The second in three days. I wrestled over whether to skip the regular Friday Forum, having launched an emergency Wednesday forum just days before. I decided to keep on schedule because 1) a lot is happening in the Wonderful World of Ethics right now and 2) the Emergency Forum has amassed a whopping 51 comments, and its my experience that may readers won’t take the time to drill down that deep, though they miss a lot of excellent commentary as a result.
So open forum away, I say with tongue in cheek, since I hate hate hate the current fad of turning nouns into verbs (“Let’s movie!”).
Ethics Alarms 
I have a question (or a series of short questions) for the group regarding the phone apps that allow people to track the locations and movements of ICE agents. After this week’s shooting in Dallas – where it was noted that the shooter was using such an app – what is the correct response/action? Can those apps be deactivated? Should they be? Are there potential legal ramifications for the creators of such technology that “aid and abet” those committing violence? Are the creators “accessories” to the deed?
A while ago Apple and Amazon killed the Parler app as it was not censorious enough to their taste. My view is that the app that allows people to track the location of ICE agents it way more unethical, and should me removed from all platforms, and should automatically be disabled on all cellphones.
This app put a target on the back of law enforcement officers, endangering their lives. I hope the DOJ makes efforts to outlaw this app, and hold platforms as Apple legally responsible if they keep supporting this app.
This is another example of “freedom is scary, deal with it.”
If the companies decide to dump it without government coercion then OK. But if there is ANY government push to do it, it is a first amendment violation. In America, we’re all the press. There is no legal acknowledgement of a press pass. We ALL get the same rights to freedom of the press. That includes the live rebroadcast of any government activity, including the activities of the police.
The problem with anyone phone company or phone service provider taking it off is that the government said they can’t exclude any app for anti-trust reasons. If they double back on saying it is OK because of the expression contained in the apps, then it is also a first amendment violation.
Modern version of a police scanner, the information is neutral, the use to which it is put is the question. This is for actions on the clock, if they are publishing home addrersses or locations of their kids schools, that is a horse of another color.
We had a very active Open Forum at Wednesday, and it is still quite here.
I was wondering about events across the pond, in the UK, as I am worried about the developments in that country. Apparently “walking while Jewish” seems to be a problem for law enforcement while there is a pro-Palestine protest going on….
Did that policeman assume his relious affinity?
It’s hardly a new fad. Verbing nouns has been around for a long time. Ship being the oldest example I can think of, with ships being around before you would ship something.
I’d bet there are relatively recent examples that you hardly notice now. Do you ever google something instead of search for it on google for instance? I could be wrong, but it seems like things which bother me at first become more tolerable with exposure. Maybe it’s just me resigning myself to it.
Mr. Golden hates the use of “impact” as a verb and has for years.
As do I, and I never, ever use it.
I can’t see that word without thinking the George Carlin bit on words he will not be using tonight. “…I will say impacted when I mean affected…” 2:49 in the link.
Bah… how did I manage to leave the word “not” out of that quote…
Words that can be used both as noun and verb are versatile. Do you know what the most versatile word is in the English language? I hope that our host Jack is not going to ban me for this…
Loved it! My f***ing partner (in a good way) makes ample use of this versatile word… don’t know how the f**k he would manage without it.
From a neuroscience POV, swear words ARE special so this word punches way above other F words via enhanced activation of various subcortical structures, including the amygdala (which stores memories that are stamped with intense emotion). Swearing, also increases pain tolerance, so if you are injured, by all means let it rip! Do so will also quickly attract the attention of people who might help.
Here’s a little primer on the topic: https://brainhealthuniversity.com/brain-health-insights/the-neuroscience-of-swearing-why-bad-words-feel-so-good/
Here’s my understanding of nouns becoming verbs. It’s nothing to fight. Don’t fight the feeling!
The English language is very close to “pure positional.” As I understand it, that means that the role of a word in a sentence is understood almost entirely by where it is.
The standard sentence order in English is S V O–Subject Verb Object.
“I ran home.”
He threw the ball.”
Note the archaic Anglo-Saxonism for weddings: “With this ring I thee wed.”
“I thee wed” is S O V.
= – = – = – =
The English language has verbs that hardly inflect at all for case or number–we don’t really have to conjugate the verb “to run.”
I run
you run
he, she it runs
we run
they run.
= – = – =
With these features of the language, it’s very easy to change a noun into a verb simply by putting the noun in a spot where it is understood that the word should function as a verb.
“I calendared the appointment.” or “Let me minute that.”
Or as Shakespeare wrote, somewhere…
“But me no buts, uncle me no uncles.”
We also have the option of putting “ize” on the end. If we wish to make something final, we can “finalize” it.
These tricks (nouns being made into verbs or the other way around) have been performed for hundreds of years. It’s nothing new.
= – = – = – =
The English language is curiously simple in terms of verb inflection, gender, articles, etc.
The book _The reader over your shoulder_ (Graves and Hodge, methinks) gives the following example
“If only you two thieves had drowned yourselves”
takes fewer words in Greek. Four or five, I forget which. Greek is shorter because of cases, modes, numbers, etc. It’s better in the Graves and Hodge book.
= – = – =
The grammatical simplicity of English is presumably a result of what happened to the Anglo-Saxon tongue after the Norman Invasion. Our English language emerged stripped of much of the complexity of Anglo Saxon. The book to read is probably _Our Magnificent Bastard Tongue_ by John McWhorter.
That sounds like a digression but it’s not, quite. I suspect the simple nature of the verb in English makes it easy to make a verb into a noun.
Somewhere (probably in _Dragons of expectation_) Robert Conquest wrote that if you know English but don’t know any other languages you just *know* English, but you don’t *know about English*. It’s hard to *know about* a language if you lack any other language to compare it to.
Thanks for reading.
charles w abbott
rochester NY
Public discipline of a Judge:
https://kstp.com/kstp-news/local-news/minnesota-supreme-court-censures-suspends-county-judge-9-months-for-misconduct/
For the record, the Minnesota Supreme Court has answered the lingering question of whether it is judicial misconduct for a Judge to conduct Court proceedings in a moving car.
Yes. Yes, it is.
-Jut
I had a conversation on Facebook last night:
Friend Post: Can someone explain why the government wanted to shut down TikTok because of spying but they’re okay with the refrigerator listening?
Person A: Easy. Trump hated Tik Tok because the younger kids kept making fun of him. Then he realized that he could get people to vote for him using Tik Tok, so then he loved it. National security was never an issue with him…hes friends with Russia….he doesnt care about national security.
Me Replying to Person A: The Protecting Americans from Foreign Adversary Controlled Applications Act was signed into law by President Joe Biden on April 24, 2024. The Biden Administration argued that TikTok – a China-based application – has the potential to be influenced by the Chinese government, as well as the ability to spy on Americans. The Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of the ban in January 2025, prior to Trump’s inauguration.
Though Trump had proposed a ban in his first administration, it did not happen.
President Trump has extended the deadline for its enforcement of the Biden law four times to give the application time to find a U.S. owner.
Friend Replying to Me: Accurate.
Trump did extend the ban.
This is his Supreme Court.
Me Replying to Friend: Trump did not extend the ban. He extended the deadline for enforcement of the ban. TikTok is still accessible in the U.S. The deadline has been extended to 12/16 after Trump delayed enforcement for the fourth time on 9/16.
Regardless of how many SCOTUS justices were appointed by Trump, H.R. 7521 was approved by Congress, including 155 Democrats, and signed by President Biden.
Friend Replying to Me: I still agree.
Person A (replying to my original reply to him): Biden? You’re forgetting the simple fact that Trump wanted TIk Tok shut down during his first term, BEFORE Biden was in office. Biden did ban them, nor did he suggest them to be shut down….he clearly stated he left that open for Trump to address.
Me Replying to Person A: No, I didn’t forget. I literally wrote in my original reply that Trump wanted to ban it in his first term and didn’t.
“Biden did ban them, nor did he suggest them to be shut down…he clearly stated he left that open for Trump to address.”
Not sure what you’re trying to say here. Biden signed the legislation. At that point, whether Biden suggested that TikTok should be shut down or not is moot. However, out of respect for Friend, I’m ending it here and will only add that I will never buy a smart refrigerator.
————————————————–
Now, I want to point out that the TikTok post was clearly meant as kind of a knock on the whole Ban TikTok thing going on. However, my friend’s friend made it overtly political by dragging Trump into it. Like Justice Thomas’ observation that you can’t just say, “stare decisus” and shut your brain down (as I pointed out in the previous post some people actually do), this guy immediately says, “Trump” and shuts his brain down (as much of the Trump Deranged do).
I’m not sure if my friend made a typo or is just misinformed. Trump did not extend the ban. And the dig about the SCOTUS being Trump’s because, I assume, he appointed more of them than the Left would like, is ridiculous.
Far more bizarre is the fact that Person A completely overlooked my acknowledgment in my original reply that it had been Trump’s idea during his first administration. Nor do I understand what his point is at all in his reply to me. Is he really saying that the fault for the TikTok ban is Trump’s because it was his idea even if it didn’t happen on his watch? Is he saying that Biden went along with it and deliberately left it for Trump to deal with?
This is what having a conversation with the Trump Deranged is like. They make no sense.
This coming Sunday marks the 31st anniversary of the sinking of passenger ferry MS Estonia, which took the lives of 852 men, women, and children in the worst-ever peacetime disaster on the Baltic Sea.
I was there, aboard the ferry that took on most of the survivors. Even from a safe vantage point the experience was horrific. Every year I mark the anniversary by reposting my 2014 essay about the sinking.
—
When I posted the article directly to LinkedIn, I heard from a British journalist who had covered the story at the time:
“Thank you for your recollections. I was a newspaper newsdesk journalist in London when the first reports came in. I was able to use my connections to make contact with maritime experts.
“We found out in the early hours from a ship inspector in Tallinn that they had had second thoughts about issuing a safety certificate for the ship before it sailed for various reasons.
“I had gained these marine connections years earlier. I was a student in the UK and had a part-time job driving UK-made new cars direct to owners in Germany – so I crossed the Channel, often across tumultuous seas – more than 200 times. They could be frightening experiences in winter – a two-hour crossing taking 24 hours on occasion amid chaotic scenes and screaming passengers.
“It later emerged that the first rescue helicopters that reached the scene from Sweden could not pick up survivors as their winches had rusted. By the time they returned few of the frozen survivors were left alive. Sweden, they say, ‘is a great country, except in an emergency.'”
—
Key ethical themes: professionalism, foresight, courage, and chivalry.
Wow, thank you very much for posting this.
You’re most welcome!
I studied in Sweden in 1998. I visited Talinn and saw the memorial for this.
I know it was irrational, but ferry trips in the Baltic Sea made me nervous.
-Jut
I don’t think fear/concern was irrational.
Thank you for sharing this.
You’re welcome!
Yoikes…THAT was something!
Curious; to which part of the Northwoods do you Listen.
Our Place Of The Heart is in Anderson TWSP/Iron County, north of Hwy 77 and south of U.S. Hwy 2.
PWS
Thanks for posting that — I don’t think I’d heard of that before, that was a pretty insular period in my life.
Sounds like Baltic ferries are routinely pretty horrific.
You’re welcome. My sample size is one, but I did find it noteworthy that the ferry line provided Dramamine gratis.
The free speech rights under the First Amendment are not absolute, as there are some exceptions e.g. incitement to violence. My understanding is that the criteria for determining whether speech falls in a category that is unprotected under the First Amendment are very high (strict scrutiny, clear and present danger). What should be the appropriate remedy for posters like the ones shown below?
The Charlie Kirk assassination have put a lot of conservatives on edge. Do we need additional definition of what exactly constitutes “incitement” as unprotected speech? E.g. if somebody says online that person X deserves to be killed and posts his address and a picture, maybe that constitutes incitement. However as person A says online that person X deserves to be killed, and person B posts his address that would not be legally actionable. How should a society deal with this issue?
I don’t think fear/concern was irrational.
Thanks to Cynthia T’s post, I wandered around the Northwoods Listener site a bit, came upon a post about Charlie Kirk (apologies to our host, I know you are tiring of this topic) and watched a recent interview of Kirk by Jordan Peterson.
I didn’t actually know very much about Kirk before his death and it was really interesting to learn about his trajectory from high school to the recent present. In case there are others who aren’t maxed out yet on CK and/or already have lots of knowledge about his journey, here’s the blog which links to the video: https://northwoodslistener.wordpress.com/2025/09/16/good-night-sweet-prince/
Oregon is so weird, the naked teacher principle no longer applies. A middle school math teacher at a public charter school protested topless across the street from the school. I can confirm that it was reported in mainstream local news outlets, but after the school decided to not take action, the articles went into the memory hole. Here is one from a right wing activist news site: https://thatoregonlife.com/2025/09/springfield-oregon-teacher-topless-protest-in-front-of-students/