> liberals on suicide watch
http://www.breitbart.com/tech/2016/06/10/gawker-media-files-bankruptcy/
How would you react if George Soros funded a suit against Breitbart?
Oh yeah! Best news of the day. I hope other shitty liberal media will follow.
>>76750101
THIS IS A SLIDE THREAD.
http://boards.4chan.org/pol/thread/76737959#top
THEY ARE SLIDING THIS THREAD
THREAD THEME: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O2pUmuVY37w
>>76751222
>They are sliding my thread!!
>>76750289
>George Soros funded a suit against Breitbart?
Depend on what they sue them for.
>>76750101
so much butthurt on /v/ right now
Everytime you get baited into visiting a "journalism" site, you are inadvertently giving pennies. Even with ad-blockers installed, the company uses visitor statistics to maintain relationships with their advertisers. Windows operating systems have a feature called the "hosts file" that will let you block these websites.
>The Windows Hosts file allows you to define which websites are linked to which IP addresses.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hosts_(file)
Here is how to use it
Notepad
Open with admin privileges.
C:\Windows\System32\drivers\etc
This is where your Hosts file is located. Open "hosts" (does not have an extension) with Notepad. If you utilize Spybot - Search & Destroy, you will see a very long list of unsafe domains already entered here. For your convenience, enter the following lines in at the top:
https://gist.github.com/ChimeraCoder/7495794
Spacing DOES matter in your host file, so ensure it looks like the example that is already in there. Some similar, clickbait-modelled sites to consider adding:
#Expanded list
127.0.0.1 rockpapershotgun.com
127.0.0.1 polygon.com
127.0.0.1 theverge.com
127.0.0.1 vox.com
127.0.0.1 games.on.net
127.0.0.1 pcgamer.com
127.0.0.1 fortune.com
127.0.0.1 cracked.com
127.0.0.1 neogaf.com
127.0.0.1 polygon.com
127.0.0.1 vice.com
127.0.0.1 wired.co.uk
127.0.0.1 wired.com
127.0.0.1 theverge.com
127.0.0.1 nymag.com
127.0.0.1 huffingtonpost.com
127.0.0.1 salon.com
127.0.0.1 indiewire.com
127.0.0.1 dailymail.co.uk
127.0.0.1 theguardian.com
Save the file. The "Save As" dialog box will appear. Save this as "hosts_new".
C:\Windows\System32\drivers\etc
1) Back in your \etc\ folder, rename your previous "hosts" file to "hosts_backup".
2) Rename the newly created file, "hosts_new.txt" to "hosts"
Congrats, no more accidentally giving pennies and view counts. Chances are, this post will be replied to by a "journalist" from one of Gawker's sites. If unsure, please do your own research.
>>76752385
Ι can imagine /v/ banning people for opening related threads.
>hey guys let's post this video of hulk rogan having sex lmao it's so disgusting lol
>heys guys we have no money you're fired
>>76752560
No need to imagine, they are. I watched 10 threads in the course of less than 5 minutes get deleted before 10 posts were reached.
Whats worse- there's non-mod posters reporting these for some reason.
>>76752519
>daily mail
To be fair that's a conservative tabloid. I know you will see some liberal nonsense there, but I wouldn't put it in the same bag as HuffPo, Gawker etc.
>>76752133
Seeing as they employ at least one writer who engages in harassment campaigns, it could very well happen.
I'm also fascinated that some were outraged over the Hogan tapes, yet claimed that The Fappening was just free speech.
>a gawker is somebody who absolutely won't be missed if something happens to him
Heh, nomen est omen.
i really like their website though lifehacker, gizmodo and jalopnik, i even have them on rss google newstand and feedly too bad. Never ever fight with hulk lol.
>>76750101
>>76753228
Daily Mail hosted pro Anita/Brianna Wu articles. They were added for that reason.
>>76753391
What harassment campaign? Something specifically libelous? or is it nothing?
>>76753860
Yeah, but in all fairness, who hasn't? Her sob story about misogyny in the gaming world has been all over the news.
>>76753391
Also, who would you arrest for Fappening leaks?
>>76752519
that list needs to be much longer
for instance at least KOTAKU comes to mind instantly
>>76750101
We did it /pol/ gawker is finished, soon enough liberal media will be dead.
>>76754164
True, true. Personally though, I don't see any harm in not going there. However, kudos to you for actually reading through the post and replying with words formed into a coherent sentence.
>>76754497
The GitHub link contains all direct, Gawker Media websites.
127.0.0.1 gawker.com
127.0.0.1 gizmodo.com
127.0.0.1 kotaku.com
127.0.0.1 deadspin.com
127.0.0.1 lifehacker.com
127.0.0.1 jalopnik.com
127.0.0.1 io9.com
127.0.0.1 jezebel.com
127.0.0.1 gawkerassets.com
127.0.0.1 img.gawkerassets.com
127.0.0.1 valleywag.gawker.com
I would love to include more, but the post is currently at the character limit. Most of the /v/ crowd can't be bothered to look for a post [2/2] in the same thread. I was thinking of linking to
http://gawkerblocker.com/index.php
But, I don't want people thinking I'm shilling for some website. Maybe I should make a pastebin like the /vg/ threads.
>>76750289
If brietbart engaged in libel, rank hypocrisy, and acted like lying cunts as a general business plan then I would be fine with it.
r8 me
>inb4 muh Aol account
>>76753391
>I'm also fascinated that some were outraged over the Hogan tapes, yet claimed that The Fappening was just free speech.
Who said that? Are you even remembering anything correctly?
