If You Actually Want To Do Something About This:

thespectacularspider-girl:

If you’re wanting to show your displeasure, don’t just tag staff or support.  Take a page out of other consumer revolts and make sure your displeasure is known.  

Don’t be an idiot.  Do not threaten, harass or otherwise make this personal.  Contact these companies, make your displeasure known, alert them that you are a customer and you will be leaving their brand across all boards unless they reverse their decision.

Be clear, be concise, be polite, but make your displeasure known.

Tumblr

  • Email:         support@tumblr.com 
  • Mail:           35 E. 21st St., 9th FloorNew York, NY10010 
  • Twitter:       @tumblr
  • Facebook:  https://www.facebook.com/tumblr/

Oath Inc

Verizon

  • Email:        –
  • Mail:          1095 Avenue of the Americas, New York, NY 10013
  • Twitter:       @VerizonNews
  • Facebook:  https://www.facebook.com/verizon/

Note the following properties owned by Oath Inc.  Bring them up explicitly in your statement of leaving their services.

  • Yahoo and all Yahoo Subsidiaries (Yahoo News, Yahoo Mail, etc)
  • AOL
  • TechCrunch
  • HuffPost
  • Flurry
  • Kanvas
  • Endgadget
  • AutoBlog
  • Makers
  • Build
  • Ryot
  • BuiltByGirls
  • MSN
  • Outlook
  • X-Box

New Info Will Be Added As I’m Made Aware Of It

Edit: This does nothing if it isn’t shared around

shakespearesglobeblog:

‘Within this circle…’ Magic Circles and Doctor Faustus.

We asked our Research team to tell us a bit about magic circles and how they feature in Doctor Faustus


Within this circle is Jehovah’s name
Forward and backward anagrammatized,
The [ab]breviated names of holy saints,
Figures of every adjunct to the heavens,
And characters of signs and erring stars,
By which the spirits are enforced to rise.
Doctor Faustus
Act 1, Scene 3

Open up a 1616 edition of Christopher Marlowe’s Doctor Faustus and you’ll find the play’s title figure, book in one hand, staff in another, standing within a circle, about to greet a devil who is emerging from the floor to his left. But what does this snapshot of early modern necromancy tell us about magic spells and circles?  

Medieval treatises tell us that magic circles had two main functions: they boosted the powers of the conjurer, and they protected them from the unfriendly spirits that could inadvertently be called up. One fifteenth-century manuscript instructs the would-be magician to ‘sign’ or bless the circle with a magic wand, and repeat the following: ‘I make this circle in honour of the Holy Trinity […] a place of protection and refuge which the demons cannot violate, enter, defile, touch, or even fly over; they must appear in a place designated for the outside the circle’. In his Discoverie of Witchcraft (1584), Reginald Scot also offers directions for such spells, instructing the conjurer to ‘make a circle’, ensuring that he ‘close again the place, there where thou wentest in’ once the mage has placed himself within it.

Not all magic circles looked the same. They could be traced on the earth, or inscribed on parchment; they could be simple or ornate in design. More often, like the one we see on the floor of Faustus’ study, these circles were made up of complex inscriptions and symbols (typically snatches of scripture or names for God) with designated positions for specific magical objects, including the conjurer him- or herself.

Amongst the names of saints and astrological symbols, the specific inscription that Faustus figures into his circle is an anagram of ‘Jehovah’, the Hebrew name for God. Inscribing this on his floor, Faustus not only flouts taboos that forbade writing the name but also mocks the belief that divine anagrams could bring mortals closer to God by using this specific inscription to conjure the devil.  

Magic circles are part of the Faust story, and can be found in the German legend which Marlowe drew from. In the English translation, The History and Damnable Life and Deserved Death of Doctor John Faustus (1592), Faustus is described conjuring in a forest:

[Faustus] made with a wand a Circle in the dust, and within that many more Circles and Characters … [then] began Doctor Faustus to call for Mephistophiles  the Spirite.

The circle is a space of safety, providing protection from Mephistopheles who is unable to penetrate it.

Magic circles are also part of the staging of the Faust story. One apocryphal account of a performance of Marlowe’s play at Exeter tells of one too many devils in the detail:

As a certain number of devils kept everyone his circle there, and as Faustus was busy in his magical invocations, on a sudden they were all dashed, every one harkening the other in the ear, for they were all persuaded, there was one devil too many amongst them…

Such anecdotes of extra devils appearing on stage and frightening the audience have become part of the Faustus legacy. They serve as a reminder that while Faustus might think he stands safe within the circumference of his circle while making his magic invocations, there is no guarantee that the safety extends beyond the stage…

Doctor Faustus is in the Sam Wanamaker Playhouse until 2 February 2019. 

macaroni-rascal-dreams-of-gals:

Staff: We’re getting rid of all adult content on Dec. 17th to combat illegal content!

Everyone: You do realize this ban only hurts the people producing legal content, right? Like, those small pages posting illegal stuff never tag their pages appropriately, and don’t care about having to remake a new blog if theirs gets nuked because they can just make a new burner account to post that stuff again.

Staff:

Everyone: The only adult content that will likely be spreading around would be the illegal content, since you are strong-arming the legally-abiding and responsible adult content creators who take care to tag and label their content and not post anything that’s god damn illegal.

Staff:

Everyone: That’s also assuming that there won’t be people that just continue posting adult content, either with censor bars or cuts to bypass the adult content check, or by just posting whatever anyway and not caring.

Staff:

Everyone: None if this even addresses the racism problems that people did have, including the adult bloggers you are now getting rid of. You can’t just get rid of text posts or images of disgusting rheotoric unless there’s a nipple in the mix, yeah?

Staff:

Everyone: Speaking of which, this new plan of yours still requires moderation, which is seemingly the main responsibility you are actively dodging with this adult content ban measure.

Staff:

Everyone: So now, basically nothing will have changed except for all the responsible adult content creators being gone that made up a decent number of your most active and loyal users, some of the most active critics and filters of racist content users being banned, and the only people being left posting illegal content or blatantly breaking your rules to post legal adult content to spite you.

How did you think this was going to pan out?

Staff: … but we said no adult content tho.

Have you read the new poirot books by Sophie Hannah? I’d like some reviews :P have a good day

fuckyeahmurdermysteries:

Hey! Mod 3 replying to this one (if the other 2 mods have read it please do
chip in). Sorry for the late reply to this, but I wanted to finish the first
book before replying to you. I’d be happy to discuss all three once I’ve
finished them, which should be soon.

So, two things that influenced my review of the first book, The Monogram
Murders
(I’m reading the second one, Closed Casket, right now.)
Spoiler free for the most part apart from one pertinent bit that doesn’t really
surprise anyone paying attention:

First thing: I want to thank you for sending this message, because I
initially saw these books a few years ago, and just… ignored them. They
weren’t something I’d have picked up – ever since reading the irritation that
was Jeeves and the Wedding Bells by Sebastian Foulkes, I tended to sneer
at any ‘new plot/new author’-published works, like the various Sherlock Holmes
sequels or Bond stories that various authors have published. I’d consider them
basically fanfiction, and the way I saw it, I’ve read excellent fanfic online,
so why should some fanfic get published because the author’s voice was bigger,
or they were the ‘right’ kind of fanfic writer, or they had connections to
the original estate, and some fanfic not? (Like I said – JATW was a seriously
annoying book for me, and influenced how I saw these others. It
literally has Jeeves trying to marry Wooster off, it’s annoying and
heteronormative as hell) I shouldn’t have ignored these. They’re so much fun.
I’m actually sad that I left these so long without reading them, just because I
pre-judged them.

Second thing – I made the mistake of reading some of the reviews of some
very… uh, traditional Christie fans towards the first book. And
specifically, their reactions to the fact that Sophie Hannah has created an OC
to be Poirot’s sidekick, Hastings obviously still being in Argentina in this
timeline. And their rage – or at least one of their rages – was centered around
the implication that  this detective sidekick, Edward Catchpool, might *gasp*
be gay. Not even living it large with lots of boyfriends, or even one
boyfriend, or having dastardly gay sex on every other page. He merely alludes
to not fancying women and has an internal discussion about a crisis of love.
And their homophobic rage just drips off every review. And so, I decided to
stan for these books out of sheer spite. At first I merely liked them as a fun
yarn – now I’ve decided to insist they’re the bee’s knees, the cat’s pyjamas,
solely because of some asshole homophobes who decided they were the gatekeepers
of what constituted “true” detective fiction. Spite-stanning, it’s a thing. (EDIT: having now finished Closed Casket – someone who ships Gathercole and Catchpool come talk to me)

Anyway – the actual review. This book is not Christie. It’s not
like her voice, and this is a good thing. The problem with fanfic is it
often tries to cleave to the original author’s voice too strongly,
and this leads to it coming off as fake, offputting. You can never truly
imitate someone else’s writing style, so any little discrepancy will send the
story into the literary equivalent of uncanny valley. Sophie Hannah doesn’t
even try, but instead makes a choice to concentrate more on making it in the ‘style’
of the original author, to conjure up the atmosphere of interbellum London. And
that seems to have enraged a lot of Amazon reviewers, who seemed to expect
actual Christie. For my part, I think this choice works. Catchpool isn’t
Hastings. He’s a character of his own, and despite a shaky start you do grow
fond of him, and he works well as a narrator for this new, retired Poirot.

I initially found his character a bit annoying – without giving too much
away, he’s a bit wet at first when confronted with three bodies, and is
supposed to be a novice inspector… but even for a novice he does do some dreamy
stuff. You get the impression this is a character on the verge of growth – in fact,
this is lampshaded by Poirot when he says he wants to make a good inspector of
Catchpool and therefore won’t just spoon-feed him the way he did Hastings… but
by gods, his character development does take some time. He isn’t completely
dim, which is good because as ever this kind of character is meant to be a
stand-in for us, the audience, and it’s nice to not have everything overexplained.
I hope he continues to become a better policeman in the next two books.

The story switches between Poirot’s and Catchpool’s perspectives, and it’s a
risky move that pays off. You do get the feeling that this is an older, retired
Poirot, more genteel and slowed down, but the pace of the book is still great.
The twist-upon-twist at the reveal was done really well, and just when you finally think you know the murderer, it
twists again… and you’re left unable to put the book down. Which is what
Christie would have wanted, I think. This aspect seems quite influenced by the
David Suchet TV adaptations (that guy can’t be the killer, there’s still 15
minutes left of the show!) but it works in book format, too.

I also really appreciate that this stuck to one cardinal Christie rule –
everything used by the detective to solve the murder HAS to appear on the page
at some point before. Even if it’s just a vague mention. You find yourself
going back frantically to recheck tiny details. The plot itself is original
enough, and though I started yelling at the page really early on about a
certain theory in the book when a crucial difference was remarked upon (cos you
know, there’s some tropes you just know when you read a lot of detective
fiction) but besides that, I was pleasantly entertained.

The author commentary on social issues is sparse, but just as with the
original Christie there’s a few lines, underlining that Poirot is a foreigner
in England, and that has got some social implications, and people do behave in
certain ways. It’s subtle, but good.

Tl:dr version – I liked these books. They’re not exactly Christie’s style,
but they stand well enough on their own. I’d actually even read a spinoff (I
guess original fiction) with this sidekick, as he grows up.

mystery-and-history:

Father Brown Characters as John Mulaney Quotes

Father Brown: “I try to stay optimistic, even though I must admit, things are getting pretty sticky.”

Sid: “Here’s how easy it was to get away with bank robbery back in the ‘50s: As long as you weren’t still there when the police arrived, you had a 99% chance of getting away with it.”

Mrs. McCarthy: “You have the moral backbone of a chocolate eclair.”

Lady Felicia: “Every time I walk down the street, I need everyone, all the time, to like me so much–it’s exhausting.”

Bunty: “I think Emily Dickinson’s a lesbian.”

Flambeau

:  ‘Why?…Why do you do this…?’ 
“Because it’s the one thing you can’t replace.”

Inspector Valentine: “I know all of that, how do YOU know all of that?”

Inspector Sullivan: “I’ll just keep all my emotions right here and then one day, I’ll die.”

Inspector Mallory: ‘Inspector, we found a pool of the killer’s blood.’ “Hhmmm……gross! Mop it up! Now, back to my hunch.”

Sargeant Goodfellow: “My vibe is more like: ‘Hey, you could pour soup in my lap and I’ll probably apologize to you’.”