Yahoo! Assbags

I signed up for Yahoo! Answers the other day. We're already not getting along.

----------------------------------------------------

Hello The RoBeast

You have posted content to Yahoo! Answers in violation of our Community Guidelines or Terms of Service. As a result, your content has been deleted. Community Guidelines help to keep Yahoo! Answers a safe and useful community, so we appreciate your consideration of its rules.

Question: should men tweeze their eye brows? Indians only please...?

Question Details:

Deleted Answer: You should tweeze your eye balls out.

Violation Reason:Community Guidelines and/or Terms Of Service Violation

If you feel this content was removed in error, please read the Community Guidelines and make sure that this content: 1. respects the question-answer format and is not chatty or personal communication; 2. does not contain non-relevant links to external sites or other questions and does not promote your own blog or website; 3. is respectful to other people and does not offend other community members. If you still believe this content has been removed in error, please contact Customer Care and tell us why.

Regards,
Yahoo! Customer Care

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I basically signed up to give smartass answers to everything, so I knew that racking up violations was inevitable. I'm not sure how exactly I violated Yahoo's policy with this one. I didn't feel that I was being particularly mean, obscene, or hateful. I also wasn't harassing or threatening this person. I didn't suggest that I personally would hurt the guy in any way--I advised him to hurt himself. Big difference! Besides, tweezing hurts anyway whether it's your eyebrow or eyeball.

I decided to appeal the deletion as this user's question was racist in the first place.

--------------------------------------------------------------------

REDFRMADV Case ID: 59003154

What are you appealing?
Subject: Answer Deletion

Enter additional information here:
I hope you understand that you flagged my inappropriate answer to
a clearly racist question.

---------------------------------------------------

Little did I know that my appeal was being forwarded to Yahoo! India. Another fun fact: Yahoo! India is apparently located in Singapore. Singapore, not exactly known for their liberal sense of humor, had zero interest in my appeal. (Another fun fact: Google's Blogger has zero interest in allowing me to type without using italics anymore. Why do you think I'm angry all the time?)

---------------------------------------------------

Hello,

Thank you for writing to Yahoo! India.

We have reviewed your appeal request. Upon review we found that your
content was indeed in violation of the Yahoo! Answers Community
Guidelines, Yahoo! Community Guidelines or the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
As a result, your content will remain removed from Yahoo! Answers.

Please note: Questions that do not receive any answers within the 4-day
open period will expire and be deleted automatically.

Use of Yahoo! Answers is subject to the Yahoo! Answers Community
Guidelines, Yahoo! Community Guidelines, and also the Yahoo! Terms of
Service. Members who have violated the Community Guidelines are at risk
for review and possible termination of their Answers accounts. In
extreme cases, members who have also violated the Yahoo! Terms of
Service risk losing their Yahoo! ID and access to other Yahoo! services.

Please review the Yahoo! Answers Community Guidelines here:

http://sg.answers.yahoo.com/info/community_guidelines.php

Please review the Yahoo! Community Guidelines here:

http://sg.docs.yahoo.com/info/guidelines/community.html

Thank you again for contacting Yahoo! India.

Regards,

Louis
Senior Customer Care Specialist
Yahoo! Singapore
http://sg.yahoo.com

-----------------------------------------------------

Anyway, my original appeal was sent on a form entitled "First Appeal," so I logically presume that I can appeal again. This email from "Louis" suggests otherwise. There is no additional form, no contact information... basically, no recourse other than reviewing their policy over and over. Regardless, I hit reply and gave Yahoo! India a piece o' my mind:

You consider my content inappropriate, but you don't see THE OBVIOUS RACISM IN THE QUESTION? It says "INDIANS ONLY". How is that respecting "a diverse community of people with diverse opinions" as stated in the community guide? If you don't delete that question, I'm going to tweeze my own eyeballs out in protest. You don't want that blood on your hands.

I was tempted to make the subject "Indians only," but decided against it. I never received a response back, but I also can't find the question anymore. Maybe it was deleted, I don't know. This is the RoBeast again, by the way talking in real blog time, so pretend I'm not using block quotes or italics. Blogger obviously wants you to use your imagination since they won't allow me to just fucking type over there with left justification or with plain old text or anything else I want to do. Why would I? It's their blog really. I shouldn't complain because they let me have all this free space and bandwidth for no charge at all. It's not like they track everything I do or anything in exchange for this privilege. It's not like they follow every website I go to and then throw strategic ads at me all fucking day.

Well somehow I broke out of the blockquote, but now I've got a different font that I don't want. At least it looks different. I don't know why I even fucking bother trying to make these blogs visually interesting. I would think that large quoted items such as email messages should be italicized and separated somehow. It makes it easier to read, plus I don't want anyone to think the text is to be read in my voice, but no... I can't fucking do anything I want in Blogger. YOU HAVE NO IDEA HOW FRUSTRATING IT IS TO CLICK ON AN ITALICS BUTTON AND NOT HAVE THE GOD DAMNED ITALICS GO AWAY. GO AWAY ITALICS. BLOGGER YOU PIECE OF SHIT, JUST DO WHAT I WANT. IF YOU KNOW ANYONE THAT WORKS ON BLOGGER, I WANT YOU TO TELL THEM TO TWEEZE THEIR FUCKING EYEBALLS OUT.

JIHAD AGAINST YAHOO AND GOOGLE. YOU HEARD IT HERE FIRST. I KNOW THAT'S NOT SOMETHING INDIANS DO, BUT I'VE BEEN READING A LOT ABOUT MUSLIM BATHROOM HABITS LATELY AND EVERYTHING IS SETTING ME OFF. I GOT LIKE 13 HOURS OF SLEEP LAST NIGHT AND IT'S ALL RUINED NOW. I JUST CAN'T RELAX. I WANNA GET FREE.

Why I'm not voting for Hillary Clinton.

Time for a barely political (and potentially unintelligible) rant.

I spotted this "news item" earlier this week:

WASHINGTON (AP) — Call her a Honky Tonk Woman: Hillary Rodham Clinton is a big fan of the Rolling Stones.

Speaking to reporters aboard her campaign plane Sunday morning, the Democratic presidential contender said she was eager to see "Shine a Light," the new documentary about the legendary rock band that was directed by Martin Scorsese and opens Friday.

Clinton said she attended her first Stones show as a high school senior in 1965, and has been a few times since. She praised Mick Jagger, the band's 64-year-old lead singer, and said she admired his work ethic.

"If you go to a Stones concert today and I have been, it's just amazing," Clinton said. "He has this incredible presence. He is very disciplined, he works out, and he's incredibly devoted to what he does."

I will tell you everything that pisses me off about this article in chronological order.

1. I read this in USA Today. This news is not news. This is kindling.

2. I will not call Hilary a "Honky Tonk Woman." The title of the song has absolutely no relevance to the rest of the article, Hilary Clinton's campaign, or Hilary Clinton's life, unless she's planning to soon be a "divorcee in New York City" looking to blow a rock star.

3. I still don't know how to spell Hilary's name. It's two L's. Why can't I remember that? Bill. Hillary. Bill. Hillary. Ok done.

4. Hillary is a big fan of the Rolling Stones? Is this an Onion article? A million other knuckleheads are Rolling Stones fans too. Fuck them all. I'm not voting for any Rolling Stones fans.

5. Did reporters bring up the Rolling Stones with Hillary, or was it the other way around? Were they just hangin' around smokin' butts, rappin' about their Top Fives? Or was this 100% calculated? I'm guessing the latter. Which reporter said "Oh shit, Hillary's saying something that unhip people may consider 'hip!' Let me get my steno pad and my astronaut pen out and write this down!!! The only thing that could make this article better is more exclamation points!!!! PULITZER!!!!!!!!!"? How do you sleep at night? You are literally a fucking tool. And I literally mean that literally, hole of the ass.

6. Campaign plane. Urbane birdbrain.

7. What was I doing two Sundays ago? Hmm.... Oh, I woke up early and made Belgian Waffles. Film at 11.

8. Ah. Now we've come to the beef and tomatoes. This brief is a commercial. Actually, two expensive commercials in one sentence. Vote for Hillary, go see the Stones documentary. One of these FKRs (BTW, those are WallyChung.Com's Big Buck Hunter high-score initials) paid the other one a lot of money for this BS. Or maybe this was a big AP-Hillary-Jagger threeway. Another boomer fantasy that we all get stuck trying to clean up. Or just blogging about. Oh, generation gap.

9. So Hillary has seen the Rolling Stones a few times in 40+ years. I suppose that makes her a big fan. I wonder how many of those times she's actually paid for face value tickets. Those greedy bozos charge hundreds of dollars for their fake electronic light show, then double the price every year. And then people like Hillary Clinton think they're getting they're getting street cred and an experience of a lifetime just by showing up with their ticket stub. Here's an impression of me: "Oh you went to a Stones show recently? Sucker." PEOPLE, STOP FEEDING THE STONES. They are not Rock 'n' Roll--they are a business model. They are neon nostalgia. Hillary admires Mick Jagger because he has the amazing ability to sell what was cool years ago to a new audience every 4 years they go on tour. Sound familiar, politician?

10. I won't lie though, I am impressed that she saw them in '65. Sort of. Here's another impression of me "Oh, you went to a Stones show in '65? I hope I get Social Security someday." Rolling Stones are so safe though. I mean, I feel like they made fun of George Bush on one of their last unmemorable albums, but big fucking deal. The Stones are innocuous. Nobody cares if you went to a show that marihuana cigarettes may have been at anymore. You weren't being edgy. Maybe if she saw Marilyn Manson or Rage Against the Machine I'd pepper up without even firing off a blog about her being a fake goth or a frat boy.

In summary, I hate politicians, reporters, and rockstars. If Obama starts talking about Kanye West next week, I'm voting Republican.

Here's a news article I'd like to see:

WASHINGTON (AP) — Call her a "Local" Girl: Hillary Rodham Clinton is a big fan of Local H's "California Songs."

Drunkenly ranting to gawking hipsters last "Thirsty" Thursday, the Democratic presidential contender said she was eager to go home and track down a bittorrent of "California Songs" by Local H, a 2-piece band from Chicago that predates The White Stripes.

Clinton said she loved "Bound for the Floor" the first million times it was on the radio in 1996, and assumed they broke up after that album. She credited Wikipedia for having a well-maintained article on the band that helped her explore their continued discography.

"I read the lyrics to 'California Songs', and they're just amazing," Clinton said. "He makes fun of California the whole time. And then he says 'Fuck New York too.' I don't care if they still kinda sound like Nirvana.. they fucking rule, man!"