I could be you, I could even be me

Why do I always read that word in the Spy’s voice when it’s by itself?

Users are the acceptance testers.

Government employee makes mistake, other employee corrects mistake, innocent family suffers minor inconvenience. Stay tuned for more.

This fucking guy. I hope he gets soundly defeated in November and I never have to hear or read about some dumb shit he said ever again.

Not meaningless, just flawed

No wait nevermind they were just between the couch cushions here. Haha that’s so funny I don’t know why I would assu- … wait… WHY IS THIS ON THE NEWS

🍦

We’re a family here! You know, one of those toxic shitty kinds of families where the obligations only go one way and we all just pretend that’s cool, 'cause we’re a family!

They are often found residing on or near couches though

Oh fuck, do you think the rider is considered part of the motorbike? How about the square where just a bit of the wheel goes into. Ok I think tha- no SARAH NO PLEA-

You’re right and I really wish you weren’t.

You’re a bit of a cunt aren’t you

Yeah, I agree she is at fault for spreading harmful and fucking racist misinformation online. At the same time though it must be wild to have a president candidate pick it up and run with it. It’s a shame it took this kind of experience to make her see the potential harm of her actions.

What qualifies someone to be a judge is simply redefined to be what is popular. A judge should therefore no longer follow the law, but make the ruling most in line with what is popular. Under a voting system that is the sole qualifier.

Yes I agree, and just because there is a methodology doesn’t make the result not arbitrary. Can you explain what number four means? How do I assess it, what’s a 0, what’s a 5 and what’s a 10? How does number 2 relate to bias, isn’t that a factuality rating thing , why is it in the bias rubric? It’s a joke, each rating is totally arbitrary as there is no definition of what each one means beyond some vague description of the category. It’s essentially pick a number, feels based.

I have worked with qualitive rubrics before and this one is barely worthy of the name honestly. Two people could take this rubric away and come to completely opposite conclusions based on their own biases.

He wants a perfect body. He wants a perfect soul.

Biden: killing Americans in the west bank is totally unacceptable…but we will accept it.

The placement of the yellow dot is determined through a composite score derived from four distinct categories: Biased Wording/Headlines, Factual/ Sourcing, Story Choices, and Political Affiliation. Each category is rated on a scale of 0 to 10, with 0. indicating a lack of bias and 10 representing extreme bias. The average of these four scores is then plotted on the scale to indicate the source’s overall Left-Right bias.

I wouldn’t call picking four numbers 'a whole lot more ’ personally. If you actually read some of the bias analysis it becomes more obvious how arbitrary it is.

Thanks for clarifying, that makes sense now. I think from that perspective, MBFC in my mind is still useless because the why behind their rating is totally opaque, at least to me. I have read several of their analysis and their methodology and I just still have no idea why they give a certain rating. It feels more like a post hoc rationalisation than a process or set of criteria that was followed. Maybe it’s just me though, and it’s clearer for other folks.