SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Okay, there is at least a random chance that some of us or someone in our family got a new smartphone as a gift this year. Maybe you hand the old phone down to one of the kids for a wifi device. Maybe you thought better of trading it in, and having your data end up on the streets.
There are the usual perennial articles on this subject Such as this one from a site that appears somewhat reputable, or this one from BusinessInsider.
Note: Most GSM phones can be used to call 911 in the US/Canada even without a sim card present. Donations to Charities or Women's Shelters or Homeless service agencies is always an option as long as you wipe the phone completely.
So what does the Savvy Soylentil do with the old Smartphone?
[Update: removed derogatory phrasing that was present in original submission. -Ed.]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 28 2015, @01:10PM
they did? I hate to have seen the original...
"somewhat reputable" attached to a link to a Pakistani website could be read as saying many aren't. Which may or may not be true but what relevance does that have to whether the website at hand has content worth reading?
Recent history, human rights violations and international relations with India as well as harbouring Bin Laden may have tarnished their reputation but as netizens, don't we have a duty to cast our fellow human beings in a positive light rather than give into stereotypes that don't represent the estimated 200 million Pakistanis in general?
(Score: 2, Insightful) by The Mighty Buzzard on Monday December 28 2015, @01:15PM
No. At most we have a duty to portray them accurately. And we should never censor our community to do even that.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 28 2015, @01:25PM
Is it an "accurate" portrayal to dismiss a website based on its country of origin or should we judge it by its content?
I'm not calling for censorship but I'm just not sure what unnecessary slander adds to a discussion other than inflame the original poster.
(Score: 1, Flamebait) by The Mighty Buzzard on Monday December 28 2015, @02:43PM
When you start cutting out all the parts you don't feel are worth reading, you end up with a site only you want to read.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 28 2015, @04:29PM
Leave it to buzz to rely on a trite turn of phrase instead of thoughtful analysis.
Mr "individualism above all else" proves once again that he's a hypocrite when it comes to stereotyping groups of people he doesn't like.
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Tuesday December 29 2015, @05:18AM
Learn to use that stuff between your ears. I didn't say I agreed with what was said, only that it should not be censored.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by urza9814 on Tuesday December 29 2015, @03:58PM
As others have mentioned, there's a difference between censorship and editing. This site makes no promise to post an *article* submission without alterations -- in fact, usually we see more complaints over a *lack* of changes than over any change itself. "You didn't correct the spelling!" "What's the point of quoting the entire article?" "You need to define what these random acronyms mean!" -- but when it comes to racism, suddenly people have to jump in with "You should never change what was submitted!" I don't get it.
If you want to inject your personal bias into a discussion, that's what the comment section is for. That's why the comment section isn't edited. The summaries ought to stick to summarizing the article -- particularly since comments injected into articles aren't subject to the usual moderation system. There's a reason we have all these moderation options, and stuffing that crap into the summary is merely a way of abusing the system to bypass everyone else's preferences and make them read your comment, and read it first.
Of course, I'm not sure it's possible to have *completely* opinion-free summaries. In many cases, the article itself is nothing but opinion. But comments that aren't actually adding anything substantial to the story should be removed. If you have a comment, post a comment.
(Score: 4, Interesting) by DeathMonkey on Monday December 28 2015, @08:57PM
...not sure what unnecessary slander adds to a discussion other than inflame the original poster.
And predictably, due to the offtopic flamebait in the post we have a discussion thread with barely any on-topic responses.