#polite and appropriate conduct with strangers anymore

[supercantaloupe]

okay don't harass this person on my behalf please and thanks or you will lose the mandate of heaven. i have already blocked them for the crime of being rude on my poast. but on that note i do want to share this truly ridiculous set of replies they left me

Hi just wanted to let you know your chanukiah isn’t kosher. If you don’t care, then no worries, I’m not trying to be judgy, but I wanted to let you know just in case! 💙

yeah i don't really care, it's a family thing

[tomboyjessie13-artblog]

Requested by @purplemermaidprincess7

Name: Lady Amethyst Sapphira Japanese: アメジスト サッピラ Romaji: Amejisuto Sappira

Social Status: Upper Class; Lady Ethnicity: British

Family: Earl Seolfor (Father; Deceased) Lady Rubina (Mother; Deceased) Earl Aureole (Brother; ?)

Family Occupation(s)/Profession(s): Sapphira Family Jewelers (fictional); The Largest Jewelry Producers in the World Sapphira Opera Hall (fictional); Famous Opera House and Theater

Family Nickname: The Queen's Lyrebird; able to gather information and perform acts that police cannot, then provide given information to the queen.

Age: 16

Preferred Hand: Left

Character Songs: Monster; Look What You Made Me Do; Carry Me (her singing performance); Disturbing Nursery Rhymes: [1], [2], [3], [4] (she likes to sing these to herself and comment on their morbid nature)

Appearance: Her amethyst-purple hair reaches her midsection, with her bangs cut short above her eye brows. She has very pale skin and almond round sapphire-blue eyes. Her demon contract pentagram is engraved just above her breast, right on top of her heart, so it is hidden by her clothing.

History: Amethyst was born exactly July 7th, 1887, at 7:07 am. Due to all of these circumstances, Amethyst was nicknamed the "Perfect Child". Her parents threw a huge celebration, though this left Aureole, her older brother, within her shadow.

Growing up, Amethyst was a child prodigy; on many occasions she proved to be smarter than her own parents in: cognitive processing, problem solving, and mental adaption. She spent most of her free time in the family library. But during her childhood, she made very few friends because she complained about how slow they were compared to her intellect. She hated going to balls and social gatherings. But her parents were still happy with her and cherished her.

She was physically abused by Aureole, mostly when he was angry or when she did something better than him.

But on her 10th birthday, she was at a dinner party with her parents. Her brother told her to give two glasses of wine to their parents, and reluctantly agreed to avoid his wrath. After her parents fainted and were later declared dead, Aureole blamed Amethyst for poisoning their parents. His lackeys backed him up, by claiming that they witnessed the girl putting something in the drinks that she gave them. Unable to convince anyone of her innocence, she was committed to the Bedlam Mental Institution for "schizophrenic behaviors and homicidal tendencies". And we all know what went on in those hell-houses before logic was invented.

For 3 years, Amethyst was beaten, physically chained to her bed, starved for days on end, and was raped repeatedly by the mentally ill patients and sadistic bastards that ran the hellhole.

Amethyst "escaped" the asylum by pretending to be "cured". She treated every faculty member, no matter how idiotic and/or cruel, with kindness. Eventually, the doctors declared that she was ready to be a perfect citizen and was allowed to return home. But Amethyst was only pretending to be the obedient and quiet woman that society expected of her, while plotting for revenge on her brother and the others that turned against her.

During her absence, Aureole was named successor to the family heritage and was foolishly using the family power and fortune to his own means. He didn't consider his sister to be a threat anymore, believing her to be broken, and continued to abuse her any time he wanted to. He also continued to waste money on alcohol and prostitutes.

In secret, Amethyst was doing research on demonology and was plotting to summon a demon to do her bidding. In the basement of her mansion, she summoned "Esmeralda" (along with Lapis and Lazuli, the twins demon servants) and made a pact to help Amethyst gain revenge on those who betrayed her. Aureole had somehow learned of his sister's contract with a demoness and fled the manor. During that night, every servant who was loyal to her brother was slaughtered; save for two: Gretel, who was Amethyst's nursemaid and proved her loyalty by providing the heiress with the intel of how to summon Esmeralda, and Garnet, the head butler who guarded the basement door during the ritual.

With Aureole's disappearance, Amethyst was named the Lady of the Manor and heir to the Sapphira Estate and fortune. Amethyst rebuilt her family's fortune, with the help of Esmeralda, and successfully runs the underworld's intel-center (gaining and providing information that the police cannot). She also began to learn forbidden magic from Esmeralda, learning spells to help her in her conquest.

Personality: Amethyst is a ruthless young woman, eventually consumed by her wrath and desire for vengeance against her brother and everyone else who betrayed her. Her quest for vengeance also made her extremely ambitious; likewise, the heiress's ruthlessness was tempered by her guile and she was willing to tolerate talented and, more importantly, useful individuals, even if she hated them. She also honored her deals with others when they were to her advantage.

She usually maintains her calm and low-key demeanor, often making her difficult to read for others. And because of the mental torture and abuse when in Bedlam, she appeared outwardly emotionless and seeming somewhat shy. She commonly had awkward pauses or imperfections in her speech as well, especially when speaking with strangers (however, this is just for show when around law enforcement). She also lacked any social awareness or courtesy in most social situations, sometimes oblivious to sarcasm.

She tends to have random breakdowns, a result of the abuse and trauma she suffered in Bedlam. These could be quite helpful at times, but she hates having them, especially when in social gatherings and public areas.

She always governed her thoughts and her family business with her intellect; and she never liked fairy-tales as a child, believing them to be "lies from a silver spoon". However, she was not stubborn about her preconceptions, readily accepting the existence of demons and magic after meeting "Esmeralda" and learning forbidden magic from her.

When she was younger, she believed she was her father's favorite child, and usually ignored proper conduct and social etiquette with family, though still taking a formal manner in meetings with strangers. She also has an interest in the unique and exotic, and even the supernatural, researching it endlessly as a child, despite her parents' protests and concerns. But because of her disdain for socializing, she hated sharing and didn't tolerate anyone tampering with her things, not even the maids, as she was very territorial about her room.

Whenever Amethyst heard her parents tell her "I love you", she always believed that it was faked. She noticed that so many people said this, and that they must say it because they are taught to say it. And if one were to say it for no reason whatsoever, it would mean it was null. She also saw how only the "beautiful people" would say it to each other.

When the opposite sex attempts to flirt with her, Amethyst finds it quite irritating that they believe that she would fall for idiots. And her interest in intercourse is limited only to wanting children of her own, but she would rather be married to a loyal man first. Though she had since lost her virginity at Bedlam, she had now been having intercourse in secret with her servant, Jasper, to keep him in-line. Though her levels of seduction are there if she needs them.

As proven by her history, Amethyst values loyalty above all else, and wouldn't hesitate to have any perceived traitors extinguished. Defiance was looked upon as a nuisance and, once considered useless to her, would have any suspected rebels purged from her "kingdom". She also took joy in "punishing" her offenders.

Amethyst also has a desire for power and dominance, as she often states that she wants to be feared. She enjoys demonstrating the power she has by imposing others under herself. However, she does seem to exhibit fear and hesitance when she knows she's outmatched, fleeing if her opponent proves to be as such.

She is observant by nature and keeps herself updated on current affairs and events. Due to her self-serving nature, Amethyst is not above spiting others she dislikes and enjoys getting back at her enemies when able; such as when she adopted a cat for her "mental wellbeing", only it was to spite Ciel for his cat allergies.

Likewise, she would never back down from a challenge, no matter the danger, if the cause was a worthy one, and refused to be swayed by the pessimistic opinions of adults or her peers.

When Amethyst uses the twins, after learning of their assassination skills, she intends for them to be just instruments in her plans for revenge. But she ultimately becomes attached to them. She begins to act like a mother to them, deciding that she feels a certain "affection" towards them, though unable to describe it.

As her personal servants, she trusts in them to manage her territory and protect the estate when she is off on her travels with Esmeralda.

Skills and Abilities: Having a keen intuition, Amethyst has a talent of telling individuals what they are hoping to hear and giving them appropriate advice. Additionally, her experience with "traitors" gives her a stronger intuition concerning the intentions and actions of others. Aside from being well educated and attractive as befitting her noble status, her creative nature showed a degree of craftiness at a young age, able to sneak out at night, alone and undetected, in order to descend to the manor's basement to perform the summoning ritual.

Because of her birthright, Amethyst also has many resources at her disposal, including her loyal servants, whom also act as her bodyguards. The heiress is also well-versed in politics and excels in the field of her position as a Lady. Because of this power and influence as the Queen's Lyrebird, she could warrant anyone's arrest under the pretense of investigating a crime and confiscate evidence as she saw fit. This power even extends to forging evidence.

Thanks to the forbidden knowledge and teachings from Esmeralda, within a month, Amethyst is able to predict the weather and propagate flowers and became skilled with a variety of plant and water spells. Esmeralda states that though most mortals cannot use even the most basic of magic spells, she is surprised that Lady Amethyst is able to do so.

Her intellect also stretches farther than the normal standard than her gender was expected to have during the Victorian era, though this gave her an advantage in seduction and interrogation.

Amethyst is also trained in swordsmanship and fencing. With her advanced intellect and tutelage, she can take advantage of an enemy's habits in combat to turn against them, as well as able to dodge and defend against even the quickest attacks.

As a member of a family that associates with theater and opera, Amethyst is a talented prodigy in singing, with a voice beautiful enough to soothe an irate crowd. Despite her youth, she is particularly skilled in opera and is able to project her voice over a wide audience. Her skills in acting allow her to utilize them outside the theater, as she appears calm, fragile, and weak-willed in public; she is, in truth, conniving and manipulative and knows how to act around specific people. Having been raised with an upper-class lifestyle, she has been taught to conduct herself with a certain elegance, even when exhausted.

[bloojayoolie]

Being Alone, Animals, and Cats: 36904-6 years old 44 lbs THE CUTEST with an adorable smile, super affectionate, friendly, wiggly. seems housetrained omanh aco waiting for LOVE **** TO BE KILLED - 8/29/2018 **** FETCH AND SQUEAKIES ARE FUN, BUT HUMANS ARE SO MUCH BETTER TO QUEEN PAGE <3 A volunteer writes: Queen Page had been wiggling in her kennel, hotly anticipating the prospect of a new person to befriend. And a clean kennel it was, so seems house trained. Queen Page is definitely a proponent of the Yeats quote, "There are no strangers here; only friends you haven't yet met". (I'm sure it's in Latin on her family crest.) Sweet, a bit taken aback by the familiarity I undertook with harnessing after leasing, but hey, I'm a stranger to her, having barely been introduced, so I get it. Our Queen likes a slower intro. She is super affectionate, effervescent and lickety-split wanted to cuddle. Fetch and squeakies were fun, but humans are better. And in spite of being rather mite sized, she can pull quite passionately, so a front clip harness or head halter will slow her roll. So if a bubbly charming adult dog with more love to give than you can possibly quantify is on your list for your future dog, the answer is a gray package with 2 names: Queen Page. Come meet our royal little Queen today. VIDEO Queen Page and Casanova https://youtu.be/BLLLxHhK_NA QUEEN PAGE@MANHATTAN ACC Queen Page ID# 36904 Manhattan Animal Care Center Sex: Female Age: 6 years old Is Vaccinated: Yes Primary Color: Gray Secondary Color: White Weight: 44 lbs. Owner Surrender / Moving Intake Date: 08-03-2018 SHELTER ASSESSMENT: EXPERIENCED HOME No Cats OWNER NOTES This animal came from: Relative Basic Information: Queen Page is a roughly 6 year old dog whom was gotten from a family member and kept in the same home for the past 6 years. Unfortunately due to moving to a no pets allowed apartment she and her housemate King Page were unable to be kept. Previously lived with: 2 adults, 1 dog, 1 cat How is this dog around strangers? Around strangers Queen is described as outgoing, shy for a few minutes and plays exuberantly. How is this dog around children? Around children of ages 12 and 14 she is described as playful and plays exuberantly How is this dog around other dogs? Around her housemate dog she is described as respectful and is also relaxed around other dogs and plays exuberantly. How is this dog around cats? Around cats she is described as tolerant of her but didn't pay her much mind. Resource guarding: Queen has no known resource guarding issues Bite history: She has a previous bite history that is elaborated in a separate memo Housetrained: Yes Energy level/descriptors: high Other Notes: Queens isn't bothered by loud storms or fireworks, having her food or toys touched, being given a bath, being brushed, being held or restrained or when unfamiliar people approach her home or owner. Has this dog ever had any medical issues? No For a New Family to Know Queen is described a confident, independent, pushy, affectionate, playful and excitable. She enjoys playing with balls, squeak toys and ropes and enjoys playing fetch and tug. She was being fed Pedigree dry food once a day, is considered very house trained, is well behaved when she is left alone at home and alone in a yard and was crate trained but doesn't need it anymore. She knows the sit command, was being walked 2 times a day and pulls very hard on leash. BEHAVIOR NOTES Upon Intake: Queen allowed all handling upon intake. She allowed being collared and had an extremely wiggly body. She allowed having her picture taken and was receptive to head touches. She had a healthy appetite for office treats. Means of surrender (length of time in previous home): Owner Surrender (In home for 6 years) Previously lived with: Adults, a dog, and cat Behavior toward strangers: Shy at first but then outgoing and exuberant Behavior toward children: Exuberantly playful with older children (ages 12 and 14) Behavior toward dogs: Relaxed and exuberantly playful Behavior toward cats: Tolerant Resource guarding: None reported Bite history: Yes, a cat in the home was swatting at Queen Page. She chased and bit the cat on the neck and paw. The cat died as a result of the bites. Housetrained: Yes Energy level/descriptors: Queen is described a confident, independent, pushy, affectionate, playful, and excitable with a high level of activity. SAFER SCORES Date of assessment: 5-Aug-2018 Look: 1. Dog's eyes are averted, with tail wagging and ears back. Allows head to be held loosely in Assessor's cupped hands. Sensitivity: 1. Dog leans into the Assessor, eyes soft or squinty, soft and loose body, open mouth. Tag: 1. Dog assumes play position and joins the game. Or dog indicates play with huffing, soft 'popping' of the body, etc. Dog might jump on Assessor once play begins. Paw squeeze 1: 2. Dog quickly pulls back. Paw squeeze 2: 2. Dog quickly pull back. Flank squeeze 1: Item not conducted Flank squeeze 2: Item not conducted Toy: 1. Minimal interest in toy, dog may smell or lick, then turns away. Summary: Queen quickly approached the assessor with a soft body. She was social and playful throughout the assessment, allowed all handling, and displayed no concerning behaviors. Summary: *PLAY GROUP HELPER DOG* Slow introductions are recommended between Queen Page and dogs whoa re respectful and gently playful. Summary (1): 8/4: When off leash with a male dog, Queen Page will greet politely. She is tolerant of the male helper dog's overzealous greeting. Summary (2): 8/5-8/6: Queen Page is initially tense, then softens while wandering around. Summary (3): 8/7: Queen Page opens up to engage in soft, bouncy play. Summary (4): 8/8: Queen Page greets politely and engages in play. She offers small correction for mounting. Date of intake: 3-Aug-2018 Summary: Loose body, allowed handling Date of initial: 3-Aug-2018 Summary: Allowed most handling but screamed and snarled when hind end was manipulated ENERGY LEVEL: Queen Page is described as having a high level of activity. We recommend long-lasting chews, food puzzles, and hide-and-seek games, in additional to physical exercise, to positively direct her energy and enthusiasm. BEHAVIOR DETERMINATION: EXPERIENCE (suitable for an adopter with some previous dog experience, especially with the behaviors outlined below) Recommendations: No cats Recommendations comments: No cats: In her previous home, Queen Page killed a cat. We recommend she not go to a home with a cat or with other small animals. Potential challenges: On-leash reactivity/barrier frustration Potential challenges comments: On-leash reactivity/barrier frustration: At the care center, Queen Page has been observed to react to other dogs on leash, lunging towards them, barking and growling. Queen Page may need positive reinforcement, reward based training to teach her to look at you rather than other dogs. We recommend a front clip harness or head halter to help manage this behavior. MEDICAL EXAM NOTES 3-Aug-2018 DVM Intake Exam Estimated age: 6yrs based on O hx. Microchip noted on Intake? scanned negative by LVT on intake. MC placed on intake. History : O surrender. Subjective / Observed Behavior - BAR; allows most handling. Screams and snarls when hind end palpated, manipulated. Evidence of Cruelty seen - none Evidence of Trauma seen - none Objective BCS 5/9 EENT: Eyes clear, ears have heavy brown exudate; no nasal or ocular discharge noted Oral Exam: dc 2/5; pd 2/5 -- full oral exam not performed due to muzzle in place. PLN: No enlargements noted H/L: No murmur ausculted; CRT < 2, Lungs clear, eupnic ABD: Non painful, no masses palpated U/G: intact female. no scar present. MSI: Ambulatory x 4, skin free of parasites, no masses noted, healthy hair coat CNS: Mentation appropriate - no signs of neurologic abnormalities Rectal: unable to visualize due to behavior. Assessment otitis externa dental disease Prognosis: excellent Plan: ear cleaning claro otic -- performed at intake behavioral assessment SURGERY: Okay for surgery * TO FOSTER OR ADOPT * If you would like to adopt a dog on our “To Be Killed” list, and you CAN get to the shelter in person to complete the adoption process *within 48 hours of reserve*, you can reserve the dog online until noon on the day they are scheduled to die. We have provided the Brooklyn, Staten Island and Manhattan information below. Adoption hours at these facilities is Noon – 8:00 p.m. (6:30 on weekends) HOW TO RESERVE A “TO BE KILLED” DOG ONLINE (only for those who can get to the shelter IN PERSON to complete the adoption process, and only for the dogs on the list NOT marked New Hope Rescue Only). Follow our Step by Step directions below! *PLEASE NOTE – YOU MUST USE A PC OR TABLET – PHONE RESERVES WILL NOT WORK! ** STEP 1: CLICK ON THIS RESERVE LINK: https://newhope.shelterbuddy.com/Animal/List Step 2: Go to the red menu button on the top right corner, click register and fill in your info. Step 3: Go to your email and verify account Step 4: Go back to the website, click the menu button and view available dogs Step 5: Scroll to the animal you are interested and click reserve STEP 6 ( MOST IMPORTANT STEP ): GO TO THE MENU AGAIN AND VIEW YOUR CART. THE ANIMAL SHOULD NOW BE IN YOUR CART! Step 7: Fill in your credit card info and complete transaction Animal Care Centers of NYC (ACC) nycacc.org HOW TO FOSTER OR ADOPT IF YOU *CANNOT* GET TO THE SHELTER IN PERSON, OR IF THE DOG IS NEW HOPE RESCUE ONLY! You must live within 3 – 4 hours of NY, NJ, PA, CT, RI, DE, MD, MA, NH, VT, ME or Norther VA. Please PM our page for assistance. You will need to fill out applications with a New Hope Rescue Partner to foster or adopt a dog on the To Be Killed list, including those labelled Rescue Only. Hurry please, time is short, and the Rescues need time to process the applications.

[edmundbillings-blog]

Hiding With the Gray Men

On a 2013 episode of the BBC panel program Would I Lie To You?, British comedian David Mitchell revealed his esoteric style philosophy: Mitchell’s sartorial goal, as he put it, was that his appearance “should be in no way noteworthy, but then again not so un-noteworthy as to be in itself noteworthy”. This admission drew considerable laughter from both the studio audience and Mitchell’s fellow panel members. When questioned by the opposing team, Mitchell went on to explain what such a constrained style entailed: even something as innocuous as his beard was dangerously close to being too noteworthy to be compatible with Mitchell’s personal style, as some people in the TV personality’s life have noted the beard – much to his chagrin. Something overtly bland like a grey necktie, on the other hand, was considered by Mitchell to be “so colorless, so not wanting to draw the eye” that it would end up doing just that, and in doing so become inadvertently noteworthy. 

Mitchell’s strict (and somewhat contradictory) style rules were deemed to be so bizarre by the panel members and the studio audience that they could be played for comedy, but David Mitchell is in no way the only person to have this particular sense of style. The sartorial philosophy based on remaining anonymous and unnoticed, known to its adherents as “Gray Man theory”, is a strategic and complex style of dress that has been practiced by various groups – for various reasons – for over a decade.

The people that practice Gray Man styles of dress are a diverse group, ranging from veterans, members of intelligence communities, and self-described “preppers” – people with an interest in preparing for whatever worst-case scenario they’re concerned for. Regardless of the specific personal reasons that Gray Men dress for anonymity, the common sentiment across the majority of Gray Men is that the style is meant to be practiced in preparation for disaster – invariably referred to by Gray Men as either a “loss of civility”, or a “SHTF” (“Shit Hits The Fan”) scenario. Far beyond a simple aversion to being noticed, as in David Mitchell’s case, Gray Man adherents stress the style’s utility as a means of survival in the event of a dangerous situation.

The Gray Man style seems to have been devised almost completely organically by forward-thinking, preparation-minded people (possibly including people with experience in dangerous environments, like soldiers or spies) with a strong conception of possible situations in which self-presenting as unique or noticeable is a serious threat. In such a SHTF scenario, as one prepper blog puts it, “there will be many predators who wait for such occasions to prey upon those whom they perceive as weak”. In such threatening situations, sometimes the only viable preventative measure, beyond simple fight-or-flight responses, is “to learn to blend into a crowd and not do anything to draw attention to oneself”. Under such extreme circumstances, the proverbial nail that sticks out is quite forcefully hammered down – and some members of the intelligence and military communities have owed their lives to their skills in remaining nondescript.

More so than the simple desire to remain hidden in plain sight, dressing like a Gray Man requires an intimate and well-rounded knowledge of your surroundings. What counts as boring an nondescript in a particular area is entirely dependent on the customs and cultural influences within that area, as another intelligence-community forum points out, because “what stands out in Beverly Hills might be completely normal and grey in a small Midwestern town”. Remaining completely anonymous in a well-populated place demands both extensive knowledge of that place’s contemporary styles of dress and personal conduct, as well as exactly how those styles are appropriately expressed by a person of the Gray Man’s approximate age, gender identity, and ethnic background. When the goal is survival, it takes a lot of work to look boring.

The Gray Man philosophy seems completely ridiculous to many of us who don’t model our lifestyles based on preparing for imagined dangerous situations. Gray Man style could even be said to be completely orthogonal to the majority of people’s basic conceptions of fashion and personal style. For most people, the freedom to dress however you want is a tacit invitation to express your individuality and creativity through unique dress – and any belief system that seeks to limit this expression (save for a few religious customs) is seen as oppressive or anti-fashion. For most people interested in fashion or expression through dress, expressing your unique outlook through your appearance is the central point of all fashion – and anything that seeks to limit or curtail their unique style is seen as regressive. People like David Mitchell, then, are seen as exceptions to the norm, and their embrace of anonymity is seen as a strange idiosyncrasy to be made fun of.

While the Gray Men could appropriately be viewed as hardline sartorial ascetics who only see clothing and dress as purely utilitarian, fashion is no stranger to some of their core tenets of anonymity, and at times the two meet in the middle. The contemporary fashion industry is a constant churn of aesthetics that lives and dies on the novelty and visual flair of its creative output, but that’s not to say that the concept of fashion is diametrically opposed to intentionally-boring clothing.

While its origins were dubious and its cultural impact is still hotly-debated, the normcore trend of 2014 made a lot of noise for its polarizing aversion to fashion’s love of the new and unique. “Normcore” was just a convenient moniker that fit well over a much more recognizable trend: where fashion’s cutting edge was fixated on continuously redefining “chic” or “cool” or “rare” through increasingly avant-garde trends, the cool kids in Bushwick, Silverlake and Portland remained clad in New Balances, Champion sweats and Seinfeld-era stonewashed denim. The Cut defined normcore as “fashion for those who realize they’re one in 7 billion”: a style of dress for those who embrace the sameness and comfort of “boring” clothing – normal clothes unburdened by the constant shifting of the fashion cycle. Critics of normcore denounce the entire trend as an appropriation of “normal-people” clothes by hip, clued-in urbanites who should know better than to adopt an entire style as an ironic statement. While these detractors make a valid point, that critique fails to address the real point normcore has to make about the growing divide between everyday, quotidian clothing and the fashion industry’s obsessive pursuit of novelty. Normcore itself may have been entirely vacuous – nothing more than a way to sell Patagonia fleeces to Brooklyn artists – but as “one facet of a growing anti-fashion sentiment”, as fashion writer Jeremy Lewis put it, the trend took on a broader significance as a direct response to fashion’s flashiness and emphasis on individuality. A reaction to the cult of the individual through calculated sameness.

An anti-fashion trend that champions Levi’s 501s and Birkenstocks is one thing, but it’s entirely another for upmarket brands to build their entire brand identities around anonymous clothing. A.P.C.’s Jean Touitou was a Trotskyite during his time studying at the Sorbonne, and correspondingly A.P.C. acts as the closest thing in fashion that Gray Men have to an ally: a bulwark against fashion’s excesses, just as Trotsky’s own politics served as an alternative to Capitalism’s excesses. In an interview with Touitou, The New York Times made particular note of his brand’s calculated rejection of novelty, dubbing A.P.C. both “willfully anonymous” and “defiantly normal” within three paragraphs. To Touitou, the vagaries of the fashion world makes dressing anonymously the true challenge. Touitou goes even as far as to say that “the bourgeois don’t know how to dress anymore”, and that “the group luxury brands have a huge responsibility into that culture of vulgarity” – mirroring perhaps the most widespread complaint of high fashion and its cultural influence.

Like many of the Gray Men, then, Touitou and A.P.C. act as subversive agents behind enemy lines, working to offer a collection of basic, everyday items to a market entranced by the vulgarities of high-concept aesthetics. Instead of striving to create the one pair of sneakers that stands out amongst the rest on the runway, or the flashiest jacket on the rack at Market Week, A.P.C. quietly provides modest products that slot effortlessly into their consumers’ wardrobes and personal styles. Rather than distancing themselves from the fashion machine, or directly challenging it as part of some broader anti-fashion crusade, A.P.C. offers an anonymous, basic conception of everyday fashion that even the most hardline, anonymous Gray Men can identify with.

A.P.C. isn’t the only crusaders for anonymity within high fashion, however. Even the “group luxury brands” that Touitou denounced have had their own history of anonymity in the form of Martin Margiela. Even more hardline than Touitou in his zeal for anonymity, Margiela might be the closest that fashion has to a true Gray Man – only two known photos of the designer exist. While Maison Margiela’s brand identity has shifted and warped with each designer, as each labored endlessly to fill Margiela’s influential space within the house, the brand has had a sense of invisibility fused into its DNA from its very inception. All of Margiela’s stores are decorated completely in white, with all sales staff dressed in white lab coats, and none of them are listed in any phone books or identified with any signage. Many of Margiela’s tops and denim pieces bear a brand label affixed with only four pick stitches for easy removal. Martin Margiela’s right-hand-man Patrick Scallon once even described Margiela’s core marketing strategy as “absence equals presence”. In an industry consumed by aspirations of individuality and brand recognition, such a repudiation of brand-centric idiosyncrasies is a radical act. While the Gray Men may scoff at the notion of blending into the crowd in a $2,000 jacket or a pair of $500 sneakers, Margiela’s core tenets of invisibility and anonymity are baked into the brand’s DNA to the extent that not even the most ascetic survival preppers can deny their importance to the fashion house’s values. 

Margiela and A.P.C. are not creating for those preparing for world-historic disasters, any more than the normcore kids are dressing to escape murderous predators. But are their goals that disparate? Can doomsday preppers and upscale French maisons be included within the same aesthetic discourse? Is there even one definition of “anonymous” within style, or does it carry different connotations for different people? The Gray Men will continue to buy their fanatically-utilitarian survival gear from the specialist brands that they’ve always bought from, with little to no stylistic overlap between their style and Margiela’s brand identity. David Mitchell will also continue to define his own calculated anonymity within the boundaries of his own conception of what is “noteworthy” and “un-noteworthy”, and will spend perhaps only a second to associate A.P.C. with the attention-seeking excesses of the brands it shares a market position with. Regardless of the differences in approach, all of these individual actors – from Margiela and Touitou to the most fanatical Gray Men, and even David Mitchell – have reached similar conclusions, with understandable differences in execution. In a culture dominated by the desire to stand out, to differentiate yourself from the crowd, perhaps the most effective thing you can do is blend in.

[uniquedesignz-blog1]

Trust Is Earned

At the center of all brands is a little thing I like to call:

TRANSACTIONS.

Now, you might think it’s SALES, but there are a lot of Brands that exist without sales, think churches and political parties.

So at the core, there is always a transaction, there is always a trade of some kind.

Something must be given, and something must be taken.

There is always an exchange…

An exchange of services, exchange of goods, exchange of something, but there is always an exchange of one kind or another.

You have to get your head around that, because it’s like the food and water and air that lets a brand live.

We’ve talked about this plenty of times, people only ever buy two things: ‘To Get Pleasure, OR To Remove Pain.’

That’s it.

No matter what your brand does, it is going to resolve down to some

aspect of those two core things.

Get pleasure, or remove pain…

So I want you to think about something for a moment…

You need a root canal… lol

Do you go to the Dentist who just graduated dental school or do you look for an experienced dentist?

Let me go a step further…

Do you want to be a dentist’s FIRST patient?

No way!!

No one wants to help a dentist lose their dental virginity. lol Or less extreme…

Do you want to have your hair cut by someone who is a beauty school student?

If you could choose between an experienced hair stylist versus a beauty school student, who would you pick?

Still not clear?

Okay let’s go a step further…

Do you want a licensed CPA to do your books and taxes or a taxkeeping hobbyist?

Odd hobby, but we all know that guy who helps his buddies with their taxes.

Do you want that guy or a proven pro?

Do you take your pets to a licensed vet?

Or do you ask you cousin who is good with dogs what they think?

We all do this, we all use our social circle to get knowledge, but when it comes time to get results, when it comes time to get our teeth drilled, we use the best pro we can find right?

From dentists, to hair dressers, to mechanics, to accountants, to veterinarians, we all look for someone we feel we can trust.

When money is on the line, when health is on the line, when image is on the line, heck POOL cleaning, when some stranger is coming to your house to clean your pool, we all look for people and brands we feel we can trust.

Trust is the essence of exchange.

Trust is the prerequisite.

Trust is the oil that lets the exchange flow.

Trust is what sets the great brands apart from the also-rans.”

So here’s to day’s lesson…

So what is trust and how do you get it?

Well, let me give you the shortcut first, and then we’ll get into the details.

The fastest path to get trust is ‘Historical Success’.

People tend to feel that historical performance is a great indicator of future performance. And they’re usually right.

Think about the dentist in that example.

We all want a dentist with good referrals right?

When we move to a new city and need to get a new dentist, what’s the FIRST thing we do every time…

We ask around.

We ask the people we work with who they use.

I have a friend who interviewed 7 dentists before deciding on his new dentist.

The fastest path to trust is to have a track record of success.

We look for dentists with the best history of success. We look for hair stylists with experience and achievement.

Now, let me give you a little bonus gem today: “No one trusts CEO’s or Politicians anymore.”

Back in the 50’s a survey was done asking people who they trusted the most, and people strongly believed in corporate CEO’s and elected officials rating them the #1 source of trusted information, even higher than the news or journalists!

Like, if the CEO of Ford announced some new features, people took that as gospel.

If the President said something, people treated it as fact. Something shifted, sometime around Nixon and we lost faith in corporate officials and elected officers.

Nowadays, we barely believe anything a corporate CEO says.

We live in an era of fake news where we’ve lost our faith in journalists, lost our belief in news programs, lost our trust in elected officials, and somewhere near the bottom of it all we’ve completely lost our faith in corporate officers.

You can market all you want, you shout from the rooftops about your amazing history of success, but that will barely matter anymore, because people don’t trust company officers.

Who do they trust?

The same study was conducted in 2012 and what they found was shocking:

“A Friend, a Peer, or someone just like me” was the number 1 source of trusted information.

Ask yourself, when you shop at Amazon, do you check reviews before you buy?

A shocking 80% of shoppers check the reviews before they buy!

Think about that for a moment…

People don’t go to the Canon website to hear about how amazing the new camera is…

Sure they check the features at the main site, but when they want to know if it’s good, they check the reviews of “Friends, Peers, or someone just like me.”

So this is a hugely important aspect of good brand development. I like to say, “Brand Development is Building Trust”

Check this out…

A 2010 study called the ‘Customer Experience Impact 2010 report’ found that 82% of customers are willing to abandon a brand after a single bad experience.

Running a business and building a brand in the modern world is just insanely competitive.

People have more options than ever before and they simply don’t tolerate bad experiences the way the used to.

All that hard work, all that brand and trust building, crushed in a single bad day.

It takes a lifetime to build trust, but it can be destroyed in an instant.

How are you instilling and building trust in your marketplace?

So today, I want you to think about trust, of course cultivating reviews from friends, peers, and someone just like your ideal client are the Holy Grail of trust building.

But that’s just one touchpoint.

We’re going to do a whole week on that one soon, but today I want you thinking about all the other ways you can build and communicate trust.

Yesterday we spoke about Apple and did some brand review on them.

Let me ask you, does their packaging build trust? Does their website instill confidence?

Do their stores make potential clients feel like they can trust Apple?

Historical success is evidenced in everything we do.

Let me give you one last odd example.

Watches…

Nice watches are a very odd thing because they are a ‘signal�� to others.

They signal ‘historical success’ to some people, while they signal ‘decadence’ to others.

Personally, I just celebrated my ten year in business anniversary.

Now if your a little mathy, you know that 94% of all new businesses close within ten years.

So the ten year anniversary is a big one, so what did I get?

I got myself a new Rolex.

Not an insanely expensive one, but a nice one.

Now I know that for some of my clients, a nice watch signals a history of success, and for other potential clients, they don’t like it because it also signals that I’m not cheap…

So as we wrap up today and look at that concept a little bit, we need to understand that in both cases those people are getting the correct signal tied to that watch.

If I was running a non-profit, or a soup kitchen, it probably wouldn’t be the appropriate watch.

Remember Brand Integrity?

All aspects, right down to your shoes and watch are communicating with your clients and everything has to add up to single brand message.

If I ran a soup kitchen, a nice Rolex would be the wrong watch to wear…

But I’m a Brand Consultant!

I develop brands!

Think about it, would you want to hire an unsuccessful person to help build your brand?

Or would you want to hire someone with a history of success visible in everything they do?”

If want to develop your brand into a TRUSTED BRAND, then check out the Branding On Demand Program…

It’s my monthly membership program that can seriously get your brand rocking in now time!

Here’s the link: www.uniquefunneldesigns.com/intro

[garancefranke-ruta]

Too close for comfort: How social media changed how we talk to (and about) each other in America

Illustration by Yahoo News; source images: Getty Images, Gordon Donovan/Yahoo News

WASHINGTON — “We cannot afford to be so politically correct anymore,” Donald J. Trump thundered at the Republican National Convention in Cleveland.

“Here, at our convention, there will be no lies. We will honor the American people with the truth, and nothing else.”

Though fact checkers disagreed with his assessment that it was a lie-free convention, Trump’s from-the-podium denunciations of political correctness during the campaign resonated loudly. “I think the big problem this country has is being politically correct. I’ve been challenged by so many people, and I don’t frankly have time for total political correctness. And to be honest with you, this country doesn’t have time, either,” Trump told Megyn Kelly at the Fox News debate in response to questions about his offensive comments about women. He would later dismiss his shockingly crude comments to Access Hollywood host Billy Bush as “locker room talk.” As former White House adviser Steve Bannon recently told Charlie Rose on “60 Minutes,” “People didn’t care. They knew Donald Trump was just doing locker room talk with a guy. And they dismissed it. It had no lasting impact on the campaign.”

Offensive speech, true speech, politically correct speech – America has for the past two years been having a national debate about what the appropriate boundaries of public discourse ought to be. At the heart of this conflict is not just the question of who says what about whom, and how frankly, but a fundamental transformation in the technologies of speech over the past decade that has changed how the conversation itself is conducted. These changes have decreased perceived freedom of speech at the same time that they have magnified once marginal positions to create a novel public speech environment that can seem at once stiflingly conformist and shockingly extreme. And in the process of carving new public squares out of the once private realm of social ties, the new social technologies have made politicians of us all, subject to the same strictures on speech that formerly only truly public figures had to be concerned with.

“Our community is evolving from its origin connecting us with family and friends to now becoming a source of news and public discourse as well,” noted Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg in his lengthy February letter to the public.

“Big tech’s incursion into public/civic life,” Slate tech columnist Will Oremus has called it and similar efforts from other major firms.

Social media has, by design, fundamentally reshaped how we have conversations with each other, moving casual speech from the auditory ether to the realm of the written. And it has vastly expanded the audience for conversations that used to happen in small communities of relatively similar people, replacing them with one-to-many interactions with people who potentially have a wide array of views, and weak or even no direct personal ties.

From secret Facebook groups to support Hillary Clinton to Twitter pile-ons to the Alt Right’s provocative “free speech” tours at college campuses, we now are living in a world transformed by a massive decline in undocumented and uncontested speech — for most of human history, the very cornerstone of how we existed in society.

* * *

  The transformation has been astonishingly swift. 79 percent of online American adults used Facebook in 2016, according to an analysis by the Pew Research Center right after the election, and 24 percent used Twitter. Overall 86 percent of American adults use the internet, meaning that 68 percent of American adults were on Facebook in 2016 – and 76 percent of those checked in daily. Twitter users skewed younger and better educated than Facebook ones overall.

Just eight years ago, these social networks were so far from dominant that Pew didn’t even mention Facebook in its post-election analysis of how voters got their information, lumping everything digital into a single “internet” category. But we can get some sense of what’s changed from their early 2009 observation, “Usage of social networking sites has nearly quadrupled over the past four years—from fewer than one in ten online adults in early 2005 to more than one in three today.” And most of that would have been Facebook, as by 2010, only 6 percent of the adult population, or 8 percent of the adult online population, was using Twitter.

Illustration by Yahoo News: source images: Getty Images, Gordon Donovan/Yahoo News

While for early adopters it may feel like the social networks have been with us since the mid-2000s, in point of fact they were not very well-developed or widely used when Obama was elected president.

Overall, only “55 percent of all American adults went online during the 2008 election season to get news or information about the campaign, to communicate with others about politics, or to contribute to the online debate,” Pew found. By 2014, the average Facebook user had 338 friends and cited “sharing with many people at once” as the top reason for using the network and the numbers using Facebook was on track to surpass the one-time all digital category. Importantly, Pew found as early as 2008, “those who are most information hungry are the most likely to browse sites that match their views.”

That observation was at the heart of a slew of articles and books dating back to technology columnist Farhad Manjoo’s oft-overlooked but analytically important 2008 book True Enough: Learning to Live in a Post-Fact Society, which located the new success of campaigns of what we would today call fake news — like the 2004 Swift Boat attacks on Sen. John Kerry — in the ability of partisan actors to manipulate the newly fragmented and increasingly digital media ecosystem.

“In the last few years, pollsters and political researchers have begun to document a fundamental shift in the way Americans are thinking about the news,” Manjoo argued, in words as timely today as their were more than nine years ago. “No longer are we merely holding opinions different from one another; we’re also holding different facts. Increasingly our arguments aren’t over what we should be doing…but instead over what is happening.” The new fights would be over “competing visions of reality,” he predicted, correctly.

MoveOn cofounder Eli Pariser continued the argument in his 2011 book The Filter Bubble: How the New Personalized Web Is Changing What We Read and How We Think, blaming personalization as well as fragmentation for the failure of the digital utopian dream.

“For a time, it seemed that the Internet was going to entirely redemocratize society,” Pariser wrote. “Bloggers and citizen journalists would single-handedly rebuild the public media. Politicians would be able to run only with a broad base of support from small, everyday donors. Local governments would become more transparent and accountable to their citizens. And yet the era of civic connection I dreamed about hasn’t come. Democracy requires citizens to see things from another’s point of view, but instead we’re more and more enclosed in our own bubbles. Democracy requires a reliance on shared facts; instead we’re being offered parallel but separate universes.”

“Left to their own devices, personal information filters are a kind of autopropaganda, indoctrinating us with our own ideas, amplifying our desire for things that are familiar and leaving us oblivious to the dangers lurking in the dark territory of the unknown,” he warned.

At the same time our speech is more public and potentially contestable than ever before, we are increasingly cocooned in digital media worlds that reflect and reinforce our own views. And we increasingly live in physically atomized and homogenized communities that reflect our own values back to us, as Bill Bishop so well documented in 2004’s The Big Sort: Why the Clustering of Like-Minded America is Tearing Us Apart.

These dynamics work in dark synergy to amp up political polarization. Also contributing to the divisions are two political cycles’ worth of gerrymandering that have led to a congressional map where seats often are more vigorously contested from the intra-party extremes in primary cycles than by opponents across the aisle.

We are surrounded by a world that reflects us online, except that our once private speech utterances now increasingly take place in micro-publics, where we are forced to patrol the boundaries of our filter bubbles, defriending and muting and blocking those who intrude upon or take exception to our worldviews.

***

  The effort and drama involved in defending what is said online — the ever-present tension between competing world views and different speech communities that are now endlessly visible to each other — at once drives people away from the new public squares and radicalizes those who witness the fights within it.

There have been many famous cases of individuals driven from the most public of the new digital public squares, Twitter. Ghostbusters actress Leslie Jones left Twitter after becoming the target of a broad harassment campaign, though she later returned to using the service. “Twitter, for the past five years, has been a machine where I put in unpaid work and tension headaches come out,” wrote author Lindy West in January, explaining why she was leaving the site. In return for what she shares with the world, “I am micromanaged in real time by strangers; neo-Nazis mine my personal life for vulnerabilities to exploit; and men enjoy unfettered, direct access to my brain so they can inform me, for the thousandth time, that they would gladly rape me if I weren’t so fat.”

Her real reason for leaving, “wasn’t the trolls themselves … it was the global repercussions of Twitter’s refusal to stop them,” she wrote, in words that take on additional weight after Charlottesville:

The white supremacist, anti-feminist, isolationist, transphobic “alt-right” movement has been beta-testing its propaganda and intimidation machine on marginalised Twitter communities for years now – how much hate speech will bystanders ignore? When will Twitter intervene and start protecting its users? – and discovered, to its leering delight, that the limit did not exist. No one cared. Twitter abuse was a grand-scale normalisation project, disseminating libel and disinformation, muddying long-held cultural givens such as “racism is bad” and “sexual assault is bad” and “lying is bad” and “authoritarianism is bad”, and ultimately greasing the wheels for Donald Trump’s ascendance to the US presidency. Twitter executives did nothing.

Meanwhile Jason Kessler, the organizer of the Unite the Right rally in Charlottesville, has cited the public vilification of publicist Justine Sacco over an offensive tweet about AIDS and Africa as a turning point in his own political evolution. “It was an awkward joke; an attempt to be edgy in the hands of an amateur comedienne that fell flat. But it whipped up the social justice hate mob into a frenzy,” he wrote in 2016.

Complaints and asides about our new digital speech communities are a daily part of living in them. “Every time I get off Facebook I feel like I need to decontaminate. That site is toxic,” wrote Jordan Uhl, one of the organizers of June’s March for Truth on Trump’s Russia ties, on Friday. “I wanted to write about [Hillary Clinton] and engage rigorously with her ideas far more than I did. But I didn’t. In part, I did not have the energy to deal with the inevitable backlash, from corners right and left,” writer Roxanne Gay admitted in the New York Times. One of the largest Facebook groups of Clinton supporters was a secret (or open secret) group because women wanted a place to express their views without being pounced on for holding them. “As much as possible,” group founder Libby

Chamberlain told the Washington Post, “it removes the risk that they’re going to be attacked for their views.”  “It’s become a thing now, where I see one of my peers tell their story, then get dogpiled by 22yr olds for furthering problematic narratives,” wrote David Wynne about his generation of queer men, who experienced a different world than do young gay and lesbians today. Lesbian author and filmmaker Sarah Schulman went so far as to write a book, Confict Is Not Abuse: Overstating Harm, Community Responsibility and the Duty of Repair, to take on the contemporary culture of “overreaction to difference.” “The mere fact of the other person’s difference is misrepresented as an assault that then justifies our cruelty,” she charges in it.

As Facebook and other tech companies come under increasing scrutiny for their lack of oversight of the public commons they have created, and the space they’ve allowed to trolls, bots, and foreign agents with disruptive intent, it’s worth also considering the role they’ve played in creating an environment seen as stifling the speech of both liberals and conservatives.

For good and for ill, we now live in an environment of highly contested speech, where more people than ever before in human history can see and publicly react to the different views around them.

****

  In many ways, the underlying dynamics cannot solely to be laid at the feet of the tech companies. Benjamin Barber argued in his seminal 1992 Atlantic magazine article Jihad vs. McWorld, later a book of the same name, that the rise of global culture fueled the rise of defensive tribalism and fundamentalism as traditionally isolated communities were forced to defend their old ways and cultural identities in the face of a homogenizing media onslaught.

Just beyond the horizon of current events lie two possible political futures—both bleak, neither democratic. The first is a retribalization of large swaths of humankind by war and bloodshed: a threatened Lebanonization of national states in which culture is pitted against culture, people against people, tribe against tribe—a Jihad in the name of a hundred narrowly conceived faiths against every kind of interdependence, every kind of artificial social cooperation and civic mutuality. The second is being borne in on us by the onrush of economic and ecological forces that demand integration and uniformity and that mesmerize the world with fast music, fast computers, and fast food—with MTV, Macintosh, and McDonald’s, pressing nations into one commercially homogenous global network: one McWorld tied together by technology, ecology, communications, and commerce. The planet is falling precipitantly apart AND coming reluctantly together at the very same moment.

Barber was writing in a world dominated by television, but the echoes of his argument hang over the debate about today’s digital world.

“Progress now requires humanity coming together not just as cities or nations, but also as a global community,” wrote Zuckerberg in his letter. “This is especially important right now. Facebook stands for bringing us closer together and building a global community.”

Barber’s broad theory was the opposite of the technocratic utopianism of Zuckerberg and other digital leaders. Proximity and visibility can increase conflict, as old ways of living feel themselves to be under assault and people dig in to defend their views. Globalism gives birth to reaction, the vision of a world community leading to a hardening of the lines around those viewpoints that the broader global community cannot or will not absorb. In a diverse world, as in a diverse nation, there will be competing visions of the best life and deep disagreements about who should wield power.

“Rhetorically, the tech companies gesture toward individuality — to the empowerment of the ‘user’—but their worldview rolls over it,” argues Franklin Foer in his just-released book, World Without Mind: The Existential Threat of Big Tech, a deep look at the changes wrought by the foursome Europeans call GAFA: Google, Apple, Facebook, and Amazon. These big tech companies “are shredding the principles that protect individuality,” he argues. “Their devices and sites have collapsed privacy; they disrespect the value of authorship…they hope to automate the choices, both large and small, that we make through the day.”

They believe “we’re fundamentally social beings, born to collective existence” but in fact they are an example of the twinning of “monopoly and conformism,” actors that marry corporate “concentration” and intellectual “homogenization” into a powerful new threat to the very idea of individuality.

Facebook itself is grappling, more than a decade after its founding, with some of these issues. As individuals feel themselves to be threatened by being thrust into direct, seemly intimate conversations with those they disagree with, the divides between them often only harden and they seek out communities of agreement.

“Research shows that some of the most obvious ideas, like showing people an article from the opposite perspective, actually deepen polarization by framing other perspectives as foreign,” Zuckerberg noted in his February letter.

“Research suggests the best solutions for improving discourse may come from getting to know each other as whole people instead of just opinions — something Facebook may be uniquely suited to do. If we connect with people about what we have in common — sports teams, TV shows, interests — it is easier to have dialogue about what we disagree on.” Facebook would be rolling out tools and a new focus on “safe” and “meaningful” groups to built these alternative communities.

The big question is if it’s ever going to be possible for this kind of reconciliation and shared understanding to happen online, thanks to the inherent dynamics of the medium he helped create.

  * * *

It can be harder to see other people as real in a world that is all-too-often virtual, where people are performing for an audience, where there are grave questions about whether the communities we are partaking of are real, and where people routinely say things to each other with a vehemence and passion that’s as much a factor of the distance between them as their actual intentions.

But the past year has also seen some astonishing examples of the collapse of seemingly hardened online identities in the face of physical reality and real human society, governed by actual laws. And the law takes comments made online seriously, even when those who make them insist they are merely performing in character before their micro-publics.

In Charlottesville, a young white man ripped off his Vanguard America White shirt when confronted by a crowd. “I’m not really white power, man, I just did it for the fun,” he said. “I’m sorry.”

What happened? A reporter asked him. “Scared the shit out of me,” he replied.

He was there because “it’s kind of a fun idea,” he later explained. “Just being able to say ‘white power,’ you know?”

So-called “crying Nazi” Christopher Cantwell made the sort of threats in a crowd he had made online as the manager of what he told a judge was “a racist podcast,” and now sits in a Virginia jail, bail having been denied as he awaits trial on charges of pepper-spraying someone during the melee in Charlottesville. His lawyer sought to play down his aggressive and racist statements at the rally as the performances of a shock jock, although the crimes he is charged with seem consistent with those sentiments.

“Pizzagate” gunman Edgar Maddison Welch pled guilty to assault with a dangerous weapon and transporting a firearm over state lines after firing an AR-15 in a Washington, D.C., pizza restaurant that had become a magnet for bizarre online conspiracy theories. He was sentenced to four years in jail.

And most recently, former hedge fund manager Martin Shkreli had his bail revoked by a judge for posting a comment to his 70,000 Facebook followers offering a $5,000 reward to anyone who could snatch a strand of Hillary Clinton’s hair during her book tour.

“The fact that he continues to remain unaware of the inappropriateness of his actions or words demonstrates to me that he may be creating ongoing risk to the community,” said U.S. District Judge Kiyo Matsumoto, explaining the decision to hold Shkreli.

“This is a solicitation of assault. That is not protected by the First Amendment.”

And yet it – and the defense of those actions — is the sort of thing we see online all the time: the idea that what he was doing lay somewhere between joking and trolling. “He did not intended to cause harm,” Shkreli’s attorney Benjamin Brafman said. “Being inappropriate does not make you a danger to the community.”

The judge disagreed. But ultimately the legal system cannot be the forum for adjudicating speech in the public square; it has an interest only insofar as other criminal accusations have become part of the picture.

Will efforts by the digital companies themselves be the solution? In the wake of the Charlottesville march, many internet providers have sought to shut down radical forums and cease to give platforms to white supremacist groups for online organizing.

This may force those groups to use older tools to organize and spread their message.

But “no-platforming” steps by the big companies also reinforce the message that fuels grievance from extremists, and raises concerns that the big tech companies, having created new public squares, are now taking on a role stifling of speech in the name of politics.

And so the free speech fights roll on, gathering in-real-life opposition as they go. Digital provocateur Milo Yiannopoulos, banned from Twitter, and other Alt Right figures are headed back to Berkeley, California, next weekend, where they will surely be met by angry Antifa protestors and students who object to their presence. And where we will see again what these online fights look like when made flesh.

_____

Read more from Yahoo News:

Clinton: Trump is being ‘played’ by Vladimir Putin and Kim Jong Un

Houston’s historic Alley Theatre is flooded but unbowed

‘Everybody is baffled’ by Trump rescinding flood-protection rules, senator says

Donald Trump, softy

Photos: Homemade bomb explodes on packed London subway

[bloojayoolie]

Being Alone, Andrew Bogut, and Animals: 28441-13 Diesel Daze years olt -05 SWEET SENTIOR WITHAPLATINUM BEHAVIOR RATNG Handsome Diesel needs an awesome retirement home where he can settle in and know he's safe and loved - Friendly sweet, gentle & Somebusny loves you! debonair! At Manhattan ACC waiting for Love Spring Has Sprung **** TO BE KILLED - 5/24/2018 **** "..... POLITE WITH ALL DOGS MET, IGNORES A LITTLE PEKINGESE LOOKING FOR TROUBLE AND STILL HAS AN EYE FOR THE LADIES." <3 A volunteer writes: What could be better than spending a sunny afternoon in the park with Diesel Daze, a very endearing and mature gentleman with the most mysterious and enthralling eyes? I did not wish to come back to the care center...neither did DD! So many people wanted to pet him, even dogs locked in the dog run scrambled at the gate to meet him! Diesel Daze is a debonair pooch who exhales peace and goodness. He walks at a very slow but sure pace, stopping at times to "smell the roses" or acknowledging a nice comment made about him. He managed the stairs carefully. He loves treats for which I do not make him sit as his hinds are a little stiff (this is quite allowed at the ripe age of 13) and closes his gorgeous brown eyes speckled with blue when he is being caressed. He is polite with all dogs met, ignores a little Peekinese looking for trouble and still has an eye for the ladies. Diesel Daze enjoyed a rest in the yard, laying on the turf and taking the sun. He is such a great guy who must have been quite a catch in his prime but still is stunning with his lingering beauty and his gentle, friendly and loving personality. Diesel Daze is with us as his elderly owner could not care for him anymore. He comes with sweet comments from his long time family. Diesel Daze is in his senior years and his life could likely be longer if his new owner could work on bringing down his weight as DD seems otherwise quite healthy, likely the result of good genes, love and great care. Diesel Daze is at the Manhattan Care Center. We so would like for him to start a new page in his life...with You!!! DIESEL DAZE@MANHATTAN ACC Hello, my name is Diesel Daze My animal id is #28441 I am a desexed male black brindle dog at the Manhattan Animal Care Center The shelter thinks I am about 13 years old Weight: 105.2 lbs Came into shelter as a stray May 18, 2018 Diesel Daze is at risk for medical reasons. Diesel Daze is a geriatric gentleman who is obese, has multiple masses which are affecting his mobility as well as a bone deformity affecting one limb, has dental disease and ear irritation. Behaviorally, we have no concerns for Diesel Daze, whom we believe would be suitable to most homes. My medical notes are... Weight: 105.2 lbs Vet Notes 20/05/2018 DVM Intake Exam Estimated age: ~13yrs based on O hx; consistent with exam. Microchip noted on Intake? scanned positive by LVT on intake. MC# 985121012554891 History: Subjective / Observed Behavior - BAR, allows all handling. Friendly. Evidence of Cruelty seen - none Evidence of Trauma seen - none Objective BCS 9/9 EENT: Eyes clear, no nasal or ocular discharge noted. Moderate brown exudate, AU Oral Exam: dc 3/5; pd 3/5 PLN: No enlargements noted H/L: No murmur ausculted; CRT < 2, Lungs clear, eupnic ABD: Non painful, no masses palpated but difficult to palpate due to large size U/G: neutered male. MSI: Ambulatory x 4, but unsteady due to obesity; skin free of parasites, multiple subcutaneous masses throughout body. dermal hairless mass along the left ventrolateral abdomen; valgus, R TL CNS: Mentation appropriate - no signs of neurologic abnormalities Rectal: grossly normal Assessment obesity multiple masses -- suspect lipomas, affecting mobility dental disease otitis externa valgus, right TL Prognosis: fair Plan:weight management! placement SURGERY:already neutered. Details on my behavior are... Behavior Condition: 1. Green Behavior History Behavior Assessment Upon intake Diesel allowed all handling. He had a very healthy appetite for treats, sought to be petted often and allowed the counselor to collar and leash him Date of Intake: 5/18/2018 Basic Information:: Diesel Daze is a roughly 13 year old dog whom was gotten during a giveaway and was kept in the same home for almost 10 years. Previously lived with:: 1 adult, 2 dogs How is this dog around strangers?: Around strangers he is described as outgoing and doesn't play How is this dog around children?: Around children he is described as respectful and doesn't play How is this dog around other dogs?: Around other dogs he is described as relaxed and doesn't play Resource guarding:: He has no known resource guarding issues Bite history:: He has no known bite histories Housetrained:: Yes Energy level/descriptors:: low energy level For a New Family to Know: Diesel Daze is described as friendly, affectionate and mellow. He was being fed Alpo wet food 2 times a day, is considered house trained and was being walked twice a day. He pulls lightly on leash, has no interests in toys and behaves well when he is left home alone Date of intake:: 5/18/2018 Spay/Neuter status:: Yes Means of surrender (length of time in previous home):: Stray (In home for 10 years) Previously lived with:: An adult and two dogs Behavior toward strangers:: Outgoing Behavior toward children:: Respectful Behavior toward dogs:: Relaxed Resource guarding:: None reported Bite history:: None reported Housetrained:: Yes Energy level/descriptors:: Diesel Daze is described as friendly, affectionate, and mellow with a low level of activity. Date of assessment:: 5/21/2018 Look:: 1. Dog's eyes are averted, ears are back, tail is down, relaxed body posture. Dog allows head to be held loosely in Assessor's cupped hands. Sensitivity:: 1. Dog stands still and accepts the touch, eyes are averted, and tail is in neutral position with a relaxed body posture. Dog's mouth is likely closed for at least a portion of the assessment item. Tag:: 1. Dog follows at the end of the leash, body soft. Paw squeeze 1:: 2. Dog quickly pulls back. Paw squeeze 2:: 2. Dog quickly pull back. Flank squeeze 1:: Item not conducted Flank squeeze 2:: Item not conducted Toy:: 1. Minimal interest in toy, dog may smell or lick, then turns away. Summary:: Diesel Daze approached the assessor with a soft body. He was calm and social during the assessment, allowed all handling, and displayed no concerning behaviors. Summary:: The previous owner of Diesel Daze reports that he is "relaxed" in the presence of other dogs. Diesel Daze has displayed interest in greeting other dogs in the care center, and has also been observed to attempt to mount them. Slow introductions are recommended to dogs who are respectful and tolerant, and it can not be said for certain how the observed mounting may translate into a home environment with other dogs. Summary (1):: 5/20: When introduced off leash to the female greeter dog, Diesel Daze follows and attempts to mount. Summary (2):: 5/22: Diesel Daze follows and attempts to mount. Date of intake:: 5/18/2018 Summary:: Diesel Daze allowed handling and sought attention. Date of initial:: 5/20/2018 Summary:: Diesel Daze was social and allowed handling. ENERGY LEVEL:: Diesel Daze was described as having a low level of activity. BEHAVIOR DETERMINATION:: AVERAGE (suitable for an adopter with an average amount of dog experience) Behavior Asilomar: H - Healthy * TO FOSTER OR ADOPT * If you would like to adopt a dog on our “To Be Killed” list, and you CAN get to the shelter in person to complete the adoption process *within 48 hours of reserve*, you can reserve the dog online until noon on the day they are scheduled to die. We have provided the Brooklyn, Staten Island and Manhattan information below. Adoption hours at these facilities is Noon – 8:00 p.m. (6:30 on weekends) HOW TO RESERVE A “TO BE KILLED” DOG ONLINE (only for those who can get to the shelter IN PERSON to complete the adoption process, and only for the dogs on the list NOT marked New Hope Rescue Only). Follow our Step by Step directions below! *PLEASE NOTE – YOU MUST USE A PC OR TABLET – PHONE RESERVES WILL NOT WORK! ** STEP 1: CLICK ON THIS RESERVE LINK: https://newhope.shelterbuddy.com/Animal/List Step 2: Go to the red menu button on the top right corner, click register and fill in your info. Step 3: Go to your email and verify account Step 4: Go back to the website, click the menu button and view available dogs Step 5: Scroll to the animal you are interested and click reserve STEP 6 ( MOST IMPORTANT STEP ): GO TO THE MENU AGAIN AND VIEW YOUR CART. THE ANIMAL SHOULD NOW BE IN YOUR CART! Step 7: Fill in your credit card info and complete transaction Animal Care Centers of NYC (ACC) nycacc.org HOW TO FOSTER OR ADOPT IF YOU *CANNOT* GET TO THE SHELTER IN PERSON, OR IF THE DOG IS NEW HOPE RESCUE ONLY! You must live within 3 – 4 hours of NY, NJ, PA, CT, RI, DE, MD, MA, NH, VT, ME or Norther VA. Please PM our page for assistance. You will need to fill out applications with a New Hope Rescue Partner to foster or adopt a dog on the To Be Killed list, including those labelled Rescue Only. Hurry please, time is short, and the Rescues need time to process the applications. Shelter contact information Phone number (212) 788-4000 Email adoption@nycacc.org Shelter Addresses: Brooklyn Shelter: 2336 Linden Boulevard Brooklyn, NY 11208 Manhattan Shelter: 326 East 110 St. New York, NY 10029 Staten Island Shelter: 3139 Veterans Road West Staten Island, NY 10309 Available Animals Thank you for your interest in adopting from Animal Care Centers of NYC. Our At Risk List is posted each day (except Saturday) at 6:00PM and remains viewable until 12:00PM noon the following day. newhope.shelterbuddy.com

[bloojayoolie]

Being Alone, Andrew Bogut, and Apparently: Given up for"No Time" Affectionate, shy, playful, friendly w/adults, strangers, kids & dogs, big or small! Well behaved, house & crate trained. A Good Girl! ld 17552 @3 Yrs., 52 lbs., Spayed, Manhattan Acc Hazel TO BE KILLED – 1/17/2018 Hazel loves to sing … well, she likes to sing to get your attention so you will take her out of her kennel…the ONLY place in the world she can’t tolerate. 😊 Once out she is bashful about her singing capabilities and somewhat shy, but absolutely sweet. She is slightly plump, but all the more to love, and of course she is absolutely beautiful. Her former family said they had “no time” anymore to care for a pet and dumped her to die. It’s really disgraceful, because she is good with kids, she is affectionate with everyone, even strangers, and she is great with dogs large or small! She doesn’t like cats but nobody’s perfect, right? As a volunteer writes: Pretty Hazel was a family dog who, although crate trained, used to roam freely in her owners' apartment. As a result, in addition to not being in her familiar surroundings and with her loved ones, she is not too fond of her kennel. But show her a leash and Hazel will zip...and exit "like a flower" from her den. She does not mind a coat and a scarf. A treat as a reward makes her happy. On the way to the street, we meet a few staff who squeal, "Hazel, Hazel, the pretty one!" Hazel is quickly in their arms for hugs and kisses. She is a good walker, does a lot of sniffing, appears house trained and sits nicely on command. Other dogs are not her focus although in playgroups with her peers, she is polite and even playful at times. She did not play with a ball but is said to be playful by her former owners. The bitter cold does not entice anyone to play, unfortunately. Hazel is a very girly and elegant young lady, beautifully cared for by her former family and ready to be the new forever best friend you have dreamed of. Come and meet Hazel at the Manhattan Care Center. Miss HAZEL! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v1C6OJI1IAg More of Miss HAZEL: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ix5NuXFmBDs&feature=youtu.be HAZEL, ID # 17552, @ 3 Yrs. Old, 52 lbs. Manhattan cc, Medium Mixed breed, White / Tan, Spayed Female Owner Surrender Reason: NO TIME Shelter Assessment Rating: Experience Intake Behavior Rating: INTAKE NOTE: Upon intake, when I approached Hazel she jumped up on me and allowed me to pet her on her head. Hazel allowed me to collar her and place a leash over her head. Hazel also allowed me to pet her along the top of her body. Hazel pulled lightly on the leash as I walked out towards her kennel. Hazel walked into her kennel on her own. OWNER SURRENDER NOTES - Basic Information: Hazel is a 3 year old female white and tan medium mixed breed dog. Hazel lived with previous owner for about 3 years and was surrendered because owner no longer had the time to care for her. Hazel has no injuries or health issues and was last taken to the vet about 2 years ago. She previously lived with two adults. Hazel is friendly and outgoing around strangers. Hazel is described as being playful and jumpy around strangers. Hazel has previously interacted with children aged 4-5 years old. Hazel is described as being excited and jumpy around children and will allow to be petted. Hazel has interacted with both small and large dogs. Hazel is described as being playful with other dogs but will growl at them if they try to take away a toy from her. Hazel has not interacted with cats. Hazel is not bothered her food or bowl is touched while she is eating. Hazel has never bitten another animal or human. She is housetrained with a high energy level. When Hazel hears loud noises or fireworks, she will curl up in a corner and hide. Hazel is not bothered when bathed but tries to escape when dried with a blow dryer. Hazel is also not bothered when her nails are trimmed or when being held or restrained. She also is not bothered when her paws are touched. She has never had any medical issues and her owner stated she is unaware of any medical issues. For a New Family to Know: Hazel is a friendly, affectionate, playful, shy, and sometimes fearful dog. When at home, Hazel likes to follow her owner around and stay in the same room as them. Hazel was kept as an indoors only dog and slept on floor next to her owner's bed. Hazel was being fed Beneful dry food twice a day. Hazel is house trained and never had accidents at home. When left home alone, Hazel is left inside crate with door closed and is well behaved. Hazel was taken for slow walks on the lease and would pull lightly. When walked off leash, Hazel wanders some but comes when called. Hazel Knows basic commands such as sit and stay. SHELTER ASSESSMENT - Date of assessment: 7-Jan-2018 Look: 1. Dog's eyes are averted, with tail wagging and ears back. Allows head to be held loosely in Assessor's cupped hands. Sensitivity: 1. Dog leans into the Assessor, eyes soft or squinty, soft and loose body, open mouth. Tag: 1. Dog follows at the end of the leash, body soft. Paw squeeze 1: 1. Dog does not respond at all for three seconds. Eyes are averted and ears are relaxed or back. Paw squeeze 2: 1. Dog gently pulls back his/her paw. Flank squeeze 1: Item not conducted Flank squeeze 2: Item not conducted Toy: 1. Minimal interest in toy, dog may smell or lick, then turns away. Summary: Hazel approached the assessor in the assessment room with a soft body. She was social during the assessment, allowed all handling, and displayed no concerning behaviors. PLAYGROUP NOTES - Summary: HAZEL IS A *HELPER DOG! The behavior department feels that Hazel would be compatible with social, gently playful dogs. Hazel has displayed social, gently playful behavior when engaged with dogs in the care center. The previous owner described her as "playful" around large and small dogs, though was reported to growl if approached by another dog while in possession of a toy. When introduced to a small dog in the foster home, Hazel was polite when greeting, and respectful of the warning signals given when the other dog was uncomfortable. Summary (1): 1/5: When introduced off leash to male dogs, Hazel is initially somewhat tense, but with a second dog greets politely and engages with loose body, exploring the pen with the other dog. Summary (2): 1/6: Hazel greets a male dog politely and engages in some running play. 1/9-10: Hazel is polite and tolerant when greeting other dogs. ENERGY LEVEL: Hazel's previous owner described her as having a high level of activity. We recommend long-lasting chews, food puzzles, and hide-and-seek games, in additional to physical exercise, to positively direct her energy and enthusiasm BEHAVIOR DETERMINATION: EXPERIENCE (suitable for an adopter with some previous dog experience, especially with the behaviors outlined below) Behavior Asilomar TM - Treatable-Manageable Recommendations: No cats Recommendations comments: No cats: When attempting to introduce Hazel to the resident cat in a foster home, Hazel displayed concerning behavior- beginning to vocalize, hard bark, growl, followed by attempting to pull toward and chase after the cat. Potential challenges: Kennel presence Potential challenges comments: Kennel presence: In her kennel, Hazel barks and growls when people pass by. While we cannot be certain if this behavior will appear in any other contexts, in highly emotionally charged or stressful environments Hazel may show behavior similar to what she is currently demonstrating in her kennel. We recommend potential adopters be comfortable managing this behavior and keeping themselves safe in any similar future situations. MEDICAL NOTES: 12-Jan-2018: Pre-Op Exam, Vet Notes: 2:26 PM, post op exam wnl, seems confortable in kennel 11-Jan-2018: Spay/Neuter Summary Post Surgery Note: 10:30 AM. Pre-surgical exam, Anesthesia, and surgery performed by ASPCA. Green linear tattoo placed on ventral abdomen. 5-Jan-2018: DVM Intake. Vet Notes: 3:36 PM. DVM Intake Exam. Estimated age: ~ 3years. History : Owner surrender. Subjective: BARH, reported to be cage aggressive but once out of cage is very friendly. Observed Behavior - Wagging tail, looking for affection. Evidence of Cruelty seen – none. Evidence of Trauma seen – none. Objective: P = 96, R = 36, BCS 5/9. EENT: Mild peri-ocular erythema, otherwise Eyes clear, ears clean, no nasal or ocular discharge noted. Oral Exam: Mild periodontal disease, no lesions. PLN: No enlargements noted. H/L: NSR, NMA, CRT < 2, Lungs clear, eupnic. ABD: Non painful, no masses palpated. U/G: Female intact, no mammary masses, mammary tissue very prominent. MSI: Ambulatory x 4, skin free of parasites, no masses noted, healthy hair coat. CNS: Mentation appropriate - no signs of neurologic abnormalities Rectal: NE. Assessment: Apparently healthy intact female. Prognosis: Excellent. Plan: Okay for surgery **** TO FOSTER OR ADOPT **** If you would like to adopt a dog on our “To Be Killed” list, and you CAN get to the shelter in person to complete the adoption process *within 48 hours of reserve*, you can reserve the dog online until noon on the day they are scheduled to die. We have provided the Brooklyn, Staten Island and Manhattan information below. Adoption hours at these facilities is Noon – 8:00 p.m. (6:30 on weekends) HOW TO RESERVE A “TO BE KILLED” DOG ONLINE (only for those who can get to the shelter IN PERSON to complete the adoption process, and only for the dogs on the list NOT marked New Hope Rescue Only). Follow our Step by Step directions below! *PLEASE NOTE – YOU MUST USE A PC OR TABLET – PHONE RESERVES WILL NOT WORK! ** STEP 1: CLICK ON THIS RESERVE LINK: http://ift.tt/2ynocEZ Step 2: Go to the red menu button on the top right corner, click register and fill in your info. Step 3: Go to your email and verify account Step 4: Go back to the website, click the menu button and view available dogs Step 5: Scroll to the animal you are interested and click reserve STEP 6 ( MOST IMPORTANT STEP ): GO TO THE MENU AGAIN AND VIEW YOUR CART. THE ANIMAL SHOULD NOW BE IN YOUR CART! Step 7: Fill in your credit card info and complete transaction Animal Care Centers of NYC (ACC) nycacc.org HOW TO FOSTER OR ADOPT IF YOU *CANNOT* GET TO THE SHELTER IN PERSON, OR IF THE DOG IS NEW HOPE RESCUE ONLY! You must live within 3 – 4 hours of NY, NJ, PA, CT, RI, DE, MD, MA, NH, VT, ME or Norther VA. Please PM our page for assistance. You will need to fill out applications with a New Hope Rescue Partner to foster or adopt a dog on the To Be Killed list, including those labelled Rescue Only. Hurry please, time is short, and the Rescues need time to process the applications. Shelter contact information Phone number (212) 788-4000 Email adoption@nycacc.org Shelter Addresses: Brooklyn Shelter: 2336 Linden Boulevard Brooklyn, NY 11208 Manhattan Shelter: 326 East 110 St. New York, NY 10029 Staten Island Shelter: 3139 Veterans Road West Staten Island, NY 10309