Snesker

What do you mean, what about autism? It's a problem more important than homelessness. Having a home is not a physiological necessity, having a shelter is and only in adverse conditions (note that clothing can often do the job).

Also, 'Most homeless have mental problems' confirms the sentence you quoted. You're either intentionally misunderstanding it because you think I'm a mean person or, as it also seems, you have a poor understanding of English. Having mental problems that result in homelessness have also resulted in an inability or distaste for adapting to society as you, the government and everyone else demand people have residences. (Edited to remove a stray period and add a newline if it lets me. I'm having a formatting problem.)

Edit again: It's unacceptable to go around accusing people who make statements you disagree with trolls. In these instances, you're often wrong and you look like a fool to outside observers(who don't also do it habitually).

>Homelessness in America is our biggest problem. LOL. Not the military industrial complex? Not pollution? Not corrupt politicians? Not murder, assault, rape, fraud? Not wall-street? Even autism is arguably much more important. You could even wrap it up in poor American education. >every county should have a piece of land reserved for homeless individuals. So crime-ridden slums that would attract only violent alcoholics and thieves. These people can't be 'saved' and are homeless because of their vices and inability or distaste for adapting to society. >As to the fear of crime and drug use in these designated areas--if there's a problem police can always be called. I'm sure they can be dragged away from revenue collection? Thinking the police have nothing better to do is one of the lamest excuses for wanting to create crime I've ever seen.

>The idea behind zoning is to make sure that different classes and races don't have to see each other if they don't want to.

What's wrong with that? It's what they want.

>whichever campground is closest to the city >and are equipped with water, power (for trailers), and showers.

This is not camping. It's dishonest and offensive to call sitting around with every amenity programming camping. I can't understand where you get off having the audacity to say people need nature when you're flying around and driving hours to spend time in tacky family camp grounds and playing on your computer. I'm so disgusted that you think not taking a smartphone with you is an act of daring revolution. So, what, you own two phones? And the smart one can't be made to stop vibrating over every reply to your dumb tweets? Regarding everything else you wrote, there's a book about how to buck gullibility that might suit your little maverick wilderness adventures.

Is Hacker News the best place for internet eulogies? Seems like this could be a good opportunity for someone to make a website or an application.

They don't want you, you're probably too smart.

http://abcnews.go.com/US/court-oks-barring-high-iqs-cops/sto...

I don't think you or the police have any obligation or right to track pedophiles. I think you mean child molesters, exploiters or slave owners.

Your post really challenged me, because I've been thinking of the issue in an us-versus-them mindset (we being criminals).

That allowable 1.9% of 40-60 hours of work could be a murder.

As I read this comment I thought it was a shill piece and you proved me right with the link at the end. I was about to say that if you want to exploit the gullible here, do it less transparently but you more or less got it right.

A Google earth search of Cape Breton would like to have a word with you.

What part of my comment do you object to? Challenging the official story of the alleged holocaust DOES cost you your freedom in Germany, and also to a lesser extent in Canada. Do you think it should be a crime to disagree with the government? With Jews? With the 'general consensus'?

Furthermore, my remark doesn't prove in the least that I'm a troll or a holocaust denier. Use your logic. The fact that your comment is still live and wasn't heavily downvoted says something about the current HN audience.

Someone feeling excluded does not make something exclusionary. It's not up to you to decide someone's opinion is objective fact [i]simply because they're a woman, I might add[/i].

Sex isn't a 'need', get over yourself.

Imprisoning someone isn't a response to anything but crime.

Imprisonment for a crime is not discrimination. You're insane.

The strange assertions aside, calling someone creepy (and meaning it) is hostile. The individual used this to mean the relationship between the two men was disgusting. Saying you think someone is disgusting, with as much intent and conviction as was applied here isn't like a joke, it's a serious opinion. I don't know how to express this. It wasn't a joke, what this user posted. If someone posted a long description of how they inanely perceived your life and your association with your colleagues and made true-looking allegations of 'creepy' non-sexual sexual relations I wonder if you wouldn't be offended and would want to clear up the misunderstanding.

1. A woman saying something is exclusionary does not make it exclusionary on the basis that it's a woman who said it.

2.>original author has some outdated views on gender competence This is libel. This is not at all a conclusion that can be drawn from that user's posts. It's an unfair presumption and you're wrong to go around stating your opinions of others as facts.

Why is that a problem?

"not so delicate that they would need to be handled with kid gloves."

See... it's the little things like this. I am pretty sure that was not your intention, but please do know that turns of phrases like that hurt a little, and exclude a little.

To see what I mean, s/kid/jew/ or s/kid/white/ or some other category and see how it reads.

I have firefox configured to search just my history and even that gets cripplingly slow. I'm incessantly frustrated by the preposterous need for resources of web browsers.

I would tell people to install mint instead - It's easier, the UIs aren't impossibly stupid and canonical doesn't have their malware in it.

Many places and people believe there should be limits to copyright and trademarks if it's in the public good.

Not knowing how to operate a server, I have to assume it's harder and you have to know everything it does and the CLI to use it. Not the same for mint or any other pre-packaged distros.

Is your comment saying 'linux is amazing, I just can't stop ricing it and get to work! OSX is better because it doesn't let me customize it'?

>Is it reasonable, then, to be uncomfortable around knives in a kitchen, too?

In Britain it is! Bin that knife, criminal!

ALA, while essential, is effectively useless 'for your brain'. You need the products your body creates in inadequaate amounts from ALA, EPA & DHA.

Furthermore, I personally guarantee your flax oil is rancid. That shit does not keep. Eat sardines.

>Recently, she sent me an email to say that she had heated up a frozen meal in a plastic bowl (“I know, I know…” she wrote) and within two hours the bumps on her skin had returned.

Margaret told me if I ate those stale old biscuits I'd break out in hives, and I did!!!

The most important function comments serve is to allow readers to view dissenting opinions and remarks conveniently. Something they would otherwise have to search out.

To date I have not seen a method of comment moderation on any site that hasn't been used to stifle dissent or unpopular opinions. It's unacceptable to give the illusion of open, free discussion when you have the ability to downvote or delete a post.

This is, plain and simple, an article espousing censorship. I'm not qualified intellectually to argue with censorship proponents, especially here.