cedara: (Politics)
([personal profile] cedara Sep. 25th, 2017 08:36 am)
CDU/CSU 33,0 % (Conservatives)
SPD 20,5 % (Social Democrats)
AfD 12,6 % (The Neo-Nazis, imho)
FDP 10,7 % (The Liberals)
Linke 9,2 % (The Left)
Grüne 8,9 % (The Greens)

2017 Voter turnout 72,1% (2013 Voter turnout 68,6%)

A decent interactive map can be found at this place. The AfD won direct seats in Saxony.
Tags:
destina: (other: thought cloud)
([personal profile] destina Sep. 23rd, 2017 04:10 pm)
I have six stories sitting in drafts on AO3 to be posted - two of them brand new - and they've been languishing there for weeks because I can't think of titles or summaries for them. Untitled by Destina - Doc and Wyatt get it on is not a particularly enticing gateway to my Tombstone story. What about Untitled by Destina - hey I wrote this Sinclair/Garibaldi story 12 years ago and never posted it, so you'd think I'd have thought of a great summary for it since then, wouldn't you? Sigh.

But I did post some other stuff. It's fascinating, what one finds when one goes combing through one's LJ for untitled stories and comment fic and leftover things I used to worry about people liking. I'm rolling my eyes at myself. It's a blue light special, everything must get posted, even that one Bradley/Colin fic I wrote and am...was... embarrassed by. (It doesn't have a title either, poor thing; I have to think of one by October 22 or it will vanish forever from drafts.)

Anyway, here's the stuff I did manage to make up titles for, hah! -

No Longer Bound To Rome - The Eagle, Marcus/Esca, 2,497 words.

Transparent - Merlin, the knights and Merlin, gen, 2,064 words.

Virtue - Merlin, Arthur/Merlin, 560 words.

Unexpected - Penny Dreadful, Dorian/Ethan, 602 words.

In other news, it's the most wonderful time of the year! No, I'm not talking about Yuletide, tho I guess that's okay too; I'm talking about PUMPKIN FLAVORED EVERYTHING OMG at Trader Joe's! I took my first baby steps in the New! Delightful! Pumpkiny Things! pool of treasures there today, and grabbed up some dark chocolate covered pumpkin spice granola topped with toasted pumpkin seeds, and oh yeah, it's as great as it sounds. Yaaaay pumpkin season!
purplecat: The Tardis against the spiralling clock face effect of the Capaldi opening credits. (Doctor Who)
([personal profile] purplecat Sep. 23rd, 2017 04:15 pm)




I had cause to pull this off the shelf the other day in order to write a Tides of Time article. I'm sure Perfect Timing wasn't the first Dr Who charity fanfiction anthology but it was the first of a new wave that started during the "wilderness years" when the line between fan and professional Dr Who fiction was particularly blurred. Perfect Timing 2, obviously, was its follow up and charity fanfiction anthologies, as far as I can tell, have continued to be published on a regular basis ever since.
trobadora: (Missy (stylised))
([personal profile] trobadora Sep. 23rd, 2017 02:57 pm)
Missy This Fic over at [community profile] missy_fest was the smallest fest I ever modded or participated in - only four sign-ups! But it turned out to be totally worth it, and I'm sorely tempted to do it again next year because everything that came out of it was so fantastic.

This was the idea: remix a story by making it about Missy! Either by shifting the focus to her, or by just plain adding her to a story she didn't previously appear in. And every one of the resulting remixes took a very different approach.

I haven't had a chance to catch up on commenting (I hope to do so this weekend), but I'm utterly in love with the story that remixes one of mine, the amazing Further on up the road. ♥ ♥ ♥

Here's all of the fic, including my own (which, btw, is eminently guessable) - go check it out:

Dazzle and Mysteries (Jack Harkness/Jenny, Missy/Jenny (The Doctor's Daughter)) [Teen And Up]
Original story: Not Just Another Mystery by [personal profile] navaan
Summary: This planet presents more mysteries than Jenny expected, but not more than she can handle. And, of course, there is running.

Further on up the road (Owen Harper, Jack Harkness, Missy) [Teen And Up]
Original story: Centuries From Now by [personal profile] trobadora
Summary: When a Time Lord emerges from the Rift, it's the wrong one for Jack Harkness. But could Owen Harper be the right Doctor?

The Master's Faithful Companion (Forever or Just a Day Remix) (Missy/Lucy Saxon, The Master/Lucy Saxon) [Teen And Up]
Original story: Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds by [personal profile] selenak
Summary: Missy didn't plan to come to this moment in time, but she's reminded that she'd had her own puppy once.

Title: Repair Jobs (Here and Now Remix) (Missy & the Doctor's TARDIS; Ninth Doctor/Jack Harkness) [Teen And Up]
Original story: Repair Jobs by [personal profile] auroracloud
Summary: The TARDIS always goes where she needs to be. - Set during Empress of Mars. (TARDIS POV)
twistedchick: General Leia in The Force Awakens (Default)
([personal profile] twistedchick Sep. 20th, 2017 08:08 pm)
Lillian Ross, the consummate New Yorker writer for decades, has died at 99 years old.

This is about her writing. And these are her writing: about the House Un-American Activity Committee -- and the search for "dangerous Communists" in Hollywood in the 1950s, and this is her walk-along interview with Ernest Hemingway, including his peculiar style of speaking without articles. And this is a NYTimes review of the book she wrote about her 50-year affair with her editor, who had died but whose wife was still alive. Well, you can't please everyone.

***

The neo-Nazis who look forward to concentration camps and Hitler on the money.

An examination of change in William Morris's The Wood Beyond the World.

Two kinds of wilderness, in Ireland.

This is weird and dangerous: government agencies suing people who file Freedom of Information Act requests for information they don't want made public.

Kremlin mouthpieces are attacking "emotional" Morgan Freeman for telling the truth in his video on Russia and Putin's KGB past. Methinks they doth protest too much.

All the Sinclair Broadcasting tv stations are being required to show Trumpist propaganda.

Ibram Kendi, a scholar of racism, says that education and love are not the answer to racism. Dismantling discriminatory politics is.

The Jesuits are returning 525 acres given to them in the 1880s to the Rosebud Sioux tribe.

West Africa's most daring designer.

Hillary looks back in anger.
scaramouche: P. Ramlee as Kasim Selamat from Ibu Mertuaku, holding a saxophone (kasim selamat is osman jailani)
([personal profile] scaramouche Sep. 20th, 2017 11:24 am)
Religious stuff. )
twistedchick: (bittern OFQ)
([personal profile] twistedchick Sep. 19th, 2017 02:16 pm)
This so-called article is a piece of crap. It purports to provide the results of a study and conflates the numbers in the study with society as a whole in ignorant ways.

For example, second paragraph:

Just ask college students. A fifth of undergrads now say it’s acceptable to use physical force to silence a speaker who makes “offensive and hurtful statements.”


A fifth of undergrads? No. A fifth of the 1500 undergrad students they surveyed. That's 300 or so.


Villasenor conducted a nationwide survey of 1,500 undergraduate students at four-year colleges.


Nationwide? There are far more than 1,500 four-year colleges (for those of you not American, the word includes universities). How were the colleges chosen? How were the students chosen? How many were chosen at each university? How many overall were from the same discipline? There's no way to know. We don't even know if he chose accredited schools, or those pay-for-a-degree places. Did they ask at Ivy League schools, the majority of whose students come from well-off families? Did they ask at places like City College of New York, where the tuition is much lower and people who are there are from a variety of backgrounds, not wealthy? Ag and tech colleges, out in the countryside, or only urban colleges?

Further down it says the margin of error is 2-6 percent, "depending on the group." Oh, really? Which group is 2% and which is 6%? We aren't told. It appears we are to be grateful that a margin of error was even mentioned.

The whole thing is supposed to be about undergrads' understanding of First Amendment-protected free speech. Since we are not told the exact wording of the questions asked, it's impossible to know if the responses were appropriate to them, or if the questions were leading the students to a specific response.

And then there's this:

Let’s say a public university hosts a “very controversial speaker,” one “known for making offensive and hurtful statements.” Would it be acceptable for a student group to disrupt the speech “by loudly and repeatedly shouting so that the audience cannot hear the speaker”?

Astonishingly, half said that snuffing out upsetting speech — rather than, presumably, rebutting or even ignoring it — would be appropriate. Democrats were more likely than Republicans to find this response acceptable (62 percent to 39 percent), and men were more likely than women (57 percent to 47 percent). Even so, sizable shares of all groups agreed.

It gets even worse.

Respondents were also asked if it would be acceptable for a student group to use violence to prevent that same controversial speaker from talking. Here, 19 percent said yes....


Let's look more closely, ignoring the editorializing sentence for the moment. Half of who? Half of 1500 people is 750 people, scattered across the US. And then again -- 19% of who? Everyone? Women? Men? Democrats? Republicans? We aren't told.

Meanwhile, the entire other side of this survey is ignored. By stressing the minority and ignoring the majority, the minority's views are inflated and made more important. Let me turn this around for you: more than 80% of undergrads say that violence is not acceptable in dealing with an unwanted speaker. Try turning around all the other numbers, and the story falls apart. Instead of "students" substitute "students surveyed", and it also falls to pieces. Who cares what 1500 people out of 200 million think? If we don't know why those 1500 were specifically chosen, why should we care?

I have worked with surveys, written surveys, conducted and analyzed surveys. It is possible to have a statistically perfect survey with 1500 people surveyed, but only if the respondents are very carefully selected to avoid bias. There is no way to tell if that was done with the evidence given in this story. For all we know, those respondents could have been selected from the same departments or majors at all the colleges. The colleges could have been technical schools or enormous state universities or religion-affiliated schools. There is no way to know. Why does this matter? Liberal arts, political science and pre-law students are more likely to have read about the First Amendment than optics majors or engineers, for instance. I'm not saying the optics majors or engineers would be more conservative or liberal -- but they are less likely to have discussed free speech in a class. Improper choice of respondents can provide very slanted results -- for example, the survey that said Dewey would win over Truman was conducted by telephone, and the calls went to houses on the corners of two streets; this meant that people who were wealthier (because corner houses pay higher taxes, based on road frontage) were questioned, while their less wealthy neighbors (who voted for Truman) were ignored.

Also, by not including any context relative to current events, there is no way to know if the small percentage who thought violence was acceptable was the same as during the Vietnam War, for instance, or Desert Storm. I guarantee you, it was not the same percentage as during the Revolutionary War, when those who spoke against any prevailing view to an audience who disagreed would have been lucky to have been ridden out of town on a rail, if not tarred and feathered. (Feel free to do the research if you wish; be sure you have a strong stomach for the details of what happens when boiling tar is applied to skin.)

What it all comes down to is this: this story is written poorly by someone who does not understand how statistics should be used, and was not properly edited. It was published in order to scare people, although the publisher may not have realized its propaganda value. By not including the whole story, and by allowing editorializing in the middle of it, it slants the results.

This would not have been published during the time when Kay Graham was publisher. Editor Ben Bradlee would not have let this story pass. He would have told the reporter to rewrite it, clean it up, and get more depth into it.

And the reason I am writing this is that this is not the only paper that misleads with statistics, and you need to be aware of this, and of what to look for when someone is quoting a study, badly, misleadingly, in a way that bids fair to be used for propaganda. Be cautious and critical when you see numbers and statistics, and look for whether the writing is made personal/editorialized. It matters.
.

September 2017

S M T W T F S
     12
3456789
1011121314 1516
17181920212223
24252627282930

Tags

Powered by Dreamwidth Studios

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags