Congratulations, Alissa Walker

"wiffleballtony" (wiffleballtony) 12/10/2015 at 17:18 • Filed to: None

30

84

For posting possibly the dumbest article ever on Gawker Media, and that is quite a feat.

For Sweden > wiffleballtony 12/10/2015 at 17:22

6

Oh no, “Ban Cars” doesn’t compare with the time they showed naked and underaged Justin Beiber.

Chariotoflove > wiffleballtony 12/10/2015 at 17:23

4

Link? With such a boast, I must check it out.

ETA: I found it. I may return to comment when I finish heaving.

CB > wiffleballtony 12/10/2015 at 17:24

2

I think the idea of banning cars in urban centres is not actually a terrible idea. However, they’d have to really step up the game of public transit and have accessibility options to make it easier for those with physical disabilities, as well as finding a way to keep deliveries going and having easy access for emergency services. A lot of downtown areas would probably have to be redesigned, in my opinion. For example, Ottawa would need connected buildings and covered walkways due to the (usually) cold winters we get.

Banning cars altogether, though? Stupid fucking idea.

RamblinRover Luxury-Yacht > wiffleballtony 12/10/2015 at 17:24

10

I’ll repost my remarks here:

The whole article smacks of “if a little is good, a lot is better” and “if a lot is too much, then only none is less enough” reductionist drivel. This article couldn’t reason itself out of a paper bag with ARASTOTEL written on it in crayon, nor could it face the logic of a prepared eight year old. Or text-to-speech-armed hamster.

TheHondaBro > Chariotoflove 12/10/2015 at 17:26

6

Don’t. Your IQ will drop ten-fold.

GordonBombay > wiffleballtony 12/10/2015 at 17:27

3

This was literally my first reaction when I saw the title to her article:

Daily Drives a Dragon - One Last Lap > wiffleballtony 12/10/2015 at 17:29

3

It was a really bad article.

TheVancen- In Pursuit of a Greater Payday and Car Parts > wiffleballtony 12/10/2015 at 17:30

6

I made it about three paragraphs before I decided my Haynes manual was better reading.

davedave1111 > wiffleballtony 12/10/2015 at 17:30

3

It’s not dumb, it’s very clever - if you share her desire to kill everyone with dark skin. Lying about what the IPCC says in an attempt to pretend climate change is an impending catastrophe is nothing more than an excuse to reverse the economic changes that have stopped Africans and Asians dying by their millions in frequent mass famines, to kill them in their millions by preventing them accessing medical care (or even things like clean water), and so-on.

It’s almost laughable that now the IPCC has debunked their pseudoscience, the nutty alarmists have simply started rejecting the scientific consensus they were so keen on before. Or at least it would be if they weren’t genocidal racists.

Brickman > wiffleballtony 12/10/2015 at 17:30

2

Yea! Hands off my victorian era reciprocating devices!

DrJohannVegas > RamblinRover Luxury-Yacht 12/10/2015 at 17:31

3

Well, I fully expect you to apologize (or apologise, as it were) for causing me to snort hot tea into my sinus cavities. That “ARASTOTEL” bit really got me.

DrJohannVegas > wiffleballtony 12/10/2015 at 17:32

1

This isn’t even the dumbest article this Presidency, much less “ever”. Plus, I have every expectation that the worst is yet to come.

DrJohannVegas > TheHondaBro 12/10/2015 at 17:32

3

0/10 = 0.

Meh, I’ll take my chances.

450X_FTW > For Sweden 12/10/2015 at 17:32

3

This is why Jalopnik needs it’s own site, nothing Gawker related

Needmoargarage > wiffleballtony 12/10/2015 at 17:33

2

Seriously...the logic is childish.

RamblinRover Luxury-Yacht > DrJohannVegas 12/10/2015 at 17:33

2

Apologies. I only have a keyboard replacement fund. The naso-pharyngeal surgery fund doesn’t exist yet and is mostly just a snot rag supply.

davedave1111 > CB 12/10/2015 at 17:34

4

Cars don’t have much place in inner cities, but the entire article is utter bilge, based on rejecting the scientific consensus on climate change in favour of racist bullshit.

Who do you think banning cars will impact on in the US? The poor, of course. And who are, thanks to generations of entrenched racism, vastly over-represented in that socio-economic class? People who happen to have darker skins than the author of that little piece of racist propaganda.

If she was honest, the author would just write ‘nigras shouldn’t be allowed to drive’ and leave it at that. It’s all part and parcel with Gawker’s repeated attempts to claim the era of segregation was the US’s high point.

Alissa Walker > wiffleballtony 12/10/2015 at 17:34

13

#honored

CCC (formerly CyclistCarCoexist) > wiffleballtony 12/10/2015 at 17:36

0

As usual, dont let your comments there lead back to Oppo.

RamblinRover Luxury-Yacht > TheVancen- In Pursuit of a Greater Payday and Car Parts 12/10/2015 at 17:37

5

“Reassembly is the reverse of removal? That’s... that’s PROFOUND!”

Crap, now I want to be the mechanic version of Chance the Gardener .

wiffleballtony > Alissa Walker 12/10/2015 at 17:39

2

Sam > For Sweden 12/10/2015 at 17:39

6

And outed the gay guy who just happened to be the CEO of their biggest competitor?

wiffleballtony > CCC (formerly CyclistCarCoexist) 12/10/2015 at 17:40

0

I tried to be obtuse as possible. I don’t think it worked.

For Sweden > Sam 12/10/2015 at 17:40

5

Well, if he was a good person, why would he work at a competitor?

wiffleballtony > CB 12/10/2015 at 17:43

1

Personally, I believe banning cars is way too heavy handed. If there were enough suitable alternatives people would choose the option that makes the most sense for them.

wiffleballtony > DrJohannVegas 12/10/2015 at 17:44

0

I try to avoid most of the other blogs but, Patrick George clickbaited me. Like a sucker.

If only EssExTee could be so grossly incandescent > wiffleballtony 12/10/2015 at 17:48

2

You clearly weren’t here for the “We got a bunch of girls together and shoved drugs up our hoo-haws to see what would happen” article.

wiffleballtony > RamblinRover Luxury-Yacht 12/10/2015 at 17:48

0

Brilliant!

TractorPillow > wiffleballtony 12/10/2015 at 17:48

3

https://twitter.com/awalkerinLA?re…

She is proud of the trophy you got her Tony!

wiffleballtony > If only EssExTee could be so grossly incandescent 12/10/2015 at 17:50

1

No, I wasnt. I am glad I used “possibly” as a qualifier.

If only EssExTee could be so grossly incandescent > wiffleballtony 12/10/2015 at 17:51

1

http://jezebel.com/this-is-what-h…

wiffleballtony > TractorPillow 12/10/2015 at 17:51

3

Well, it is that time of the season, I was in a giving mood. She can appreciate it in whatever post-religious non denominational way she pleases.

Nibby > wiffleballtony 12/10/2015 at 17:52

2

Writing about it gives it more attention. The solution to these things is to let them die.

thebigbossyboss > CB 12/10/2015 at 17:53

0

Yeah. I can pretty much agree with that. Ottawa already has one street (sparks) that doesn’t allow cars. If they added Queen or something to the list...we would manage.

Up here in PG though the bus system is laughable and a lot of people work in the bush anyways. I mean...you want us to walk 80kms down that logging road? That’s just dumb. My girlfriends brother does rail maintenance. He put on 125,000 kms a year in his truck. I don’t think that was all by choice.

wiffleballtony > Nibby 12/10/2015 at 17:53

0

I get you.

CB > thebigbossyboss 12/10/2015 at 17:54

0

Exactly, hence why I mentioned urban centres. The rest of Canada is just too sprawled out for an all-out ban, unless they subsidize dog sledding.

TractorPillow > wiffleballtony 12/10/2015 at 17:54

2

hahahaha seriously laughing out loud. what a horrible article. Must be nice to live in the same world as whatever world she thinks she lives in.

If only EssExTee could be so grossly incandescent > wiffleballtony 12/10/2015 at 17:56

4

“Even electric vehicles aren’t carbon free!”... a few paragraphs later: “the solution is a shitload of EVs!”

wiffleballtony > If only EssExTee could be so grossly incandescent 12/10/2015 at 17:57

1

I’m pretty sure people aren’t carbon free, much less most life.

thebigbossyboss > CB 12/10/2015 at 17:59

1

Oh yeah it would never work here. Closing certain streets I am begrudgingly ok with, but banning them in entirety is idiotic.

Trunk Impaired 318 > wiffleballtony 12/10/2015 at 18:00

1

This is what happens when you let stupid people look at statistics.

thebigbossyboss > davedave1111 12/10/2015 at 18:01

0

I agree with you davedave. Progressives love doing this crap like “banning walmarts” and stuff like that that affect the poor then their wealthy selves.

CB > If only EssExTee could be so grossly incandescent 12/10/2015 at 18:02

0

To be fair, at that seems somewhat educational and thought out. In comparison to the article, of course.

El Rivinado > wiffleballtony 12/10/2015 at 18:03

0

I wouldn’t go that far, but it might be up there. Just from the title alone, it’s obvious it was going to be stupid, I didn’t even need to read it and I would get the full gist of it.

Also, I love the people who's solution to a problem is to just ban something outright. Really? Did Prohibition and the War on Drugs teach you idiots nothing about how that's a stupid idea?

davedave1111 > thebigbossyboss 12/10/2015 at 18:03

0

They’re not ‘progressives’, they’re either neo-racists or ‘let them eat cake’ types.

Gamecat235 > wiffleballtony 12/10/2015 at 18:05

9

I’ve invited Alissa to be an author on oppo, just in case she ever feels like posting here to poll the crazy car people. Also, “dumbass” is pretty crass just for someone whose position you disagree with.

It’s a well researched and well intentioned position piece, which, by definition, puts as one of the smartest Gawker / Gizmodo / GMG posts.

Cars and major city centers are not actually a match made in heaven. And both the driving experience, as well as the living experience, would be improved by having car free zones and vastly improved public transportation to them. No one likes driving in these situations, they only do it because they have to.

Alissa is clearly somewhat ok with your post, seeing as how she responded to you, but this is the sort of thing which could be construed as in violation of the handbook. And I’m not asking you in the slightest to keep your opinions to yourself, just, maybe, tone down the rhetoric. Or try to keep the actual namecalling to a minimum.

F86Pilot > TheHondaBro 12/10/2015 at 18:13

4

Click on her name, and the trend continues with Every. Single. Article. I love Jalopnik, trust Gizmodo for good tech reviews, and treat the rest of Gawker as largest collection of angry liberals around. (I’m talking to you Jezebel!)

RallyWrench > If only EssExTee could be so grossly incandescent 12/10/2015 at 18:23

0

Or the Vagazzled bit on the damn sidebar for a week.

jariten1781 > wiffleballtony 12/10/2015 at 18:25

2

I’m firmly convinced she’s either not a real person or is 14.

Gamecat235 > Alissa Walker 12/10/2015 at 18:28

3

Welcome! I sent you an invitation to be an author here if you would like. FWIW I actually enjoyed the article, though the moment after I read it I came back over to Oppo to see what the mob was saying, fearing the worst. And well, at least there was a trophy?

In any case, the invitation to participate is always open. I have extended the same to anyone who is called out in this space, and sometimes people show up (J.K. did) and have fun with us too. We’re largely irreverent, unless you try to take away our cars, or make fun of people who only drive manuals, or unironically call a Miata a “girls car”, then we get serious for about 30 minutes and wander back off to cleaning carburetors, or in the case of about 25% of us, googling what a carburetor is and how to clean one.

Manwich - now Keto-Friendly > wiffleballtony 12/10/2015 at 18:33

2

Yeah... dumb and poorly researched.

And when she said:

“In the US, you are literally shoveling coal into your EV.”

In reality, coal only accounts for 40% of all electricity production in the USA.. and that percentage is dropping.

Also, it’s easier for Euro cities to ban cars from their city centers because their city centers typically are much smaller and much more walkable. What they are NOT doing is having a total ban on cars everywhere, as you are implying.

On top of that, transportation (which includes trucks, buses, planes, trains,etc) only accounts for 14% of all CO2 emissions:

http://www3.epa.gov/climatechange/…

Banning cars wouldn’t result in as much of a CO2 reduction as she believes.

If she’s serious about reducing emissions, she’ll get far more mileage by getting more people to eat less meat, have more RE-forestation programs, add taxation to printers/paper, ban inefficient incandescent lightbulbs, buy fewer consumer goods (good luck with that!), push for more programs where electricity is generated by solar panels integrated into building structures and push for higher building standards that include better insulation and more efficient HVAC systems.

Doing those things will reduce the emissions of the BIGGEST sources of emissions... heat/electricity generation and forestry.

The article is definitely poorly researched and poorly thought out.

TheHondaBro > 450X_FTW 12/10/2015 at 18:34

0

Unfortunately Gawker owns Jalopnik, so that ain’t happening.

wiffleballtony > Gamecat235 12/10/2015 at 18:41

1

My choice of images could have been better, I will keep the rules in mind.

Justin Young > TheHondaBro 12/10/2015 at 18:50

1

Someone in Jalopnik must punch an author in Gawker Media for that to happen.

Tekamul > Gamecat235 12/10/2015 at 19:07

5

you are literally shoveling coal into your EV

This is not a person that should be paid to write. All of her posts work to present opinion as fact, and inflame readership. She frequently makes rather large factual mistakes, refuses to respond to criticism detailing those mistakes, and continues blindly on her quest of wrongness in search of clicks over truth.

You have tarnished yourself by jumping to her defense.

Chariotoflove > TheHondaBro 12/10/2015 at 19:14

4

Too late, I read it. Typical young liberal intellectual thesis. The common fatal flaw in the logic is always some variation of the assumption that an authority (the government, society, whatever) can get people to accept living a certain way it determines to be correct.

Gamecat235 > Tekamul 12/10/2015 at 19:19

0

Hey, you want me to read the whole thing?

I literally acknowledge that I just supported an article which used literally incorrectly. I apologize, I shall short shift all the way home while ensuring that I never once touch the brake but instead engine brake to coast and then rev back up to speed.

I kind of enjoy the crazy speculative opinions of the future, but then again, I had a subscription to OMNI for years. And I read them as opinions, regardless of how they are presented.

Tekamul > Gamecat235 12/10/2015 at 19:35

2

It’s great that you can reflexively overcome the disservice she is doing to her readers by spotting the ‘crazy speculative opinions’, but that shouldn’t be the cost of admission.

She frequently follows the same pattern. Fact, fact, opinion; repeat. No separation, no warning, a portfolio of ‘white lies.’

I understand you’re taking this jovially, and just trying to keep oppos from stirring shit, but that’s the exact opposite of her intent.

SaIty22 > wiffleballtony 12/10/2015 at 19:55

5

She gets paid per click on the article. Everyone is clicking on it. As much as the content was total garbage the article is surely getting a lot of clicks. Maybe she’s not as dumb as we all think she is.

Then again, maybe she believes what she wrote and is actually every bit as dumb as we all think. Hard to say...

CounterTorqueSteer > Alissa Walker 12/10/2015 at 20:02

1

deekster_caddy > wiffleballtony 12/10/2015 at 20:21

0

Wow. So much to choose from. The paragraph about EVs is missing so much information and references a 2012 article as it’s source. Things have changed since then.

Also, banning cars isn’t the answer. (the suggestion is for cities) If a city wants less people to drive there, vastly improve the public transportation to and from that city and people will choose it without a ban! I don’t know anyone who _wants_ to sit in traffic to get to work...

450X_FTW > TheHondaBro 12/10/2015 at 20:56

1

This is why we need to start Oppositelopnik.com

BaconSandwich is tasty. > Brickman 12/10/2015 at 21:15

0

I think you mean Autowain.

Tekamul > TractorPillow 12/10/2015 at 23:10

0

Have you ever seen a dog roll in its own crap?

DrJohannVegas > RamblinRover Luxury-Yacht 12/11/2015 at 01:13

0

My face is bleeding and you are at fault. I will pursue satisfaction at any legal and extra-legal venue which will hear me, sir. I. Demand. Satisfaction.

DrJohannVegas > wiffleballtony 12/11/2015 at 01:14

1

YOU DUN GOOFED. I BACKTRACED IT. YOU’VE BEEN TRACED.

pip bip - choose Corrour > wiffleballtony 12/11/2015 at 05:54

0

all the faceplates in the world still aren’t enough!

Smallbear wants a modern Syclone, local Maple Leafs spammer > wiffleballtony 12/11/2015 at 08:04

0

How many times in a row has she won that now?

You can tell a Finn but you can't tell him much > If only EssExTee could be so grossly incandescent 12/11/2015 at 09:06

0

davesaddiction @ opposite-lock.com > Gamecat235 12/11/2015 at 10:48

0

If she had kept her proposed car ban to city centers, I think the reaction would not have been so sharp. What she’s calling for gives absolutely no consideration to anyone living in a rural environment, or in distant, outer suburbs.

Here’s my response to Patrick in another thread: http://oppositelock.kinja.com/thanks-for-the…

davesaddiction @ opposite-lock.com > TheHondaBro 12/11/2015 at 10:50

0

And they own Kinja and therefore, OPPO. /sad

davesaddiction @ opposite-lock.com > Nibby 12/11/2015 at 10:53

0

Yup, she was looking for clicks, and clicks she got. 52k and counting.

davesaddiction @ opposite-lock.com > If only EssExTee could be so grossly incandescent 12/11/2015 at 10:54

0

That was the most hilarious point of the article for me.

Like, golf carts run on good intentions, right?

TheHondaBro > davesaddiction @ opposite-lock.com 12/11/2015 at 10:57

0

They can keep Kinja for all I care, but I want my Oppo back.

davesaddiction @ opposite-lock.com > TheHondaBro 12/11/2015 at 10:59

0

OPPO will live on, Kinja or no Kinja.

TheHondaBro > davesaddiction @ opposite-lock.com 12/11/2015 at 11:00

1

Manwich - now Keto-Friendly > Gamecat235 12/11/2015 at 12:19

0

“It’s a well researched and well intentioned position piece”

Well intentioned maybe... but well researched?

No bloody way...

Manwich - now Keto-Friendly > F86Pilot 12/11/2015 at 12:23

0

#NotAllLiberals

Manwich - now Keto-Friendly > SaIty22 12/11/2015 at 12:27

0

I suspect it’s specifically designed to troll people into outrage.

F86Pilot > Manwich - now Keto-Friendly 12/11/2015 at 12:45

0

#fairenough

burner0008 > davedave1111 12/11/2015 at 16:48

0

[citation needed], goddamn

davedave1111 > burner0008 12/11/2015 at 21:47

0

Be more specific, and I’m happy to oblige. This shit is important.

burner0008 > davedave1111 12/13/2015 at 13:23

0

principally, your premise:

Lying about what the IPCC says in an attempt to pretend climate change is an impending catastrophe

in what way is climate change not an impending catastrophe? I’d prefer if you could cite sources from the IPCC, but at least from the scientific literature. I’ve heard a lot of people make this claim, and none of them ever knew how to avoid conspiracy theorist-type arguments.

davedave1111 > burner0008 12/13/2015 at 15:39

0

That’s simply not what the IPCC says - never has done. They have never attempted to predict where we’ll end up, only illustrate various pathways and the expected climate responses.

There is no reason to think we are going to do anything other than undershoot RCP 2.6 - and in fact we already are - so the scientific consensus is that we’re due to have no more than 2 degrees of warming, which isn’t considered particularly serious.