Serious hotbutton wedge issue!

I’m deeply suspicious of any website that proclaims its ‘reason’ credentials so directly.

1 Like

Not my favourite Joe song, BTW. This is:

Also, I was just watching the video for Costello’s Oliver’s Army. Does anyone recognise who this is?

At first I thought Patrick Stewart, but he would’ve been too young back then.


He had a non-competition clause in effect for quite a few years. I left Massachusetts in 2000 and have only recently learned about what Howell has been doing in retrospect. Yes, it sounds like he has furthered the global coffee cause. But as somebody working on the streets of Boston/Cambridge in the 1990s, the loss of Coffee Connection was still a blow which affected me daily for five years. Although I did meet some great Starbucks people in that time. #firstworldproblems, etc

[quote=“popobawa4u, post:23, topic:98038”]
He had a non-competition clause in effect for quite a few years.[/quote]
That didn’t keep anyone else from opening a shop. Howell credits Starbucks with the customer service model he adopted in the late 80s, so much of what you enjoyed from CC was really *$. Howell even stayed on as a consultant for several years, and under his influence the shops in Boston offered the lighter-roasted coffees he favored.

Maybe arguable for a brief time back in the day, but Elvis has had a long and extraordinary career. Same thing for Beatles vs Stones. Stones have kept it up for half a century, the last album of old blues is a joy, hard to believe it’s made by a bunch of grandpas.

1 Like

I used to go to Harvard Square a lot in my youth, it was great. I now I occasionally go to Harvard Square :tm:. Most of my best bumper stickers were purchased on the next floor from that picture, up at Newbury Comics, which used to be cool. Cooler than Strawberries, at least.

hotbuttons are things that changed in Massachusetts, wedge is that it’s still better here :stuck_out_tongue:

Well played!

1 Like

That’s quite a low bar!

Newbury Comics and Tower I would visit occasionally. Usually I would spend hours in the used music stores such as Mystery Train, Second Coming, Pipeline, etc. I spent an insane amount of time and money amassing a collection of books and music which was all stolen one day. I am more selective now!


I spent that money on girls, and to the same effect. :stuck_out_tongue:


similarly, Jethro Tull’s Crest of a Knave really earned their Grammy that year over Metallica’s And Justice For All.


This indexes quite well into: Restaurant freakout in Santa Monica, California

1 Like

If she was acting out over her own sense of guilt, geez, she must have murdered someone. By kissing them to death.

Moral outrage surely has multiple dimensions, and can be oddly warped by the broken culture of individualism in the US, but it seems to primarily function as a kind of social behavior to protect group mores. Seeing a behavior so inherently tied to group cohesion and defense of group bonding through shared values through a filter of individualism is applying such a totally inappropriate filter that it’s pretty much deliberate self-inflicted blindness (though that could be said for virtually everything libertarians do).

1 Like

Perhaps. But one can never tell when it comes to out-of-control, escaped lunatics. Kind of dicey.

1 Like

It can be a problem for collectivists also, some of whom might consider such efforts to enforce the ingroup/outgroup split somewhat antisocial. As well as those who prefer evidence-based models and find informal group mores to be utterly unaccountable, compared to, for instance, voting.

If people cannot handle open discussion about a topic, they might not truly know what each others’ more are, with the group identity being more of a vaguely-shared feeling based upon projection by individual members, rather than anything one can confirm that they actually agree upon.

1 Like

But that is exactly what the study is disputing. Are you simply discounting the findings out of hand*?

It’s also not necessarily contradictory; our own sense of guilt is certainly shaped by our social surroundings.

*I admit skepticism myself for these sorts of things, until it is consistently reproduced; it is after all just a psychological study with all the inherent flaws of that sort of endeavor

1 Like

Ultimately, the results of Rothschild and Keefer’s five studies were “consistent with recent research showing that outgroup-directed moral outrage can be elicited in response to perceived threats to the ingroup’s moral status,” write the authors.[/quote]
It kind of looks like the study was still understanding the behavior in terms of group dynamics, just with Reason applying their bias to misinterpret ingroup/outgroup behaviors into something individual rather than social. But I haven’t really spent a lot of time looking at it. If it’s published on Reason I assume it’s about as reliable as anything published by Scientologists. Different cult, same practices.

1 Like

I think framing things in terms of individualism vs. collectivism is maybe not a great way to frame the issue. Humans are social animals, with social behaviors, and minds that are evolved and function socially. So I would go with ‘social’ rather than ‘collective,’ since ‘collective’ has a lot of extra connotations that aren’t relevant.

With the bizarre world of the internet where a ton of people variously socialized with many and various values, mores, manners, and communication styles, part of effective communication comes out of being able to articulate one’s values, mores, etc. That’s not something people are generally good at, since they often only have an intuitive sense of them, and the spinouts can be dramatic. Generally, people have a typical level of social and emotional awareness and intelligence, which helps mitigate, though. For we who don’t, well, we just have to make sure we’re taking it in as part of the situational analysis.

It was useful enough a few posts ago when you characterized US culture and libertarianism as being individualist. For the sake of convenience, I find it a useful distinction to say that I tend towards collectivism - rather than need to explain my views upon property, government, civic participation, etc over and over whenever I try talking with someone (although unfortunately that happens anyway). Both individualists and collectivists (if you will) alike consider their frame of reference to be in some way social. I am not attached to the term, but it can be useful and save time.

ETA: [quote=“nemomen, post:37, topic:98038”]
With the bizarre world of the internet where a ton of people variously socialized with many and various values, mores, manners, and communication styles, part of effective communication comes out of being able to articulate one’s values, mores, etc.

I tried touching upon that in another topic. I find it easier to recognize different types of inculturation, than it is to get other people to agree to! These continua are suggested by Livermore in his TTC series on cultural intelligence.

I could say the same about Little 5 in the ATL. It’s still pretty cool, but getting more bourgeois and corporate with each passing day. But Waxs-n-Facts and Criminal are still around and Variety is still a nice venue for smaller, national bands.


Blues is best played by old grandpas.

Unless it’s played by 20-year-old kids who somehow are able to sound like old grandpas.