NY times is rediculous - "wrinkle in mike brown case".

[mumblemumble]

This isn't new, but this article made me shake my head...

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/11/us/michael-brown-ferguson-police-shooting-video.html?src=trending

Essentially it argues there was a time the day of, where brown entered the store he later robbed, and was.. ...trying to sell weed for cigarillos?! Except this isn't even the case : he got told to put the shit back, and it wasn't agreed upon. They say this was "omited evidence" : but what is it evidence of? Him trying to sell weed for cigarellos? I don't see the point....

....I wish people could be reasonable and actually LOOK INTO THINGS, and do research. Like see the original video, which happened later, of him robbing the place..

This case should be dead : its been years, and this is the WEAKEST criticism of this case : its trying to say the robbery later didn't happen because well... I guess he tried to buy it with weed?

Its such an incredibly weak argument, and trying to dredge up a case which already came to resolution...

... nytimes really is fake news

and a reminder, brown assaulted the cop before being shot...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UMnMmxZgTlg

[milon]

Mumble, Ludeon isn't your personal soap box.  It's a global community reflecting many MANY cultures and perspectives and opinions.  Please respect that.  Ludeon is about more than just you and me and the politics & cultural dynamics in life.  I'd like to see more posts from you that contribute to the community as a whole, and less grabbing for the spotlight to decry something.

Now, it is important to recognize injustice and call it out for what it is and work for positive change - that's a passion of mine too, by the way, and you and I both know our world is full of all kinds of wrong.  But it's also important to understand how you come across here, how you relate to others, and what people are actually hearing from you when you decry something.  You may feel truly concerned about something, but your posts often come across as:

Narrow-minded - Have you actually listened to people on the other side of the issue? Are you open to conversation with them? (No, I don't mean just arguing against "them".)
Critical - Do you have anything positive to say about "them"?  If not, you come across like you think the opposition is pure evil, which is more a reflection of you than anyone else.
Disconnected - You don't have any apparent relationship with the opposition beyond believing they're evil or wrong.

This gives you the appearance of being, at best, an armchair quarterback with an ax to grind.

That doesn't foster the kind of community we strive to have here.  What should we do about it?  I could ignore you, but that doesn't grow community and hasn't been working anyway.  I could lock threads I find to be critical/prejudiced/etc (or take stronger action), but then I'd potentially be guilty of the same things myself - and I wouldn't want to be treated that way myself as a first response.  I'd much rather open a dialog with you and try to help you see the bigger picture of the community you're interacting with.  That's exactly what I would want if I was off track and needed a reminder of why we're here.

Please, please, please, Mumble, remember that this is a community.  You're welcome here.  You're wanted here.  But I need you to be a community builder, or at least not a detractor.

I'm posting this publicly (but not blatantly advertising it) for a few reasons:
- This isn't the first time I've asked you to be a more constructive member
- You aren't the only personal who often gets sidetracked this way, so it's a good reminder for all of us
- I want the community as a whole to see good community in action

I look forward to some good dialog here fitting with the community we're trying to build.  If you really honestly find that you can't/won't work towards community, then perhaps this isn't the right community for you to be a part of.  But I truly hope that isn't the case.