush with death. In the blink of an eye, its thrusters were activated by agents beyond imagination. ISEE-3 was blown out of its planned trajectory into an orbit a thousand times more vast, an orbit which was to return the ship full circle to its point of origin, its mother Earth, not in three months...but in 30 years.


/Sees what you did there.....and LOVES it.
 
2014-04-17 06:17:29 AM  

doglover: drjekel_mrhyde: They can't afford $125K at NASA

Not anymore.

That's what happens when you let Republicans vote on science.


I'm sorry, but it was Obama who has been gutting the NASA budget for years and changed its purpose to muslim outreach.

All of those vacations, food stamps, "stimulus" dollars, and failed solar plant investments have to get their money from somewhere.
 
2014-04-17 06:26:47 AM  

92myrtle: miked1883: doglover: drjekel_mrhyde: They can't afford $125K at NASA

Not anymore.

That's what happens when you let Republicans vote on science.

I'm sorry, but it was Obama who has been gutting the NASA budget for years and changed its purpose to muslim outreach.

All of those vacations, food stamps, "stimulus" dollars, and failed solar plant investments have to get their money from somewhere.


You, sir, are facerapingly stupid.


Facts are difficult things to deal with, I know. Just take a deep breath, and it will all be ok. There is absolutely no doubt that Obama considers the NASA budget to be a very low priority compared to all sorts of other questionable things that his administration spends money on.

I just can't believe that the farklibs, in spite of the overwhelming evidence of how much Obama has eviscerated NASA, they just can't help themselves and have to blame those "evil republicans".
 
2014-04-17 06:42:46 AM  

Victoly: In the year 1978, at the John F. Kennedy Space Center, NASA launched the last of America's Sun/Earth Explorer satellites. The payload, perched on the nosecone of the NASA rocket, was an unmanned exploration vessel: ISEE-3. This compact satellite was to experience cosmic mischief beyond all comprehension: an awesome brush with death. In the blink of an eye, its thrusters were activated by agents beyond imagination. ISEE-3 was blown out of its planned trajectory into an orbit a thousand times more vast, an orbit which was to return the ship full circle to its point of origin, its mother Earth, not in three months...but in 30 years.


/ golf clap
 
2014-04-17 06:52:45 AM  

92myrtle: miked1883: 92myrtle: miked1883: doglover: drjekel_mrhyde: They can't afford $125K at NASA

Not anymore.

That's what happens when you let Republicans vote on science.

I'm sorry, but it was Obama who has been gutting the NASA budget for years and changed its purpose to muslim outreach.

All of those vacations, food stamps, "stimulus" dollars, and failed solar plant investments have to get their money from somewhere.


You, sir, are facerapingly stupid.

Facts are difficult things to deal with, I know. Just take a deep breath, and it will all be ok. There is absolutely no doubt that Obama considers the NASA budget to be a very low priority compared to all sorts of other questionable things that his administration spends money on.

I just can't believe that the farklibs, in spite of the overwhelming evidence of how much Obama has eviscerated NASA, they just can't help themselves and have to blame those "evil republicans".


That's not all you said, you facerapingly stupid and racist man.


Racist? .... hold on, let me stop laughing ... Racist?

Are you saying I'm racist because I'm quoting the NASA chief's comment to Al Jazeera about his foremost charge from Obama to make muslims feel good about themselves?

Or are you saying I'm racist because of "dog whistle" words like food stamps? Those same food stamps who have had their usage increase by 70% under Obama?

Spoken like a true farker. When in doubt, throw out the race card. Pathetic.
 
2014-04-17 06:55:47 AM  

Ginnungagap42: Victoly: In the year 1978, at the John F. Kennedy Space Center, NASA launched the last of America's Sun/Earth Explorer satellites. The payload, perched on the nosecone of the NASA rocket, was an unmanned exploration vessel: ISEE-3. This compact satellite was to experience cosmic mischief beyond all comprehension: an awesome brush with death. In the blink of an eye, its thrusters were activated by agents beyond imagination. ISEE-3 was blown out of its planned trajectory into an orbit a thousand times more vast, an orbit which was to return the ship full circle to its point of origin, its mother Earth, not in three months...but in 30 years.

/ golf clap


I`m always amazed by the fact that simply going off course allowed his craft to function for 500 years and keep him alive instead of killing him when the batteries ran out.

boogieboogieboogie
 
2014-04-17 06:56:43 AM  

miked1883: doglover: drjekel_mrhyde: They can't afford $125K at NASA

Not anymore.

That's what happens when you let Republicans vote on science.

I'm sorry, but it was Obama who has been gutting the NASA budget for years and changed its purpose to muslim outreach.

All of those vacations, food stamps, "stimulus" dollars, and failed solar plant investments have to get their money from somewhere.


While your post is, in fact, facerapingly stupid, the Obama administration certainly isn't doing NASA any favors.
 
2014-04-17 06:58:35 AM  

miked1883: 92myrtle: miked1883: 92myrtle: miked1883: doglover: drjekel_mrhyde: They can't afford $125K at NASA

Not anymore.

That's what happens when you let Republicans vote on science.

I'm sorry, but it was Obama who has been gutting the NASA budget for years and changed its purpose to muslim outreach.

All of those vacations, food stamps, "stimulus" dollars, and failed solar plant investments have to get their money from somewhere.


You, sir, are facerapingly stupid.

Facts are difficult things to deal with, I know. Just take a deep breath, and it will all be ok. There is absolutely no doubt that Obama considers the NASA budget to be a very low priority compared to all sorts of other questionable things that his administration spends money on.

I just can't believe that the farklibs, in spite of the overwhelming evidence of how much Obama has eviscerated NASA, they just can't help themselves and have to blame those "evil republicans".


That's not all you said, you facerapingly stupid and racist man.

Racist? .... hold on, let me stop laughing ... Racist?

Are you saying I'm racist because I'm quoting the NASA chief's comment to Al Jazeera about his foremost charge from Obama to make muslims feel good about themselves?

Or are you saying I'm racist because of "dog whistle" words like food stamps? Those same food stamps who have had their usage increase by 70% under Obama?

Spoken like a true farker. When in doubt, throw out the race card. Pathetic.


Quoting a quote does not stop that quote from being racist. Choosing to quote a racist quote and repeat the message it sends makes YOU a racist.

I have tried to use short words so maybe you will know what they are.

You really do seem facerapingly stupid and racist
 
2014-04-17 07:06:47 AM  
All you wanna-be science biatches are so willing to accept anything the government and media tell you.  We never launched any probes in to deep space, or walked on the moon, etc....it is impossible to even get past the Van Allen belt.   You are taking everything they tell you on faith, which we all know is ridiculous.
 
2014-04-17 07:12:56 AM  
So me linking to a youtube video of Obama's NASA chief talking about his foremost goal being muslim outreach makes me a racist? Ok ...

Race has absolutely nothing to do with any of this. I'm making the point that Obama's priorities, specifically concerning NASA, are clearly not aligned with improving humanity's goal of space exploration and research.

The entire reason why I even bothered to post in this thread is because doglover biatching that NASA can't afford $125k because of Republicans. Talk about derailing a thread with baseless political bullshiat.

So, I just want to get this straight. Linking to articles, quoting government officials, and stating your arguments is no longer allowed on Fark if it happens to be against a democrat president or in any way mentions non-whites. Great way to foster discussion guys. Throw the race card every time someone doesn't agree with you. Thats the new American way.

I don't watch Fox & Friends, I'm up early working. Again, someone has to pay for all of those food stamps.
 
2014-04-17 07:19:30 AM  
I eagerly await the arrival of the naked space vampires
 
2014-04-17 07:29:10 AM  

miked1883: So me linking to a youtube video of Obama's NASA chief talking about his foremost goal being muslim outreach makes me a racist? Ok ...

Race has absolutely nothing to do with any of this. I'm making the point that Obama's priorities, specifically concerning NASA, are clearly not aligned with improving humanity's goal of space exploration and research.

The entire reason why I even bothered to post in this thread is because doglover biatching that NASA can't afford $125k because of Republicans. Talk about derailing a thread with baseless political bullshiat.

So, I just want to get this straight. Linking to articles, quoting government officials, and stating your arguments is no longer allowed on Fark if it happens to be against a democrat president or in any way mentions non-whites. Great way to foster discussion guys. Throw the race card every time someone doesn't agree with you. Thats the new American way.

I don't watch Fox & Friends, I'm up early working. Again, someone has to pay for all of those food stamps.


He's right. Even though this is fark you can't say we can't afford 125k because republicans and not expect someone to call your bs.

Of course, calling him names fixes all that. Well played.
 
2014-04-17 08:10:06 AM  
The only troll in this thread is you, son. Only on fark can you be called a racist for quoting, linking to a story, and posting a farking youtube clip of a government official's own words in a NASA thread.

As for my "flame bait" commentary, stop being such a baby and getting your panties in a twist. Last time I checked, you were still allowed to voice your opinion in a way to intentionally agitate your political opponents. God knows you guys do it all the time on this site. It clearly worked on you.

I'm headed to the office to continue earning money and paying for your food stamps. Enjoy your day and you're welcome.
 
2014-04-17 08:15:10 AM  
My probe is back and you're gonna be in trouble
Hey la, hey la, my probe is back

/maybe an earworm will derail the troll thread in progress
 
2014-04-17 08:20:13 AM  

miked1883: I'm headed to the office to continue earning money and paying for your food stamps. Enjoy your day and you're welcome.


Do you have to be there in 26 minutes?
 
2014-04-17 08:26:14 AM  

Egoy3k: Weatherkiss: If we don't have the technology to communicate with this probe anymore, then how the fark do we know it's still functioning?

It's possible that we are able to receive a signal from it without being able to send a signal to it.  We have pretty big receivers here on earth but the probe doesn't.

/we also have bigger transmitters too
//so what do I know?
///three slashies


It's easy to hear a signal and decide what spacecraft it is coming from based upon both the characteristics of the transmission (frequency, doppler shift, modulation type, etc.), and from where the signal is coming from.

It's harder to go back and send it commands if you don't have the original equipment to do so.  Some of that can be mitigated through software (modulation of the transmitted signal, for instance), but if it's receiving in a band you no longer use to transmit to spacecraft, then you'll have to build a whole new transmitter and integrate it into existing antenna sites.

Plus, if you don't have all the documentation necessary to write the software to communicate with it, you're largely stuck.

You might be able to write the software necessary to receive the signal, but that's not necessarily the same as needed to transmit back to it.
 
2014-04-17 08:27:01 AM  
miked1883:

The entire reason why I even bothered to post in this thread is because doglover biatching that NASA can't afford $125k because of Republicans. Talk about derailing a thread with baseless political bullshiat.

A NASA authorization bill  drafted by the Republican majority of the House Committee on Science, Space and Technology proposes to slash NASA's funding to $16.6 billion for 2014 - $300 million less than it received in 2013, and $1.1 billion less than. The bill - which authorizes spending levels but provides no actual funding - would roll back NASA's funding to a level $1.2 billion less than its 2012 budget.

http://www.space.com/22023-nasa-authorization-bill-debate.html
 
2014-04-17 08:30:25 AM  

turboke: miked1883: I'm headed to the office to continue earning money and paying for your food stamps. Enjoy your day and you're welcome.

Do you have to be there in 26 minutes?


http://www.fark.com/comments/7829092/85205404#c85205404
 
2014-04-17 08:31:49 AM  

miked1883: 92myrtle: miked1883: 92myrtle: miked1883: doglover: drjekel_mrhyde: They can't afford $125K at NASA

Not anymore.

That's what happens when you let Republicans vote on science.

I'm sorry, but it was Obama who has been gutting the NASA budget for years and changed its purpose to muslim outreach.

All of those vacations, food stamps, "stimulus" dollars, and failed solar plant investments have to get their money from somewhere.


You, sir, are facerapingly stupid.

Facts are difficult things to deal with, I know. Just take a deep breath, and it will all be ok. There is absolutely no doubt that Obama considers the NASA budget to be a very low priority compared to all sorts of other questionable things that his administration spends money on.

I just can't believe that the farklibs, in spite of the overwhelming evidence of how much Obama has eviscerated NASA, they just can't help themselves and have to blame those "evil republicans".


That's not all you said, you facerapingly stupid and racist man.

Racist? .... hold on, let me stop laughing ... Racist?

Are you saying I'm racist because I'm quoting the NASA chief's comment to Al Jazeera about his foremost charge from Obama to make muslims feel good about themselves?

Or are you saying I'm racist because of "dog whistle" words like food stamps? Those same food stamps who have had their usage increase by 70% under Obama?

Spoken like a true farker. When in doubt, throw out the race card. Pathetic.


So, You summarized some of the history of the budget related events surrounding NASA, and how some of the insiders reacted to the events. You didn't make anything up, so your detractors had to ignore the facts and attack you personally.  You are now being attacked by typical Fark herp-a-derp name calling.

You can't win this one. People on Fark actually believe that ANY criticism of the current president is never founded in anything but racism.  I thought this was hyperbole, but that exact position was put forth openly in thread 8026836.  I kid you not.

They actually believe this.  This president can not possibly in any way immaginable ever do anything even slightly less than perfect.  Do not ever try to be rational with people that hold this position.  It is like mentioning evolution in Kansas.
 
2014-04-17 08:33:24 AM  
Tricky Chicken:

So, You summarized some of the history of the budget related events surrounding NASA,

Which budget related events surrounding NASA where summarized?  Please be specific.
 
2014-04-17 08:35:18 AM  
BTW, this is yet another thing hams pioneered:   AMSAT-OSCAR 7, a ham radio satellite, was launched in 1974, and after 7 years of service, it died in orbit in 1981.

Then, in 2002, it "came back to life".  Apparently it originally died when a battery failed, preventing electrical current from the solar panels from powering the satellite, but over time the chemistry in the battery changed from an open failure to a short, and that let current flow once again.  So now, whenever it's in sunlight, AO-7, launched nearly 40 years ago, is still alive and able to be used for communications.
 
2014-04-17 08:37:45 AM  
miked1883:

I'm sorry, but it was Obama who has been gutting the NASA budget for years and changed its purpose to muslim outreach.

The article you referenced shows a 5% cut in budget.  Is that what you consider 'gutting' NASA?  If so, you threshold seems a little low.
 
2014-04-17 08:38:53 AM  

miked1883: Facts are difficult things to deal with, I know


See the bolded word? This is just one of the places where you went wrong.
 
2014-04-17 08:41:43 AM  

notto: Tricky Chicken:

So, You summarized some of the history of the budget related events surrounding NASA,

Which budget related events surrounding NASA where summarized?  Please be specific.


I wasn't talking to you.

But, Let me cut to the chase for you.

I have disagreed with this president on occasion.
By Fark logic I am therefore by definition a racist.

Happy now.
 
2014-04-17 08:46:32 AM  

Victoly: In the year 1978, at the John F. Kennedy Space Center, NASA launched the last of America's Sun/Earth Explorer satellites. The payload, perched on the nosecone of the NASA rocket, was an unmanned exploration vessel: ISEE-3. This compact satellite was to experience cosmic mischief beyond all comprehension: an awesome brush with death. In the blink of an eye, its thrusters were activated by agents beyond imagination. ISEE-3 was blown out of its planned trajectory into an orbit a thousand times more vast, an orbit which was to return the ship full circle to its point of origin, its mother Earth, not in three months...but in 30 years.


Isn't that the opening to Buck Rogers?
 
2014-04-17 08:49:07 AM  

Tricky Chicken: notto: Tricky Chicken:

So, You summarized some of the history of the budget related events surrounding NASA,

Which budget related events surrounding NASA where summarized?  Please be specific.

I wasn't talking to you.

But, Let me cut to the chase for you.

I have disagreed with this president on occasion.
By Fark logic I am therefore by definition a racist.

Happy now.


If you are really concerned about the NASA budget maybe you should donate that amazing deflector dish you seem to be using.
 
2014-04-17 09:07:17 AM  

92myrtle: Tricky Chicken: notto: Tricky Chicken:

So, You summarized some of the history of the budget related events surrounding NASA,

Which budget related events surrounding NASA where summarized?  Please be specific.

I wasn't talking to you.

But, Let me cut to the chase for you.

I have disagreed with this president on occasion.
By Fark logic I am therefore by definition a racist.

Happy now.


That's true.  You are one of the more multi-dimensional trolls around here, capable of the same asshattery on many wide and varied topic.  But cheers for also being an early-riser.

http://www.google.com/search?q=%22Tricky+Chicken%22+site%3A+FARK.co m& ie=UTF-8


Ahhhh, but my asshattery is generally consistent, so I reject your use of the term 'troll' as inconsistent with my use of the term.  I consider someone a troll if they advance a position they do not actually hold solely to 'troll' a response.  I assure you that my positions are generally consistent over time on most issues.  Allowing for some issues where my position has changed over time (e.g. Capital punishment).

Just because I disagree with you, does not make me a troll.
 
Displayed 50 of 84 comments

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

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is 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