California passes gender-quota laws

[Uxupox]

I also support California succession. We need to be our own country.

It would never work. At least not without getting Oregon and Washington and maybe Hawaii to come with us.

Hawaii will never be part of California. They'd rather be their own country than become a suzerainty of Cali. Oregon has no inkling for independence, they'll die rather quick without fed issued finance.

[The Batorys]

It would never work. At least not without getting Oregon and Washington and maybe Hawaii to come with us.

Hawaii will never be part of California. They'd rather be their own country than become a suzerainty of Cali. Oregon has no inkling for independence, they'll die rather quick without fed issued finance.

I never said anything about "becoming part of California." So I'm not sure where the fuck you got that.

[Proctopeo]

You're not backing up anything you say.

The first is the most obvious, and the biggest issue with Californian succession.
If you live in Cali, you most certainly know that California is having increasingly worse problems with water.

[Mystic Warriors]

You're not backing up anything you say.

The first is the most obvious, and the biggest issue with Californian succession.
If you live in Cali, you most certainly know that California is having increasingly worse problems with water.

I am asking you to back up your assertions.

[Uxupox]

Hawaii will never be part of California. They'd rather be their own country than become a suzerainty of Cali. Oregon has no inkling for independence, they'll die rather quick without fed issued finance.

I never said anything about "becoming part of California." So I'm not sure where the fuck you got that.

It would never work. At least not without getting Oregon and Washington and maybe Hawaii to come with us.

[/quote]

[The Batorys]

Again, where in that do I say anything about them becoming "part of" California?

[Uxupox]

The first is the most obvious, and the biggest issue with Californian succession.
If you live in Cali, you most certainly know that California is having increasingly worse problems with water.

I am asking you to back up your assertions.

Wait a minute. I thought you stated you were from Cali? How is it possible that you don't know the drought problems that have plagued the state since it's inception?

[Uxupox]

Again, where in that do I say anything about them becoming "part of" California?

"Come with".

[The Batorys]

I am asking you to back up your assertions.

Wait a minute. I thought you stated you were from Cali? How is it possible that you don't know the drought problems that have plagued the state since it's inception?

Currently the water situation is actually pretty okay. But you would know that if you lived here.

[The Batorys]

Again, where in that do I say anything about them becoming "part of" California?

"Come with".

Last I checked those are two very different things.

So I guess you're a liar.

[Uxupox]

Wait a minute. I thought you stated you were from Cali? How is it possible that you don't know the drought problems that have plagued the state since it's inception?

Currently the water situation is actually pretty okay. But you would know that if you lived here.

I highly doubt that.

[Olerand]

Again, I’m not playing into the falsehood that merit even matters. I’m using this for rhetorical argument to show that even when “merit” is present, it still crashes.

And? When merit is present, things still do go wrong, but they go wrong less when merit is there.

Take, as an analogy, a car driver. The best car driver will still crash. Doesn't mean merit should be thrown out of the window.

No, no, I don't want an analogy. I want something that will prove that "merit" has anything to do with even being on a board. And that "merit" makes a board better, or worse. Because many, many boards had so much merit, like Lehman Brothers', who was making a lot of money. Until the "merit" ran out, I guess...

[The Batorys]

Currently the water situation is actually pretty okay. But you would know that if you lived here.

I highly doubt that.

Um, yeah?

That's okay by our standards.

Which, again, you would know if you lived here or knew anything about what you're talking about.

[Estanglia]

And? When merit is present, things still do go wrong, but they go wrong less when merit is there.

Take, as an analogy, a car driver. The best car driver will still crash. Doesn't mean merit should be thrown out of the window.

No, no, I don't want an analogy. I want something that will prove that "merit" has anything to do with even being on a board. And that "merit" makes a board better, or worse. Because many, many boards had so much merit, like Lehman Brothers', who was making a lot of money. Until the "merit" ran out, I guess...

Boards aren't in general merit based.

[Uxupox]

Last I checked those are two very different things.

So I guess you're a liar.

Resorting to calling somebody a liar. Who hurt you?

Last time I checked whenever entire states decide to go independent or secede ("Come with") they didn't do it go alone in their own merry own way but dragged other states to form another federalized nation.

[Uxupox]

I highly doubt that.

Um, yeah?

That's okay by our standards.

Which, again, you would know if you lived here or knew anything about what you're talking about.

"Abnormal dryness or drought are currently affecting approximately 34,572,000 people in California, which is about 93% of the state's population.
"

[The Batorys]

Last I checked those are two very different things.

So I guess you're a liar.

Resorting to calling somebody a liar. Who hurt you?

Last time I checked whenever entire states decide to go independent or secede ("Come with") they didn't do it go alone in their own merry own way but dragged other states to form another federalized nation.

Yes, because you knowingly stated that I had said something that I had not. That is fucking lying, and you know it.

And yes, a federalized nation is very different than Hawaii being "part of" California. Unless Pennsylvania being part of a federalized nation means that it's "part of" Virginia.

[The Batorys]

Um, yeah?

That's okay by our standards.

Which, again, you would know if you lived here or knew anything about what you're talking about.

"Abnormal dryness or drought are currently affecting approximately 34,572,000 people in California, which is about 93% of the state's population.
"

So, a typical summer for us.

[Olerand]

No, no, I don't want an analogy. I want something that will prove that "merit" has anything to do with even being on a board. And that "merit" makes a board better, or worse. Because many, many boards had so much merit, like Lehman Brothers', who was making a lot of money. Until the "merit" ran out, I guess...

Boards aren't in general merit based.

I entirely agree. So the argument about "merit" is factitious, made up to draw some line in the sand on why so many "merit-less" women can't be on these boards. Who would otherwise be filled with men who got there based on their... "merit".

[Uxupox]

Resorting to calling somebody a liar. Who hurt you?

Last time I checked whenever entire states decide to go independent or secede ("Come with") they didn't do it go alone in their own merry own way but dragged other states to form another federalized nation.

Yes, because you knowingly stated that I had said something that I had not. That is fucking lying, and you know it.

And yes, a federalized nation is very different than Hawaii being "part of" California. Unless Pennsylvania being part of a federalized nation means that it's "part of" Virginia.

"Come with"

Both are part of the United States as federal autonomous administrative divisions (ex states).

So, a typical summer for us.

Provide the data to refute USDA, NDMC, NDAA and the United States commerce department analysis.

[Petrolheadia]

And? When merit is present, things still do go wrong, but they go wrong less when merit is there.

Take, as an analogy, a car driver. The best car driver will still crash. Doesn't mean merit should be thrown out of the window.

No, no, I don't want an analogy. I want something that will prove that "merit" has anything to do with even being on a board. And that "merit" makes a board better, or worse. Because many, many boards had so much merit, like Lehman Brothers', who was making a lot of money. Until the "merit" ran out, I guess...

Saying that boards should not be based on merit because financial crises happen is like a commander saying that soldiers should be sent into the next battle unarmed because they lost while armed.

[The Batorys]

Yes, because you knowingly stated that I had said something that I had not. That is fucking lying, and you know it.

And yes, a federalized nation is very different than Hawaii being "part of" California. Unless Pennsylvania being part of a federalized nation means that it's "part of" Virginia.

"Come with"

Both are part of the United States as federal autonomous administrative divisions (ex states).

So, a typical summer for us.

Provide the data to refute USDA, NDMC, NDAA and the United States commerce department analysis.

So yes, you were lying, in that you were deliberately misrepresenting what I said as suggesting annexation.

[Uxupox]

Both are part of the United States as federal autonomous administrative divisions (ex states).



Provide the data to refute USDA, NDMC, NDAA and the United States commerce department analysis.

So yes, you were lying, in that you were deliberately misrepresenting what I said as annexation.

Are you going to provide the data that counter-argues what four governmental department officially state?

[The Batorys]

No, no, I don't want an analogy. I want something that will prove that "merit" has anything to do with even being on a board. And that "merit" makes a board better, or worse. Because many, many boards had so much merit, like Lehman Brothers', who was making a lot of money. Until the "merit" ran out, I guess...

Saying that boards should not be based on merit because financial crises happen is like a commander saying that soldiers should be sent into the next battle unarmed because they lost while armed.

If you think boards are based on merit, you don't understand how the upper echelons of companies work.

[Olerand]

No, no, I don't want an analogy. I want something that will prove that "merit" has anything to do with even being on a board. And that "merit" makes a board better, or worse. Because many, many boards had so much merit, like Lehman Brothers', who was making a lot of money. Until the "merit" ran out, I guess...

Saying that boards should not be based on merit because financial crises happen is like a commander saying that soldiers should be sent into the next battle unarmed because they lost while armed.

I'm not saying boards shouldn't be based on merit. I'm simply rejecting the claim that they are. Made up to say women don't have the "merit" to be present on something that no one has ever proven is even based on "merit".

I understand that as one cannot claim fictitious "merit" as some deus ex machina metric to exclude women, analogies become more and more popular. But I don't care for analogies. The entire claim is baseless. No one has proven "merit" has anything to do with board membership. And historical example has repeatedly shown that either it doesn't, or it "does", and yet it results in catastrophes that the "merit-less" would be hard-pressed to surpass, or even rival really.