SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Submitted via IRC for Runaway1956
An Aeroflot passenger aircraft caught fire while crash-landing at Moscow's Sheremetyevo airport, after an onboard emergency. Forty-one people have died in the tragedy. RT recaps how the tragic events unfolded.
Source: https://www.rt.com/news/458454-superjet-plane-crash-moscow-details
See Also:
- https://edition.cnn.com/2019/05/05/europe/russia-airplane-fire/index.html
- https://www.euronews.com/2019/05/05/several-injured-after-russian-passenger-jet-makes-emergency-landing-news-agencies-say
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
Fiery Sukhoi Superjet-100 Crash-Landing in Moscow: 41 Dead
|
Log In/Create an Account
| Top
| 28 comments
| Search Discussion
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Tell a man there are 300 billion stars in the universe and he'll believe you.
Tell him a bench has wet paint on it and he'll have to touch to be sure.
(Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 06 2019, @07:01AM (9 children)
Curious that this comes in as a Runaway1949 submission, the same year as the Communist take over of the Chinese Mainland, however many Runaway may think that is, since he is ignorant. Runaway, allegedly a Arkansasian dirt-farmer, and low level support for some unamed major factory in Nashville, posts in depth and recent informatin on a Russian plane crash? What are the odds, I ask you? Is it not more likely the case that the Runaway, instead of #runaway -ing, is in fact a Russian unregistered agent of influence, much like Martina, but not nearly as good looking. Runaway, you have been outed! The NARC list is exposed! Go to protocol 9, as quick as you can. We can protect you no longer.
And being outed as a Russian spy, in Arkansas, may God have mercy on your soul. The Ferrets are the least of your worries.
(Score: 2) by janrinok on Monday May 06 2019, @07:05AM (8 children)
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 06 2019, @07:47AM (7 children)
Didn't seem to help. Does this mean that the pro-Trump Ruskie spam-bot infrastructure will win the day?
jarinok! Pull my finger!!!
(Score: 3, Funny) by Azuma Hazuki on Monday May 06 2019, @02:30PM (6 children)
May I suggest that you 1) stop antagonizing Janrinok and 2) submit stories in the future *without* the puerile editorializing? We need a counterbalancing voice to the rising tide of alt-right sludge in here, but you need to be a bit more mature about it if you hope to be that voice.
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 0, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 06 2019, @02:49PM (1 child)
... said the puerile queen.
(Score: 3, Touché) by DeathMonkey on Monday May 06 2019, @05:09PM
(Score: 1, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 06 2019, @03:14PM
... *without* the puerile editorializing?
Oh my! No mirrors in your house, huh?!
(Score: 2) by janrinok on Monday May 06 2019, @07:02PM (2 children)
Thank you, but I have no problem with comments. The way to counter comments is to use intellect and moderation, in that order.
You do not counter the 'alt-right' comments by giving the opposing view favoured submission privileges. Comments are countered by better comments. All submissions are viewed on their own merit. If you submit a 'Politics' story, or indeed any story - of whatever position you want to take on the political spectrum - then it will be judged by the usual requirements. Will it create an intelligent discussion, is it of interest to the majority of our community, is it new and is it relevant? It should also meet our guidelines as much as possible although the editors will help here. If it fails to meet these requirements then probably it will not be accepted.
(Score: 2) by AthanasiusKircher on Tuesday May 07 2019, @02:22AM (1 child)
If that's truly a primary goal of this site, I have no clue why ANY politics stories are allowed here. Seriously.
I'm barely holding on here as a user. As far as I can see, you allow politics stories because they generate the MOST discussion, because they get people arguing at all each other. "Intelligent" is a far secondary goal, and we seem to pick up the same dynamics as the Green site -- the libertarian faction, the faction that wants to yell about "SJWs" at any opportunity, the left and right extremists, etc.
Perhaps this is the only way a site like this can survive, since there's relatively small discussion on most serious science stories, etc. So, okay, we have politics articles. But let's not pretend a primary reason is to create "intelligent" discussion. (And if it is, it's mostly an abject failure.)
(Note also that my complaints are directed at ALL sides. I took a break from the site last week for a while after I got incensed that a left-wing comment responding to a right-wing troll poster got modded up significantly... Except in this particular case, the right-wing troll actually posted a factually accurate informative post, while the liberal response was cherry picking bullshit data. I more frequently agree with the "left" because reality is usually more in tune with leftist claims, but I can't stand to see either side posting utter bullshit and getting modded up here. In this case, there were links from both posters too... Clearly no moderators followed them though...)
(Score: 2) by janrinok on Tuesday May 07 2019, @03:40AM
I agree entirely, but the community argued for their inclusion during the last US election, We don't cover elections elsewhere but the US election was deemed to be 'special' for some reason that completely escapes me. We do try to limit them (the last one was about a week ago despite receiving more and more biased politics submissions with each passing day). They still have to meet our guidelines and rules to be selected.