goDel

That positive pressure. Helping to push things in the right direction ;D

Dat drop totally puts skrillxs to shame!

I imagine his colleagues watching this would think:"well done, only three cops needed to control a large crowd like that". Even though they were completely oblivious to the fact that they actually gained control by threatening and harassing people, regardless of whether or not they were involved in "illegal" activities. It's really sad, but it looks like it's a conscious choice at some (policy) level to have the police manage crowds like this.

Very happy about the newly available downloads! But the f#cked up thing about it is that I can add them to my current itunes playlist now, rate them, and possible change my votes for 30 best tracks. My intention was to vote 30, wait for the release, and vote for the next set of 30. I'm afraid this strategy will not a winning one... :/

You could always insta-change if such a thing would happen. "Now that those tracks are going to be officially released, I don't like them anymore and I have to completely revamp my top-votes!" After which a shiny new set of your top-30 can come into existence. But you do have a point though. i hope RDJ will do such a thing if he notices a lot of sosw2-potentials do turn up frequently in current top-30s. I'd rather have him distill themed albums (saw, sosw, cw, rdj, ab,...) than creating compilations with various styles. As I'm stubbornly convinced these themed albums could be instant classics which would fit perfectly in his discography.

Yek = incarnated hipster steve jobs! :O

Delet..., you still owe me a beer!

Just voted. Happy to have 30 votes. Sounds like a compilation spanning at least two CD's (=wishful thinking). Although if he'd put 4 together it'll still be amazing. Feeling a bit ambiguous, as there are a couple of awesome albums in there with tracks which may not win in a poll, but which do fit wonderfully well together. Thinking about those SAW1.5 and SOSW2's. Wouldn't be a good thing if only a couple of tracks would end up on some compilation without the whole album seeing light of day, imo. Also didn't put any votes in any tracks from the latest batch, as I've just went through my itunes playlist and voted for my top rated. Or rather, a selection of my top rated...which was hard enough.

Sounds like the first hurdle is taken for a soundcloud dump release. Great news!

So, euhm, yeah, that thing about avoiding political discussions at watmm... *already forgot what I was doing*

Excellent stuff! How about voting for the 20 best playlists? Could make life so much easier.

*asks robert moses and gets a finger in return*

i hope xf cunningly builds a poll where tracks get automatically added to some secret RDJ bandcamp, entirely mastered and whatnot. (same for the mu-ziq sc btw!) please wake me up when the polling site is up and running

Awesome!

Nice!

That's how I took it I reluctantly agree What if as he added new tracks to the SoundCloud, they'd appear on a page to be voted on? It would be kind of neat to have a dynamic page where at any time the top SoundCloud tracks could be seen, either by community votes, or by plays/favourites from SC... nah. just cut the poll off at 200 or something. if he posts another 200, he can always put out a new album after a new poll. the fact he's still putting stuff up on soundcloud is a reason to start polling right away,imo. assuming we only get one album out of one poll. so i'd rather have one album selected out of 200 tracks, instead of one album out of 1000 tracks! lets try for the "one album out of each 200 tracks" option.

Hmmm, perhaps more explicitly than it is now. It won't get any more explicit than it already is though. Transparency tends to be a pretty good cure against these practices. admittedly: it is pretty f-ing explicit already. *cough kochs*

Future?

Regarding the ISDS thing my biggest worry is about disputes getting settled outside courts and with that out of the public eye. I would feel better if this stuff didn't happen outside of the public eye, as the public might be the best protection against misuse from any party involved. Wrt to the ISDS itself I'm not too worried simply because it's practically impossible for an international investor to win a case against a country with new regulatory laws (not in favor of the investor) which are backed by the democratic principles most countries run on (at least formally on paper). That's one of the basic principles any court will uphold and any investor has to respect no matter what. Regulations which are a product of the democratic process would win in any case. At least, that's the part which I think I understand. I admit my investment in the matter hasn't been too big.

LOL@sini Is it me, or wasn't RDJ's sarcasm-meter up to speed at that point in time? Please tell me he used the tricksy double psychology option to sarcastically pretend to not understand what was going on.

Good thing she keeps on using her voice instead of being silenced by the threats. Even though it appears as some extreme form of online trolling, most people would have chosen the precautious option and go silent, I'm guessing. I especially like what she said here.

Meanwhile, at the soundcloud service desk... It's Richard Schwarzenegger playing a scene from back to the futor

Loving the mind the gap track! Really hoping for downloads to be made available, or just a proper release!

Triple D is porn for my ears!!

Wrt to the last paragraphs: thx for the lecture. Wrt the first: isn't it weird that the criticisms people have with the deal came before the ayatolla had even opened his mouth, but yet are entirely validated by what he said? that's convenient! and does the fact that the ayatolla opened his mouth in such a way represent irans actual intentions, or rather, as i was arguing, is it another form of political smoke and mirrors? imo, the fact that the ayatolla opened his mouth in a specific way does not validate the criticism toward the deal. words mean shit in politics (politicians will openly argue the world is flat if their constituents think so/ want him to think so - even if they - said politicians - personally think otherwise), so it's all about the actions. most important actions: 1. piece of paper with deal (smart!) signed by involved parties; 2. actual measurable progress made due to deal (in terms specified inside deal). These two points should negate what any party involved said at any point in time - past or future. obviously there are lots of parties who don't trust the opposite party. whether they represent israel, the gop, americans in general, or iran, or some hawkish conservative/religious wing in the iranian power structure, both sides lack trust. which leads me to argue that it doesn't really matter what the content of the deal is. As long as those parties (who lack any form of trust in the other side) arent satisfied, it doesn't even matter whether it would actually be a realistic deal. note that odds are those parties can only be satisfied by some extreme/impossible kind of deal which isn't even realistically possible. Or in other words: any (political) deal which is realistic in any kind of way leads to a set of compromises. And as is often the case: when trust is completely lacking, compromises are pretty much impossible. So, imo, it's not really a case of being a good negotiator (negotiations imply compromises, silly!), but rather about people showing some trust, or in some cases maturity/self-reflection to understand that some compromises need to be made to break through the status-quo and get some positive developments.