Why Is Gitmo Gone?

Google

Web Adequacy.org

This is an unofficial archive site only. It is no longer maintained. You can not post comments. You can not make an account. Your email will not be read. Please read this page or the footnote if you have questions.

Why Is Gitmo Gone?

Author:

Topic:

Posted:

Mar 04, 2002

Comments:

I read the Guantanamo Bay "Modest Proposal" article the other day. I liked it. Now it's gone from the front page.

More diaries by doofus

	Is Your Child a Taliban?
	Public School (And Other) Charities
	I Despise the Olympics
	Someone Help This Poor Guy
	I am somebody!!
	Weekend Socializing
	Islamic Ji-ography
	Didn't Anyone Help This Guy?
	Mortality Forcibly Reconsidered
	Oh Dear!
	I Am A Criminal Suspect (Apparently)
	Cheers for Le Tour de France
	The Spec Is Nearing Initial Release
	Prosyletizing Long-Lost Friends

Why was it pulled?

Was it not garnering the appropriate number of responses (1 comment the last time I looked)?

Was it reconsidered due to the article elenchos has written recommending surrender?

Was it deleted on accident?

Something else?

Well...?

The answer(s), please.

	That story .. (none / 0) (#1)
	by seventypercent on Mon Mar 4th, 2002 at 01:31:38 PM PST

	.. was deemed "inadequate" by one or more of our editors and was subsequently pulled. Personally, I didn't mind the story, but different editors have different tastes and it's hard to get a group consensus on a story, particularly when we're spread so far apart across the globe and have our own esoteric schedules and reading habits. I suppose the story could be reposted if there is enough reader demand. I don't feel too strongly about it one way or the other. -- Red-blooded patriots do not use Linux.

	OK, But It Seems to Me... (4.00 / 1) (#9)
	by doofus on Mon Mar 4th, 2002 at 11:38:02 PM PST

	that once you fine editors post something it should stay there. Seems almost like an admission that you fine editors can be less than adequate yourselves, which I know cannot be true.

	As The Adequacy Turns (none / 0) (#10)
	by zikzak on Tue Mar 5th, 2002 at 02:26:49 AM PST

	The behind the scenes action is pretty intense sometimes. I swear, if we don't put aside our petty differences over eugenics and slavery reparations, these conflicts of ego are going to tear Adequacy asunder one day. I would like to take this opportunity to make an open, public plea to my fellow editors to stop all this tribal warfare. Our readers are noticing, and the frequent absences of certain staff members does not go unseen by our audience. Not only can I barely imagine what conclusions the readers are drawing, but sometimes I can scarcely believe the levels some of you stoop to in your desperate bid to influence the long-term financial path this corporation will take. If we can not come together as a group of dedicated individuals and raise the level of professionalism up to our original stated goals then I absolutely assure each and every one of you that our dreams of winning a Pulitzer will be crushed. No more threats of physical violence. No more exposing the homosexual infidelities of your co-editors to their previously ignorant spouses. And most importantly, no more pilfering of luncheon supplies from the break room refrigerator. Thank you.

	I didn't read the story... (none / 0) (#2)
	by Anonymous Reader on Mon Mar 4th, 2002 at 02:21:52 PM PST

	But I am completely against the posting of any story entitled 'A Modest Proposal'. Just in case anyone was on the edge of their seat, waiting for me to weigh in with my opinion on this site-dividing issue. --Anonymous Reader #24601

	What the readers of this site really want to know (none / 0) (#3)
	by Anonymous Reader on Mon Mar 4th, 2002 at 02:32:49 PM PST

	Is where you stand on the topic of censorship on adequacy.org, Mr. Anonymous Reader? It seems that censoship runs rampant here on adequacy.org. What is your opinion? I'm sure we all wait with baited breath.

	I'd like to point out... (none / 0) (#4)
	by Anonymous Reader on Mon Mar 4th, 2002 at 02:47:23 PM PST

	That I am not just any Anonymous Reader, but I am specifically Anonymous Reader #24601. I have put considerable effort into building up this brand name, and I do not wish it to be diluted by getting it confused with your run-of-the mill Anonymous Reader, who has nothing useful to contribute whatsoever. Note that you may conveniently read all my comments with a simple search, unlike your average Anonymous Reader, who has devised no such plan. With that said, I am quite a staunch supporter of censorship, and I believe that this site is full of it. Censorship, I mean. It's the main reason I come here. Well, that and my unquenchable thirst for elenchos' companionship. --Anonymous Reader #24601

	Indeed (none / 0) (#8)
	by elby on Mon Mar 4th, 2002 at 09:27:59 PM PST

	Jean is right. Even while busy having power meetings with powerful people on the editorial staff of Adequacy, I've had to take notice of the Anonymous Reader #24601 brand. -lb

	I think you mean: (none / 0) (#5)
	by nathan on Mon Mar 4th, 2002 at 04:11:59 PM PST

	'Bated breath.' Who'd have known that Shakespeare's elision would continue to boggle the half-miseducated even into the fourth century after his death? Nathan -- Li'l Sis: Yo, that's a real grey area. Even by my lax standards.

	I think he just meant (none / 0) (#7)
	by jvance on Mon Mar 4th, 2002 at 09:07:38 PM PST

	that he was trolling. jvance, who at one time was all too familiar with "abestos 'batement" -- Adequacy has turned into a cesspool consisting of ... blubbering, superstitious fools arguing with smug, pseudointellectual assholes. -AR

	why was the post to Jin Wicked deleted ? (none / 0) (#6)
	by Anonymous Reader on Mon Mar 4th, 2002 at 04:49:20 PM PST

	I thought it was a wonderful piece of writing.

	For political reasons. (none / 0) (#11)
	by because it isnt on Tue Mar 5th, 2002 at 03:34:33 AM PST

	I thought it was a wonderful piece of writing. I thought it was a wonderful piece of whining. Jin is a shameless self-publicist, and she was pulling the same "I am leaving" stunt at several sites. Adequacy.org may be controversial, but it's no fool, and Jin's exercise in public manipulation was swiftly removed. adequacy.org -- because it isn't

	I meant the post to her (none / 0) (#12)
	by Anonymous Reader on Tue Mar 5th, 2002 at 04:01:01 PM PST

	that went along the lines of 'you are a joke'. It was a good post because it explained very clearly why she is a joke. I was sorry to see the post removed.

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective companies. Comments are owned by the Poster. The Rest ® 2001, 2002, 2003 Adequacy.org. The Adequacy.org name, logo, symbol, and taglines "News for Grown-Ups", "Most Controversial Site on the Internet", "Linux Zealot", and "He just loves Open Source Software", and the RGB color value: D7D7D7 are trademarks of Adequacy.org. No part of this site may be republished or reproduced in whatever form without prior written permission by Adequacy.org and, if and when applicable, prior written permission by the contributing author(s), artist(s), or user(s). Any inquiries are directed to legal@adequacy.org.