I think this is a good point. One of the problems has been a lack of mutual respect here. That’s been a problem long before this string of posts, though, and it isn’t just going in one direction.
1 Like
Love it. If y’all truly wanted that type of post gone from this community I’d be happy to do it.
Since it’s obvious that you are perfectly fine with that type of posting, you’ll continue your behavior and block any attempt to raise expectations for acceptable behavior.
The problem is that there’s no basic standards for behavior and little to no follow through on standards, so bad faith posters constantly looking to find the limit like jalfrezi are still here despite repeatedly breaking the one rule against doxxing we have.
Set some basic standards and enforce them. The toddlers will throw their tantrum, but once it’s ignored behavior will improve.
Idk what you’re getting at but Jal posted a quote the other day about attacking others of things you are guilty of yourself, and I think that sums up a lot of these interactions.
3 Likes
I am a bit torn because I don’t like this siege of skydiver expanded to another thread, but this is the low content thread and this discourse is about devoid of content as one can be.
2 Likes
Yes but when an average UP poster sees there are a ton of new posts in a thread overnight they expect it to be something more interesting than the same 10 people flinging insults at each other for the millionth time. It’s a disappointing reminder that the bickering is slowly killing the site.
4 Likes
bruh imagine if this mf was raising a child
Man I can’t keep all this straight. Am I supposed to vote for Issue 1 or not?
2 Likes
For those setting up student loan repayments, best to go through studentaid.gov instead of your loan servicer. There are a lot of additional questions that are taken into consideration through the fed website that your servicer might not consider. For some reason, my servicer did not take into account my wife’s income or student loans when setting up my repayment cost.
4 Likes
Been following the hilarious local story about how our absurd mayor is trying to get some kind of world cricket championships to take place in the Bronx next year and in the process discovered that NYC has a new cricket team I had never heard of. I thought that sounded cool so I looked online to see where they play. Turns out the current stadium is in Grand Prairie, Texas. I spent maybe 20 minutes on the Major League Cricket homepage and apparently the first season is already over and I think that we are the current world championships (even the match results are inscrutable). So very proud of my team, maybe I will fly down there to see a game next year.
2 Likes
I don’t see anything undemocratic about that flyer.
There are guys who play cricket at my local park, never occurred to me that they might be Ohio’s pro team.
FWIW they also could be California’s pro team. Sounds like they play a little fast and loose with geography in that league.
1 Like
https://twitter.com/Todd_Spence/status/1698557315706986785
I’m not sure what thread this belongs in, but I don’t fully understand the idea that actors should obviously be entitled to residuals. (I’m not saying they’re not, I just don’t get the intuition.) It seems like there are lots of products where employees create products/services that generate ongoing revenues for their employers, but those employees are compensated on a one-time basis without any expectation of ongoing profit participation.
Can someone explain it like I’m 5 so I can better appreciate the actors’ side of this?
I don’t think it’s necessarily that they are entitled to residuals, I think it’s that the old contracts/ways of calculating residuals doesn’t work for streaming services in that they are resulting in actors getting much less in residuals than they used to get for syndication/re-runs (while presumably the production studios are still getting rich). I think the goal is to have the contracts/formulas for residuals reworked to take into account more accurately the value that the shows bring to streaming services.
No clue why Paul would get zero residuals from Netflix - that seems odd.
Thought residuals were for writers, not actors.
Royalties were for actors. And I thought the lion’s share of royalties went to creators/producers of the show, not performers.
Here’s someone who explains it. I don’t know if this is the absolute “correct” explanation, but it makes sense.
https://twitter.com/StefWilliams25/status/1681737569367736320
Basically, residuals are a way to compensate someone later for a product with unknown value when it is created.
Residuals are royalties for people working on TV shows and movies.
Dang I am like ten minutes away from the cricket champions?