Mollyycolllinss Categories For later read
7 days
30 days
All time
Recent
Popular
This thread attempts to cast light on how the mgmt of #UBCLite worked in lockstep with the EC to mislead, misdirect, deceive and captivate viewers.
FYI, #UBCLite was coined by Tom Ddumba after NBS consistently became a state mouthpiece. The "adjective" fits like a glove 0/13
1/13 Take note that prior and during the elections the EC repeatedly announced that Absolutely NO ONE was allowed to have a tally center, not even the candidates. But somehow NBS was able to ignore those directives and implement what appeared to be a live tally center. Why? How?
2/13
Now the station reportedly have Monday staff meetings. On the Monday of the election week, staff were notified about an election tally center going to be hosted at their station by a selected few (the special ones)- you know these people, they stick out like a sore thumb
3/13 On 15/1/21, when Canary took us through the infamous tour of the "command center", showing us their agents, and how their tally system was using phone calls to aggregate results, it was meant to build confidence in what they wanted to announce. They primed us for fake news
4/13 Interestingly, NBS actually had real staff deployed across the country to collect & relay actual tallies from districts. They collected results & called them in using phones, so on the 15th the teams down stairs were busy working out totals for different districts
FYI, #UBCLite was coined by Tom Ddumba after NBS consistently became a state mouthpiece. The "adjective" fits like a glove 0/13
After posting this thread, i got a detailed anonymous narrative from an insider at NBS on what transpired on that day and I will drop another thread later today. The truth is out there
— #ExplodingNoema (@henryshaykins) January 21, 2021
1/13 Take note that prior and during the elections the EC repeatedly announced that Absolutely NO ONE was allowed to have a tally center, not even the candidates. But somehow NBS was able to ignore those directives and implement what appeared to be a live tally center. Why? How?
2/13
Now the station reportedly have Monday staff meetings. On the Monday of the election week, staff were notified about an election tally center going to be hosted at their station by a selected few (the special ones)- you know these people, they stick out like a sore thumb
3/13 On 15/1/21, when Canary took us through the infamous tour of the "command center", showing us their agents, and how their tally system was using phone calls to aggregate results, it was meant to build confidence in what they wanted to announce. They primed us for fake news
4/13 Interestingly, NBS actually had real staff deployed across the country to collect & relay actual tallies from districts. They collected results & called them in using phones, so on the 15th the teams down stairs were busy working out totals for different districts
This is what happens when you train neural networks largely on tone and its stylistic relics. They pick up formal features of arguments (not so much fallacies as tics) that have almost nothing to do with semantic content (focus on connotation over implication).
This is a secular problem in the discipline. It's got nothing to do with the Analytic/Continental split in the anglophone world. They've both got the same ramifying signal/noise problem, it's just that the styles (tics and connotations) are different in each pedagogical context.
And this is before we start talking about tone policing and topic policing, which are both rife and essentially make the peer review journal system completely unfit for purpose, populated as it is by a random sampling of pedants selecting for syntactic noise over semantic signal.
We've allowed a system of self-reinforcing and ratcheting filters to evolve that effectively *fuzzes* our contribution to the growth of human knowledge (https://t.co/VmW15pGt7J), because it selects for properties only loosely related to those we claim to want. Let that sink in.
This is literally the opposite of what a filter is supposed to do: extract signal from noise, syntactic compression that preserves semantic content. Instead we are awash in syntactic artifacts optimised for minimal criticisable content and maximal pedantic posturing.
This is what happens when you let philosophers try to write about real life. This ridiculous, game-playing, feigned innocence. Journals have been full of this for years, this elaborate performance of *doing philosophy* and saying nothing. I cannot adequately express my contempt pic.twitter.com/ciDeWuEkET
— Jack (@jackeselbst) January 14, 2021
This is a secular problem in the discipline. It's got nothing to do with the Analytic/Continental split in the anglophone world. They've both got the same ramifying signal/noise problem, it's just that the styles (tics and connotations) are different in each pedagogical context.
And this is before we start talking about tone policing and topic policing, which are both rife and essentially make the peer review journal system completely unfit for purpose, populated as it is by a random sampling of pedants selecting for syntactic noise over semantic signal.
We've allowed a system of self-reinforcing and ratcheting filters to evolve that effectively *fuzzes* our contribution to the growth of human knowledge (https://t.co/VmW15pGt7J), because it selects for properties only loosely related to those we claim to want. Let that sink in.
This is literally the opposite of what a filter is supposed to do: extract signal from noise, syntactic compression that preserves semantic content. Instead we are awash in syntactic artifacts optimised for minimal criticisable content and maximal pedantic posturing.
Here the big people you requested. Now delete your tweets:
1. Haafidh Ibn Hajr said, “I asked my Shaikh Siraaj ud deen al-Balqayaanee about Ibn Arabee and he replied quickly he is kaafir (disbeliever)”{Leesaan ul-Meezaan(4/319), another edn (5/213),
…Tambiyyatul-Ghabee Ilaa Takfeer Ibn Arabee (pg.159)}
2. Muhaddith Baqaa’ee wrote our teacher Haafidh Ibn Hajr and another man called Ibn al-Ameen had a mubaahilah concerning Ibn Arabee. The man said, “If Ibn Arabee is upon misguidance then curse me.”
Haafidh Ibn Hajr said, “Oh Allaah if Ibn Arabee is upon guidance then curse me.” After a few months the man became blind and died during the night.
{Tambiyyatul-Ghabee (pg.136-137)}
3. Haafidh Ibn Daqeeq al-Eed asked Abu Muhammad Izz ud deen Abdul Azeez bin Abdus Salaam as-Silmee ad-Damashqee (660H) about Ibn Arabee and he replied, “Dirty, liar and far from the truth, he opined time was old and he did not consider other peoples private parts to be…
…haraam.”
{al-Wafaa Bal-Wafyaat (4/125) with an authentic chain, Tambiyyatul-Ghabee (pg.138)}
1. Haafidh Ibn Hajr said, “I asked my Shaikh Siraaj ud deen al-Balqayaanee about Ibn Arabee and he replied quickly he is kaafir (disbeliever)”{Leesaan ul-Meezaan(4/319), another edn (5/213),
Not a reason to takfir great ulamaa for. Just a reason to shut up and go back to playing ps5 and leave the big stuff to the big people.
— Emin (@AReminder0) January 13, 2021
…Tambiyyatul-Ghabee Ilaa Takfeer Ibn Arabee (pg.159)}
2. Muhaddith Baqaa’ee wrote our teacher Haafidh Ibn Hajr and another man called Ibn al-Ameen had a mubaahilah concerning Ibn Arabee. The man said, “If Ibn Arabee is upon misguidance then curse me.”
Haafidh Ibn Hajr said, “Oh Allaah if Ibn Arabee is upon guidance then curse me.” After a few months the man became blind and died during the night.
{Tambiyyatul-Ghabee (pg.136-137)}
3. Haafidh Ibn Daqeeq al-Eed asked Abu Muhammad Izz ud deen Abdul Azeez bin Abdus Salaam as-Silmee ad-Damashqee (660H) about Ibn Arabee and he replied, “Dirty, liar and far from the truth, he opined time was old and he did not consider other peoples private parts to be…
…haraam.”
{al-Wafaa Bal-Wafyaat (4/125) with an authentic chain, Tambiyyatul-Ghabee (pg.138)}
Amazigh (Berber) languages are quite close to each other and in most places nearby varieties are mutually intelligible. They function like a discontinuous dialect continuum.
A loooong thread with maps (and no memes☹️).
So can we do sub-classification?
Many people say “no”, like André Basset’s famous quote: “cette langue s’éparpille directement ou à peu près en une poussière de parlers de 4 à 5 mille peut être” (1952:1) and Alfred Willms (1980). Others are a bit more nuanced.
For example, the fantastic studies by Lafkioui (https://t.co/hHKMgEPjK2) give a synchronic classification of Tarifiyt dialects. To cut a very long story irresponsibly short: all variables are counted the same.
However, we should ask ourselves: Does this continuum hide a more discontinuous past? Has there never been major disruption, or has much of it been smoothed out by later convergence?
In order to study this, one has to classify variables and their isoglosses. Some variables are continuous and can be assigned to the latest convergence period. Others are clustered in a group unrelated to the continuum. Still others are scattered.
A loooong thread with maps (and no memes☹️).
So can we do sub-classification?
Many people say “no”, like André Basset’s famous quote: “cette langue s’éparpille directement ou à peu près en une poussière de parlers de 4 à 5 mille peut être” (1952:1) and Alfred Willms (1980). Others are a bit more nuanced.
For example, the fantastic studies by Lafkioui (https://t.co/hHKMgEPjK2) give a synchronic classification of Tarifiyt dialects. To cut a very long story irresponsibly short: all variables are counted the same.
However, we should ask ourselves: Does this continuum hide a more discontinuous past? Has there never been major disruption, or has much of it been smoothed out by later convergence?
In order to study this, one has to classify variables and their isoglosses. Some variables are continuous and can be assigned to the latest convergence period. Others are clustered in a group unrelated to the continuum. Still others are scattered.
