Black Lives Matter – Devil’s Advocate

Time to get this show on the road. Last week I took a break because people committed enough levels of idiocy that my pain meds were not wiping it out, so I just decided to take a nap instead of dealing with the immoral brainless spineless wastes of humanity. Sometimes people need to take a break from the things that make us want to go completely super villain, make a base and start robbing banks in a green tuxedo as the next Riddler.

Now while I go start making a question mark cane Let me start off with Black Lives Matter because Black Lives Matter has failed to set out and really do what they wanted. They have caused more damage for the violent machinations then as a supposed tolerant activist group they wish to portray.

Now, I do not agree with the group but I have conversations with many members trying to glean a little bit of knowledge and try to see it from their side and as a man from the San Francisco branch had noted that there were problems with the group.

I was wondering what to do with the BLM thing because as a group they have not succeeded in their mission and that would make them a failure in this case. They have a lot of problems, but you know what this week it will be a two for one. This is the Devil’s Advocate on the BLM. Now I could just rip the Blm movement to shreds and after the whole incident with the police and the riots in Baltimore it would be easy but we are not going to do that.

The reason would be because BLM still has all the tools to be a success, and sometimes you fail a few times before getting the win so let us take a look at their list of demands or their targets within their policy or bucket list for the group, list of goals, however you want to cut it this is what they want and let us see if we can do some things about it. Starting at the main page of their policy.

“Black humanity and dignity require black political will and power. In response to the sustained and increasingly visible violence against Black communities in the U.S. and globally, a collective of more than 50 organizations representing thousands of Black people from across the country has come together with renewed energy and purpose to articulate a common vision and agenda. We are a collective that centers and are rooted in Black communities, but we recognize we have a shared struggle with all oppressed people; collective liberation will be a product of all of our work.”

Here is my first problem if you are going to come out of the gate swinging bring some factual ammo. Visible violence, unfortunately, is incorrect as if we go to the first source we see that not only with the growth of black lives matter that hate crime victimization has not shown “Significant difference” from their report in 2004. It also shows that the victims of racial violence are not majority black, in fact, both whites and Hispanic have more hate crime victimization in some cases almost two to one in the case of Hispanic and four to one in the terms of white people being the victim of these hate crimes. So this mission statement has been proven factually incorrect because it also has shown that black violence is not increasing in fact only the Hispanic community had to deal with a major increase. I guess the Hispanic community does not matter to black humanity because these numbers are pretty bad.
https://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/hcv0415.pdf

Let us get to the policy. It is split into six parts and we will jump through them to see what we have the first was marked under “End the War On Black People” First we need to prove a war before we end it, but they may have info as well inside. I am going to be doing the abridged version here but I have the links here so you can check me.

https://policy.m4bl.org/end-war-on-black-people/
The first one is to “end the criminalization of black political activity” Considering we just had black people in most of the major positions in politics I am calling this bull shit. Either there is a war within the black culture or you are clearly mental. So number one is a big no. Numbers 2-5 are admirable and do not seem to show a major problem. Protection and increased funding for black institutions including Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCU’s), Black media and cultural, political and social formations. That is clearly a problem because we do not have racially selective institutions except for black ones and if anyone would like to show me an alternative with as much reach as the BET then I would love to take a look, but until then, Race is not a debit card for money to push race, that is stupid and should not be done, and those who think that is should spit in the face of other people’s whose different cultures and experience are cast off by this sort of action. This is the sort of thing that is exclusive, you cannot be exclusive, movements need people or you will not be moving much further. 2 out of 5 so far are toxic. Not bad, but not a good ratio.

Reparations are next of the six main categories which basically boil down that they legislation “at them federal and state level that requires the United States to acknowledge the lasting impacts of slavery, establish and execute a plan to address those impacts. This includes the immediate passage of H.R 40”

H.R. 40 requests a federal commission to study slavery and its impact on descendants of slaves today, including the role of the Federal and State governments. It further requests that the commission makes recommendations based on its finding, including an apology to descendants of slaves and reparations. It requests $8 million for the commission but does not specifically call for the development of heritage sites or monuments.

On the basis of this law, fuck you. Apologies do not come because somewhere in your family something bad happened, you do not get to be special for that and really it is sad that you find your lives was pitiful that an apology for those who are not here is all you want. Also addressing the other parts of this section. You do not get full and free access to high-quality educational opportunities for all black people. That is disgusting, you sick freaks. Free education on your skin color, retroactive forgiveness of student loans for black students is not a something that will help your cause it will be something that makes you look like the bigoted misguided people that never got out to read a book and felt their life slip between their fingers. Currently, as it stands you can get hundreds of grants for your skin color if you are black but if you are white you get shafted, in the SAT a black person gets an advantage while an Asian has a deduction, to begin with. Honestly, this is so disgusting towards everyone else that I am not surprised they are losing ground. This whole section is a loss basically saying how black people want this and that for just being there when unfortunately this will not help anyone, it will not happen and unfortunately all this is doing is showing the cowardice of the group.

7 out of 10 with some of the dumbest goals of a group I had ever seen and I was the one who started a group to clear the national debt so that puts it in perspective. In invest – divest we go from taking money from police to education, “The retroactive decriminalization, immediate release and record expungement of all drug related offenses and prostitution. I am going to just say this, I have lived in drug towns and no I do not want them back in the community, too many people died for trying to get ground to sell in and releasing all of them is idiocy at levels that make me question the mental health of these people. Prostitution is where some people will be surprised because if we can create a safe and respectable infrastructure whether the government is involved heavily or not, then as long as two adults agree and everyone is safe, tested and healthy, I don’t have a problem with that. The problem is all these are little sound bites. Bits of popcorn that without an actual plan means jack diddly to anything so we have five points extra to the crap pile making out twelve out of fifteen.

Rapid fire now. Radical and sustainable redistribution of wealth – Tell me how this will work you dupes this is just taking money from one and giving to another who most of cannot handle it at first. Federal and state job programs specifically for black people is just illuminating that they need these programs to get a job, that they cannot compete in a free market and if that is the case why don’t you get programs to build up their resources instead of making programs that award jobs based on skin color. Let me just put it like this, if you are trying to get a black something built you are wrong because if it cannot be done in the free market it will not be able to survive. It will fail, more money will be spent which means more negative financial decisions and the failure spins into a turd tornado of amazing proportion.

How do we fix this? First, realize you cannot be for all lives if you are just for black lives. It is A or it is B. You can do things that help everyone, but the moment you start touting how black people should get a universal income without a thought to anyone else you will be seen as the racists you are.

The black lives matter needs to reorganize it needs a structure from top to bottom and what this does is it shows people who would be taking responsibility in good or in bad decisions. If one branch does great work bringing the police and community together than show that branch you approve your work and if they riot or start trouble you need to be hard on them. This is a little piece of wisdom a chef told me while I worked on the line. “ A good meal will be talked about once while a bad one will be talked about ten times.”

Bad public relations will be ten times harder to overcome then good and having a set structure allows one to help combat that. Second, would be to actually look at what is going on around you. I have seen more violence by this group than I have from trump supporters, the KKK, and most gangs, which honestly makes me think the BLM is beyond saving at times, but we will give it a shot.

Make it structured, and look at making it inclusive of different groups of people that are not black. I do not know how many more times I need to say that line I may just need to have it engraved in the blog main page because it has been the same for the problem of so many companies. You either respect the value of all people or you cherry pick the ones you want the black lives matter group does not value all people because they cherry pick.

So be inclusive, don’t be a dick, don’t think your race gets a bye in life because of what happened a couple hundred years ago. Figure it out and get your act together or watch your numbers drop even further.

Advertisements

Peta

Devil’s Advocate
Peta

This may sound strange but we do have a lot of problems in the butchering markets for their meat. Not because all of it is wrong, in some cases you need to have it, but simply for the fact that often times it is done in conditions that are simply reprehensible. The problem stands that by many associations PETA is not a group that makes sense. Some of their work can be viewed through many a lens as extremist work or zealotry which is sad because their mission is one for good.

We need to split this up though but I got a couple things that PETA may want to try and they don’t even have to pay me for the idea, although if they use it some recognition would be nice. First, let us start with food, now most of us who have lived in an urban area has seen, heard, or at least familiar with the shock and awe tactics they employ showing visions of carnage selling them off as the norm. The problem is people are smarter than that and from a food side, we need to figure out some things before we can lay a plan. Starting off meat will never, be taken off the tables of the world by choice. It will either be due to resource mismanagement or the fact that it is not safe to eat. What can be done is lessen the hit so start with some snacks that taste good that are vegan-friendly that do not have animal products and sell them for a price much like you would see with the lootcrate or slamcrates. Giving people access to options they may find to be just as good as meaty snacks is a wonderful start, give them maybe some new seitan and what it is. You can use these boxes to get people to open up more to such foods and also begin to get people uncomfortable with the ingredients to acclimate more. Sell it a good price before using that money for other projects. A good move would be to also take some of those snack boxes and distribute them to people in need of food at disaster areas, promote it that you are helping, and reputation will be earned.

Next, would be to pick your battles. Going against Pokemon in an attempt to promote them as animal abusers are simply coined by some in public relations as “dumb as fuck”. You do not come out of it well the fans look upon the group negatively leading to a worsening reputation. If you are going to pick a battle first try to come from a move of helping rather than hindering, because you may find some common threads that could bind you all and give your words more credence. Be inclusive, not exclusive, and you are not inclusive by going full zealot on how much you are better than everyone else. Your store is full of items that take people away or try to insult them or make allegations, in your entire store there is not a single item that it said that it was okay to be transitioning from one opinion to the other. Promoting an “us or them” mentality almost never works and when it does it is often not for long.

You have a habit of trying to either get everybody on your side or none at all and unfortunately, it does not work that way. You need to learn that changes like the ones you are hoping for will not be done in one swing but many tries taking inch after inch and showing what can be done to help take the market from those animal products would be in essence a lot wiser than trying to sell 50 brochures at $2.00 a pop. Start making products the majority of people will want and work over time. Except what we have is antagonistic and if you can make this work even a little bit you will have much better results in the long run.

Vidcon and Polygon Failed

Vidcon 2017 has come and gone, but not without controversy. For those that know what happened this will be a bit of a brief to get people up to speed.

Anita Sarkeesian is a popular Youtuber with various feminist groups and she explored the implications calling for the supposed need for feminism in modern society. She often claims to be the voice of disabled and the supposed marginalized without facts or figures and this will come in to play later.

Sargon of Akkad is another Youtuber who is what can be best defined as a social commentator they take things found over the world and give their two cents using a combination of numbers, experiences, and personal opinion.

They both went to Vidcon and Ms. Sarkeesian was in a panel where Sargon and many other social commentators some of which with wildly varying opinions sat down in the first three rows as a group to properly listen to a different point of view. Video backs this claim as there was no insults thrown by the group, none of them were being rambunctious and some may even say including myself they were being model citizens in the situation. This can be fact checked against the hundreds of minutes of footage of them and not one video being able to produce evidence of anything but what was described.

During the conversation of the panel Ms. Sarkeesian has claimed “if you look up my name on Youtube, you get shitheads like this dude.” before gesturing to the man behind the channel of Sargon of Akkad. Continuing on commenting that people including Sargon “make dumbass videos that is just the same shit over and over again.” Now, for those who are not familiar of these conventions let me make clear that all conventions make it clear that any harassment is not allowed. None whatsoever, normally being called out in such fashion may anger you especially when you gave part of your time to learn someone else’s opinion in an honest fashion. Going on to call him a garbage person the normal set of actions if this was anybody else would be to remove the offending party or parties.

Claiming that these people were there to “intimidate” which was proven incorrect not only by the video footage once again numbering in hours that anyone can see, but she claimed it was then supposed to put her on edge. According to her actions, it seems that she is always on edge and that these people had nothing to do with it. What is funny is that Ms. Sarkeesian was also on a panel about bullying where other panel members noted Ms. Sarkeesian’s aggressive nature.

This tale ends not with a bang nor a whimper, but a question. There were no actions done about this until afterward and that is only when the convention founder released a statement. It started talking about mobs before moving to the main matter, which I will quote directly from the debrief here.

Our founder, Hank Green, talked with our panelist and said two things:

  1. He told her that her comment had violated our policy, but that he understood that there was a broader context (which to be clear, we were blissfully ignorant of until this weekend, and remain inexpert in.)
  2. He apologized to her for not having been more aware of and active in understanding the situation before the event, which resulted in her being subjected to a hostile environment that she had not signed up for.”

Here is the full debrief, but here is where we go deeper.

https://medium.com/@VidCon/vidcon-debrief-e6bb4e187a28

Not one person in the group that was sitting in those rows has communicated that any contact was made between either of the founders to their side of the matter at hand. So that means that without any evidence in data, video, or first-hand testimony from anyone in that panel except for Ms. Sarkeesian that we need to figure how valid is her statement and it is clear that she is completely incorrect.

Before going any further let us classify harass and I will do it using the Merriam-Webster Law definition which notes it as, to subject persistently and wrongfully to annoying, offensive, or troubling behavior.

That is the definition that is the standard so we will stick with it. This whole incident is not wrongful by any measure, as once again can be proven by the many videos taken, first-hand witnesses, and any data from that event in any other form. Nothing supports her statements to this incident, but let us also take a look at Sargon of Akkad more in depth to see if there have been any past waves of videos that fulfill the definition. In his interview with Joe Rogan, he clarified that over four years he has referred to her about 30 times and my own investigation uncovered by description and thumbnail that the video targeted the beliefs of Ms. Sarkessian specifically numbered even less than that. She has only been prominent in the thumbnail of the video only two dozen times with specific videos about her rhetoric numbering to just over half of that at fourteen. Three videos did that but were not made by Sargon and he only ran them as a way to get some time off or work on other projects it seems. Using the number of 780 videos and taking to account that fourteen videos were specific to her in some form or fashion whether it be statements about Gamergate, his own views on the feminist movement, or the current Vidcon debacle. We add the three videos from others that specifically target giving us seventeen. That accounts for just over two percentage points. This is far from the broad statement given and even if we add the ones where she is only been lightly referenced in the video, we get a grand total of the three percent that was commented by Sargon on the Joe Rogan show.

Two percentage points do not count as all of Sargon’s work. It does not count as most of the video library, and certainly is not a majority. Taking the seventeen videos by the four years that the account has been up and figuring the two leads us that on average one video where her work is the major crux of the video happens just less then every three months. Is it persistent? The argument can be made, yes. Sargon’s views on providing data and Ms. Sarkessians more emotional style of debate will obviously cross and there will be some exchange there. Is it wrongful, no. In every video she has been the heavy crux of specifically it has been a disagreeing of her opinion, the question of what data supports it, and his own opinion in counterpoint. There have not been any major persistent personal attacks from this channel. If you do not believe me then go check for yourself.

https://www.youtube.com/user/SargonofAkkad100/videos?sort=p&view=0&flow=list

It is also noted those videos are not even the most popular work from the channel with only one of the top ten videos having a thumbnail referencing her, but none specifically her work. Laci Green is someone whose work has been featured multiple times in Sargon’s most popular responses and overall videos has been noted three times in the top ten and twice specifically her work was where the majority of the social commentary in that video was targeted.

So we have a convention that backed a harasser when she tried to get a rise out of someone in the crowd, and nothing happened. That is not what some of the biggest pieces of coverage about it has even attempted to show.

Now I tried to write this piece here but I need to do this as well because this is past tilted to blatant propaganda levels of idiocy. This is where I will be a bit biased myself not because of the opinion but simply the style of writing is so poor, the effort so minimal, and the bias so amazing that it any editor who looked at this thinking it was a journalistic piece needs to add some yellow.

https://www.polygon.com/features/2017/6/27/15880582/anita-sarkeesian-garbage-human-vidcon-interview

We are going to correct some things here because Polygon is not known for political work, and it shows.

Carl Benjamin is a British YouTube personality in his late 30s. He has spoken vituperatively, many times over many years, about Sarkeesian and her work. Some of his videos are thumbnailed with ludicrously Photoshopped imagery of Sarkeesian. At the time of writing, his Twitter page is bannered with a picture of Sarkeesian.”

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/vituperative

The fourth paragraph seems to note one Carl Benjamin (Sargon Of Akkad) speaking in vituperative fashion. Vituperative in this case is defined as ”uttering or given to censure :  containing or characterized by verbal abuse” Unfortunately, no evidence has been found making that line useless as he has asked for data and sources so he can learn about it to see if he is correct. Also, at time of writing the banner is of him and Anita photoshopped over Beast and Belle from Beauty and the Beast. Unfortunately, that is not a proper description so we need to remove that and if we do so we are left with this.

Carl Benjamin is a British YouTube personality in his late 30s. Some of his videos are thumbnailed with ludicrously Photoshopped imagery of Sarkeesian.”

Colin Campbell is the writer for this piece and on the same day about writing this piece Campbell tweeted “I hope to continue writing mainly about people I admire.”

colincampbellx

Colin Campbell, I hope you do so too, however the work needs to get better, I will edit this section for you just to see where some improvements can be made with your style in case you wonder why some people are not amused with it. The three paragraphs before hand are world building that you do not need to do as you reworking from sources in reality. Boil down the fantasy lingo to one paragraph. Let us work from the second paragraph, dump the first and third which leaves us with this.

After so many public appearances, Sarkeesian has grown accustomed to speaking in front of a few hundred people. But today she feels a certain intimidation. A crowd of her most vociferous critics, including YouTubers, sit together in the front rows, their phones pointed at her.”

This needs some work though, vociferous is used incorrectly as it is “marked by or given to vehement insistent outcry “. Since we all know the asking for data is not along vehement outcry we must remove that word. You also do not want to start a sentence with the word but, because usually. that makes it sound like either it should be part of the previous sentence, reworked, or added to make a complete sentence. Funny thing also the videos show that the entire group did not actually have phones out, a detail surely missed by the author here so let us correct it let us take this down to what it needs to really be.

After so many public appearances, Sarkeesian has grown accustomed to speaking in front of a few hundred people. Today, she feels a certain intimidation as a crowd of her most well-known critics sits together in the front rows.”

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/vociferous

Good, four paragraphs down to about two, let us continue.

Benjamin has made his name dismissing her feminist documentary work such as Tropes vs Women in Video Games, which details the cultural biases of video games. He is a hero for many in the hate group GamerGate, a rough assemblage of misogynists, racists, conspiracy theorists and right-wing ideologues who have spent years harassing Sarkeesian and anyone who publicly supports her work.

Most of his YouTube videos follow standard reactionary protocols, excoriating the supposed evils of political correctness, shady liberal elites and the media. His most frothy content is reserved for feminism, a hot topic for men who feel afraid and threatened by progressives, who they dismiss as “the regressive left.” He has more than 600,000 subscribers on YouTube. He makes more than $5,000 a month from Patreon.

Today, he is surrounded by a group of his supporters, who have planned to come in force and take the front seats of this VidCon panel, which is focused on the lives of women online.

Unfortunately, here we have a lot of problems, no worries though. Benjamin started by dismissing some of her work, but his name was not made on it as proven above by the sources. Him being a hero unless it is proven just rings as an attack of character and without evidence just smacks of holier-than-thou sentiment. Adding the evidence previously found it just makes you look like an idiot the fact that you tried to use excoriate in such a fashion which is defined as “to censure scathingly “ without any evidence. In fact, evidence of Sargon’s work proves just the opposite with the few videos talking about Ms. Sarkessian’s work asking for data. The remaining parts of the sentence need to be reworked. The comment about feminism also smacks of not knowing the subject matter, but no worries I have your back. Campbell. Before we rework this, let us go over the last portion of writing as the comment about “his supporters” is trying to dictate a mentality that this is a simple two-party issue when the issue is far from two party. This is where that majority of that work not being in politics is starting to play against you. That is okay, you are trying we just need to cut some fat. Basically, if you are going to say it then you need to have data or experience or explain in some fashion why it is the case otherwise it needs to be cut. Here is what we have after all that.

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/excoriating

Benjamin had started his channel dismissing her feminist frequency work. His most frothy content is reserved for modern feminism. He has more than 600,000 subscribers on YouTube and he makes more than $5,000 a month from Patreon. Today, he is surrounded by a group of other critics of Sarkessian’s work, who have planned to come in force and taking the empty seats in the front three rows of this VidCon panel, which is focused on the lives of women online.

This will go quicker, no worries.

The panel’s first question drops. It’s about why feminism — online and in games — is an issue worthy of discussion.

Sarkeesian notes Benjamin’s presence and begins speaking.

“If you Google my name on YouTube you get shitheads like this dude who are making these dumb-assed videos,” she says. “They just say the same shit over and over again. I hate to give you attention because you’re a garbage human. These dudes just making endless videos that go after every feminist over and over again is a part of the issue of why we have to have these conversations.”

The crowd gives her a positive response, with some whoops and cheers.

On the front rows, Benjamin and his retinue rock back and forth, as if they are watching a comedy show. He yells back that he be allowed to debate with her.

But she won’t debate him. She understands that he’s not in the least bit interested in what she has to say.

Positive response as the article notes can be found to be not correct by the video. Benjamin did not rock back and forth, and really it is kind of sad I need to describe what happened in videos against someone who never saw them, but thinks they know more about it. What he yelled was akin to providing data and not debating, and the last portion of this section is just chaff clearly debunked by all that evidence above. Her supposed understanding would be coming off as paranoia which can be defined as “a tendency on the part of an individual or group toward excessive or irrational suspiciousness and distrustfulness of others” That leaves us with this.

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/paranoia

The panel’s first question drops. It’s about why feminism — online and in games — is an issue worthy of discussion.

Sarkeesian notes Benjamin’s presence and begins speaking.

“If you Google my name on YouTube you get shitheads like this dude who are making these dumb-assed videos,” she says. “They just say the same shit over and over again. I hate to give you attention because you’re a garbage human. These dudes just making endless videos that go after every feminist over and over again is a part of the issue of why we have to have these conversations.”

I just corrected the first section of this article shaving the bulk of incorrect information, political character assassinations, and misused words from it. This section alone was 514 words before my edits dropped to a nice 227 which you can find below.

After so many public appearances, Sarkeesian has grown accustomed to speaking in front of a few hundred people. But today she feels a certain intimidation. A crowd of her most vociferous critics, including YouTubers, sit together in the front rows, their phones pointed at her.”

Carl Benjamin is a British YouTube personality in his late 30s. Some of his videos are thumbnailed with ludicrously Photoshopped imagery of Sarkeesian. Benjamin had started his channel dismissing her feminist frequency work. His most frothy content is reserved for modern feminism. He has more than 600,000 subscribers on YouTube and he makes more than $5,000 a month from Patreon. Today, he is surrounded by a group of other critics of Sarkessian’s work, who have planned to come in force and taking the empty seats in the front three rows of this VidCon panel, which is focused on the lives of women online.

Sarkeesian notes Benjamin’s presence and begins speaking.

“If you Google my name on YouTube you get shitheads like this dude who are making these dumb-assed videos,” she says. “They just say the same shit over and over again. I hate to give you attention because you’re a garbage human. These dudes just making endless videos that go after every feminist over and over again is a part of the issue of why we have to have these conversations.”

It is amazing what you have left when you cut the crap. My suggestion is to continue to grow as a writer because this section was your work that I just edited. The first was flabby, emotional and unfocused, this tells you what happened. Keep going Colin Campbell I hope your writing continues to grow.

Taking that portion of the article to pieces and showing why it wasn’t the greatest piece of work in the world, but what could be done with it leaves us down to the issue of Vidcon. The stance of those in charge allowed someone to harass and embarrass someone who was a paying customer, who was respectful in the event, and who did not make any aggressive motions that can be backed up by any evidence found on this planet. I have never been to Vidcon, but as also a Youtuber this makes me wonder if I should provide the opportunity ever comes up. It is also a question I notice a lot more people asking. On the other side I have never run a con, but I do have some political experience so let me make something clear that I have found true. When you act in such fashions to take someone’s words at face value without checking the other side you make the other side believe their opinion does not matter so much. Ms. Sarkessian has not proven anything and not even taking the other side into the account has painted their opinion to be even more laughable. This may not be so much right now, but there are people who will look at this believing you are now politically leaning one way. Political identity is not something you want an event to have because as soon as you leave the center line you find yourself greeted by more and more extremist and less respect for the opposing side.

My plan would have been to get both sides, check the story, and stick to the code and unless there was something that changed the entire situation Ms. Sarkeesian should have been disciplined. The stance alluded to by this decision would have been fair by your own code, but since you have not done so I wonder what you think will happen when you start adding politics to exclusive opinions as done in this case I.E not properly investigating and then siding with Ms. Sarkessian. It will be interesting to see where this goes, but if those here do not listen then I ask you to think of what the road to hell is paved with. Good intentions can often be the most damaging, so please think before the next actions or you will find your social pools evaporating.