Dilbert loses newspapers, publishers, distributor, and possibly its website

[thm_w]

Woke outrage case just yesterday:
https://twitter.com/eevblog/status/1630361968099065857
Electroboom posted about how Canadian schools have apparently dropped geometry from the sylabus and he wasn't happy about it.
I sarcastically replied "Let me guess, they replaced it with a woke subject?" (because it actually has been huge news in Canada for many years now of this happening, that's the joke)
Electroboom then replied with a funny woke type quip.

You're free to post a joke, that part is fine.

Electroboom saying "I just realized x" without posting any proof or citation whatsoever, is deceptive and disingenuous. Now people are left thinking its a fact, while simultaneously stirring up outrage/whatever. This is an actual problem.

Its a bullshit statement, geometry is right there: https://curriculum.gov.bc.ca/curriculum/mathematics/12/geometry

[EEVblog]

Woke outrage case just yesterday:
https://twitter.com/eevblog/status/1630361968099065857
Electroboom posted about how Canadian schools have apparently dropped geometry from the sylabus and he wasn't happy about it.
I sarcastically replied "Let me guess, they replaced it with a woke subject?" (because it actually has been huge news in Canada for many years now of this happening, that's the joke)
Electroboom then replied with a funny woke type quip.

You're free to post a joke, that part is fine.

Electroboom saying "I just realized x" without posting any proof or citation whatsoever, is deceptive and disingenuous. Now people are left thinking its a fact, while simultaneously stirring up outrage/whatever. This is an actual problem.
Its a bullshit statement, geometry is right there: https://curriculum.gov.bc.ca/curriculum/mathematics/12/geometry

That's not the point. The point is they got triggered because the word woke was mentioned.

[james_s]

It's interesting to see how the use of the term "woke" is evolving.  A few years ago when "woke" hit the mainstream, the SJW-types were embracing the term, applying it proudly and self-righteously to whatever they were trying to do.  It was a badge of honor.

Now, whenever someone from the other side uses the "W" word, those same SJWs heap scorn and outrage, claiming that "woke" isn't a real thing, just something that the right-wing MAGA mob made up to be used as a slur.

[Yes, I know not everybody does this, but just over the past few days I've seen this in more than one editorial or commentary.]

And any time I think I'm just over-reacting, I merely have to read this from a few years ago (draft Seattle Schools K-12 Math Ethnic Studies Framework): https://www.k12.wa.us/sites/default/files/public/socialstudies/pubdocs/Math%20SDS%20ES%20Framework.pdf

I first remember noticing that phenomenon with "socialism", I remember hearing conservatives calling everything socialism, even things that had nothing to do with economics. Now I guess everything is woke, and on the left everything is racist. The problem with this of course is that when you apply a label to everything, it starts to mean nothing.

[EEVblog]

And any time I think I'm just over-reacting, I merely have to read this from a few years ago (draft Seattle Schools K-12 Math Ethnic Studies Framework): https://www.k12.wa.us/sites/default/files/public/socialstudies/pubdocs/Math%20SDS%20ES%20Framework.pdf

Ah, memories. I do believe that was the post at the time that spawned my infamous FX-Problematic calculator joke reply. Another thing that still gets used today to prove that I'm a racist, homophobic, transphobic, misoginist, bigoted, Trump MAGA loving, alt-right privledged cis white male nazi.
If you think I'm being hyperbolic, I'm not, I've been called all those things and piled-on because of a joke tweets in reply to woke stuff like this. And anyone who dared associate with me got attacked too.
Go look at any article on any electronics wesbite like Hackaday that dares mention me and you'll enevitably find comments saying "why are supporting this xxxx-ist xxxx-phobe?" 
They'll still be doing it 10 years time.

[Circlotron]

And any time I think I'm just over-reacting, I merely have to read this from a few years ago (draft Seattle Schools K-12 Math Ethnic Studies Framework): https://www.k12.wa.us/sites/default/files/public/socialstudies/pubdocs/Math%20SDS%20ES%20Framework.pdf

Who gets to say if an answer is right?

 

[vk6zgo]

I had noticed for years before all this hysteria arose, when nobody knew anything about Scott's political views,  that Dilbert was losing popularity, & didn't appear as often as before.

It happens with cartoons---they are trendy for a while, then fade.

Maybe his more recent pronouncements were an attempt to lift his profile above "that bloke who used to do this cartoon with the pointy haired boss --can't remember the name".

He might have picked up a few followers on the right side of the spectrum, but I doubt they will stay, as so-called "conservatives" are not into the wry humour of his older cartoons, being more of the "true believer" type

Re "the mob"---- I'm not on Twitter, but I have noticed with comments on MSN News that Right wingers outnumber "lefties" by about 5 or 6 to 1, totally out of proportion to their numbers in society.

Many "lefties" & a very few "righties" try to logically discuss the subject, but they are the ones that get told their comments "don't fit the guidelines".
It seems the platform really wants comments of the intellectual level of "Your Mother wears army boots", as they get more clicks.

On "Whirlpool" the same policy seems to exist, as I was banned on a particular board for "going off topic" when I tried to put people (both left & right) straight on their factual mistakes.
They very kindly offered to let me stay on the other fora, but I said "Up Yours" & left.

[thm_w]

That's not the point. The point is they got triggered because the word woke was mentioned.

Yes I get that point. Attacking you based on the use of the word is dumb.

But it also doesn't look great to not take a few seconds to verify, is what I am replying to a fact, or just a made up/clickbait statement to generate views?
Not saying thats the case here, but, may have been in other scenarios.

[EEVblog]

I had noticed for years before all this hysteria arose, when nobody knew anything about Scott's political views,  that Dilbert was losing popularity, & didn't appear as often as before.
It happens with cartoons---they are trendy for a while, then fade.
Maybe his more recent pronouncements were an attempt to lift his profile above "that bloke who used to do this cartoon with the pointy haired boss --can't remember the name".

If you've been watching his live shows for the last few years then you'll know that his goal is certainly not to get more Dilbert viewers. In fact everything he says he admits will alienate a lot of people.
He does it because he's got "screw you" money and wants to educate people on how society and the media works etc
Of course you can say its ego etc (which he readily admits), trying to prove how smart he is etc, and you likely wouldn't be wrong.
In the last 6 months or more he's been saying ever more provocative things to "test" the public, media and platforms to see if he can get "cancelled" or banned from Twitter or Youtube. And he's actually been disappointed that many of these test have failed. Looks like he finally hit on a winner.

All of this seems very bizzare to Joe Average, but it's obvious what he's doing if you follow him, especially the daily live shows (which have very interesting takes on the daily news BTW, where he filters the news through the lens of persuasion techniques and fake detection)

[EEVblog]

That's not the point. The point is they got triggered because the word woke was mentioned.

Yes I get that point. Attacking you based on the use of the word is dumb.
But it also doesn't look great to not take a few seconds to verify, is what I am replying to a fact, or just a made up/clickbait statement to generate views?
Not saying thats the case here, but, may have been in other scenarios.

Welcome to the world of Twitter.
Do you know how many times I tweet a day?
And I trust Medi wouldn't tweet something like that just for the clickbait views. He obviously thought it was true. I know he has a daughter in high school I think now, so maybe it's based on her experience.

[SL4P]

Dilbert held a mirror up to the evolution of tech/engineering workplaces.

As time passed, there were inevitably those who were exposed & offended by those revelations.  The other people that weren’t involved just had to be offended because that’s the 21st century method of validation.

Aslong as you read it tongue in cheek, it’s quite clever and funny.
If you think the strip is about you personally, there’s a chance you’re the problem, not the cartoon.

[fourfathom]

so-called "conservatives" are not into the wry humour of his older cartoons, being more of the "true believer" type

Really???  Or is this some of that "wry humour" that I' must not be into?

[vk6zgo]

And any time I think I'm just over-reacting, I merely have to read this from a few years ago (draft Seattle Schools K-12 Math Ethnic Studies Framework): https://www.k12.wa.us/sites/default/files/public/socialstudies/pubdocs/Math%20SDS%20ES%20Framework.pdf

Ah, memories. I do believe that was the post at the time that spawned my infamous FX-Problematic calculator joke reply. Another thing that still gets used today to prove that I'm a racist, homophobic, transphobic, misoginist, bigoted, Trump MAGA loving, alt-right privledged cis white male nazi.
If you think I'm being hyperbolic, I'm not, I've been called all those things and piled-on because of a joke tweets in reply to woke stuff like this. And anyone who dared associate with me got attacked too.
Go look at any article on any electronics wesbite like Hackaday that dares mention me and you'll enevitably find comments saying "why are supporting this xxxx-ist xxxx-phobe?" 
They'll still be doing it 10 years time.

Nah,Dave, you're none of that shit---you are a bit of a "rightie", but who gives a damn!

I have seen the mirror image of this, where a "rightie" posts some nonsense on a forum saying that "the ALP federal government are going to turn Australia into a Communist Dictatorship".

I comment that they are going about it in a very strange way, as like every other Federal govt, they only have the rest of their 3 years to do it!
The result is a barrage of abuse, calling me everything from a "fellow traveller" to a "union thug", with a lot of other crap in between.

Telling them they are dumb, usually is the trigger for the forum to refuse to add my comment.
At that point, I usually give up.

I have also had arguments with some "young" lefties who assume because I am old, I am sitting on millions.
Then there are, usually in the same threads, the self-satisfied twats who say I should have made a lot of money like them.

The more I see of social media, the more I despair of the intelligence of humans.

[joeqsmith]

...
I once posted a photo of a red cap with the message Make Electronics Great Again as a joke. And that was subsequently used (and continues to be used) by "the mob" in an attempt to cancel me and anyone associated with me as I mentioned previously.
...

Someone had posted a link at the top of this thread but the message was removed right away.  I don't have a twit account but sounds like the you or admins did not pull it. 

... social cues others perceive clearly are hard for me to discern.  Things like ethnicity and even gender are not obvious to me, and I just do not pay attention to such details because I do not care about such details: they have no value to me in the interaction I have with the other person.  And I do place high value in human-human interaction. 
...

I have a similar view.   It's all about what you bring to the table or in other words what you personally have to contribute.   I could care less about anything else. 

[james_s]

... social cues others perceive clearly are hard for me to discern.  Things like ethnicity and even gender are not obvious to me, and I just do not pay attention to such details because I do not care about such details: they have no value to me in the interaction I have with the other person.  And I do place high value in human-human interaction. 
...

I have a similar view.   It's all about what you bring to the table or in other words what you personally have to contribute.   I could care less about anything else.

I think that's true of a lot of people really, but we aren't the ones making all the noise. Gender is only of interest to me in the context of dating/romance. Outside of that I can't really think of a situation where I'd care. Ethnicity is only interesting as far as learning about a place or culture I'm not familiar with, otherwise it too is irrelevant.

[EEVblog]

Nah,Dave, you're none of that shit---you are a bit of a "rightie", but who gives a damn!

No actually, I consider myself left wing, as in old school left wing.
At one point in my life I would have been considered far or even extreme left.
But because the overton window shifted and the "left" has now gone batshit crazy, I'm still standing in the same place I always have politically, but now I'm constantly called "right" or "alt-right" for holding the exact same values.
These days I'd be closest to what you'd call a classical center liberal. And not Liberal in the Australian meaning of it, as in liberal party. For those outside Australia, the "Liberal party" here is the right wing christian conservative party, roughly equivalent to the US Rupublican party.

[EEVblog]

...
I once posted a photo of a red cap with the message Make Electronics Great Again as a joke. And that was subsequently used (and continues to be used) by "the mob" in an attempt to cancel me and anyone associated with me as I mentioned previously.
...

Someone had posted a link at the top of this thread but the message was removed right away.  I don't have a twit account but sounds like the you or admins did not pull it. 

Wasn't me.

[tom66]

Conservative is actually 30% as I understand. But that's not what is on the opposite side for the radical left. The ultranationalists are really fringe in numbers, almost insignificant. I like to think of the political views as a circle, where the radical left and right are right next to each other. Bigger issue is that people seem to not even have a basic understanding of political views.

The horseshoe theory. I made this same observation quite a few years before I had a name for it. The far left and far right are diametrically opposed and yet nearly indistinguishable from each other in their behavior. A lot like the north and south poles of a magnet I suppose. You'd never know the difference without having an opposing pole to see how it reacts.

It's bollocks, I'm afraid. 

Radical right wing wants: religious supremacy (often), radical policies on immigration ("build the wall" and so on), an entirely free market with no controls, as little government as possible. 

Radical left wing wants: any religion or none (not usually specified), open borders (varies), a controlled market which is centrally planned, maximal governmental involvement.

I think it is hard to say that those two ends are equal in any significant manner.

Are they similarly rabid?  Sure.  Can they use similar techniques (violence, intimidation, protest, authoritianism) to get their way?  Sure.  But they definitely are quite distinct groups, even at the surface level, with a diametric opposition in many areas.

[james_s]

It's bollocks, I'm afraid. 

Radical right wing wants: religious supremacy (often), radical policies on immigration ("build the wall" and so on), an entirely free market with no controls, as little government as possible. 

Radical left wing wants: any religion or none (not usually specified), open borders (varies), a controlled market which is centrally planned, maximal governmental involvement.

I think it is hard to say that those two ends are equal in any significant manner.

Are they similarly rabid?  Sure.  Can they use similar techniques (violence, intimidation, protest, authoritianism) to get their way?  Sure.  But they definitely are quite distinct groups, even at the surface level, with a diametric opposition in many areas.

You're missing the point I'm afraid. They both want different things but they both behave identically. They both want religious supremacy, the left's religion is primarily atheism, but it's a religion for all practical purposes. I can't prove there is no god any more than someone else can prove there is, it's a belief either way. Both sides want to control your life, both sides think they are clearly right and everyone else is clearly wrong, both have similar double standards, both are blindly idealistic and inflexible. I find both to be intolerable and want nothing to do with either one. Perhaps the biggest difference is the far right mostly keeps to themselves and has no real power, while the far left is very much mainstream and has become incredibly powerful thus I see them as a greater threat, even though I am closer to the left than the right.

[newbrain]

atheism, but it's a religion for all practical purposes.

This is simply bollocks. 
It's like saying that the absence of any ailment is an illness in itself.
Or (on the converse, to give a non-negative example) that the absence of any virtue is a virtue in itself.
But there are some atheistic religions, I'll concede that.

[daqq]

Nah,Dave, you're none of that shit---you are a bit of a "rightie", but who gives a damn!

No actually, I consider myself left wing, as in old school left wing.
At one point in my life I would have been considered far or even extreme left.
But because the overton window shifted and the "left" has now gone batshit crazy, I'm still standing in the same place I always have politically, but now I'm constantly called "right" or "alt-right" for holding the exact same values.
These days I'd be closest to what you'd call a classical center liberal. And not Liberal in the Australian meaning of it, as in liberal party. For those outside Australia, the "Liberal party" here is the right wing christian conservative party, roughly equivalent to the US Rupublican party.

I think this one sums up your (and many others) situation: https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/my-fellow-liberal

[Circlotron]

atheism, but it's a religion for all practical purposes.

This is simply bollocks. 

Plenty of atheists have pledged allegiance to a flag, an inanimate material object, and what it represents, and more importantly, died for it. And quite a few flags appear to have religious symbols on them. The Union Jack for example has the crosses of three saints. That sounds like idolatry, plain and simple. So I'd say that degree of devotion has some of the hallmarks of religion. Not devotion to a deity, but religion nonetheless.

[EEVblog]

Radical right wing wants: religious supremacy (often), radical policies on immigration ("build the wall" and so on), an entirely free market with no controls, as little government as possible. 

Every US president for the last 25 years starting from Bill Clinton has "built the wall", including Biden.

[EEVblog]

I think this one sums up your (and many others) situation: https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/my-fellow-liberal

Yes, 100% accurate.

[tom66]

Radical right wing wants: religious supremacy (often), radical policies on immigration ("build the wall" and so on), an entirely free market with no controls, as little government as possible. 

Every US president for the last 25 years starting from Bill Clinton has "built the wall", including Biden.

Build-the-wall as in Trump's rhetoric on immigration rather than functional anti-immigration policy.  Trump was definitely the most publicly anti-immigration, even if his policies did not have a great effect.

Besides, the US political system is "far-right to right-wing" (Republican) or "right-wing to centre-right" (Democrat).  There are very few mainstream left-wing politicians in the US, if we use the academic definition of left-wing.  (You could apply some kind of political relativism if you want but I don't think it's really sensible because it makes it difficult to compare with other countries).

[EEVblog]

Every US president for the last 25 years starting from Bill Clinton has "built the wall", including Biden.

Build-the-wall as in Trump's rhetoric on immigration rather than functional anti-immigration policy.  Trump was definitely the most publicly anti-immigration, even if his policies did not have a great effect.

Building a wall and securing your border should have nothing to do with immigration policy. A wall is to stop people illegally entering your country. "illegal immigration" is not the same as immigration. No sane immigration policy formally includes illegal immigration. This is why all US presidents, either Democrat or Republican have helped "build the wall".
Clinton (D) started it. George.W (R) built some. Obama (D) built more the 100miles of it. Trump (R) built the most I think at 400 miles or something. Biden (D) built some, but was the most reluctant.