October 19, 2005

tha beacon

i don't know if this is old news to you people, or what, but does anybody else think it's hysterical that they routinely publish an entire magazine with like five articles in it? on glossy-ass expensive paper?

i don't know if this is on purpose or what, but it's such a performance of their entire worldview- "fuck yeah, we waste space. today i filled up half a page with a pull quote. why not? i can afford it. and the paper? this gloss is the finest gloss in all italy. we thought about newsprint, but it's so, you know, plebian. this is a fucking Magazine. we're fucking Professionals."

cause i'm a h-u-s-t-l-e hustla.
you'll never find a dime that ain't mine, mothafuckaaaa

10 comments:

  1. You're the last person who has a right to complain about wasting space.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Anonymous11:56 AM

    seriously way to waste all those trees in cyberspace

    ReplyDelete
  3. Anonymous12:28 PM

    Little Green Blog people - it appears that you're being spammed by what seems to be a potty-mouthed 16 year old.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Anonymous5:37 PM

    Seriously, what is this garbage? Is it an attempt to "move the center" and make Niral's more "out there" posts seem more intelligent and reasonable? Is it like the inclusion of Terry Bradshaw on the football broadcasts--an effort to show that LGB cares the "douchebag with a head injury" demographic? Is this Wukoson changing his screen name and dropping the "hey cons" catch phrase?

    ReplyDelete
  5. Anonymous5:52 PM

    I give this new guy a few days before he forgets this blog and seeks attention elsewhere.

    His posts are just weird and creepy.

    Is there A Little Green Blogger that will actually stick up for this guy? (don't chime in all at once)

    ReplyDelete
  6. sandbox referee9:08 PM

    I'm sorry if this gentleman's language offends you. His points, while rife with hyperbolic humor, stand as legitimate and often well-considered opinions. As a public blog created as open space for Dartmouth folks to air their political and social views, I should think this a perfectly appropriate venue for this sort of thing. The internet is a very large space -- there's no need to sling accusations of being worthy or unworthy of online publication. For the very reasons it is easy to post one's opinions online, those opinions should be met with a grain of salt, and for god's sake, if it offends your delicate sensibilities, move on. If you disagree, post entries you feel exemplify the ideal blog entry, don't spend your time quibbling over who ought to be allowed to speak freely in a public forum. Enjoy this blog for what it is, or find a better use for your time.

    ReplyDelete
  7. I'll stand up for Connor--I invited him. Like Sandbox Referee says (nice name, btw), his points are solid. It's your fault if you can't read around language that irritates you.

    I, for one, hope that Connor is going nowhere.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Anonymous9:08 AM

    Just thought I'd ask before "moving on." Sure, everyone's a winner on the internet, but one of the other good things about the internet is that readers can call crap what it is. LGB has the "right" to post whatever they want on the blog, just as I have the "right" to try to talk them out of posting this stuff.

    I suggest you replace this "connor" retard with some porn and cialis ads and at least profit from it if you're going to clutter your blog with this sort of thing.

    But of course, you're just as free to ignore my suggestion as I am to go elsewhere. Goodbye.

    ReplyDelete
  9. sandbox referee5:04 PM

    On an entirely personal note entirely aside from the content of this debate, I wish that people wouldn't use the word retard as an invective. English has a lexicon so rich in foul language, it's a shame when people resort to using the label of an entire class of people as an insult. I suppose there are all kinds of retarded people, good and bad alike, but most of the folks I know are fully decent human beings. It's no different than saying that this or that is gay (which additionally makes no literal sense) -- which sort of homosexual person are we comparing this thing to?

    Likewise, it's no different than derrogatorily calling someone a nigger based on racial stereotypes, although this seems to have fallen out of style. I suppose the homosexuals and the handicapped don't yet pose the same perceived social threat of retaliation that black people do. It's a cynical view, to be sure, but do people really believe that the bigots of the world have honestly learned to respect black people, or do they simply know that they no longer have society's backup should they choose to act on their racist impulses? Perhaps if someone with Down's Syndrome were to beat the snot out of a few bigots, they would begin to think twice about using the term retard to suggest incompetence. Is that the criterion for respect that we really want to set as a society?

    ReplyDelete