3 ms·

Actually, I make an effort to be sufficiently even handed that only a committed partisan could take offense.

by batz 11y ago

pyre 11y ago
Reading what you wrote, and this comment seems to translate as: > I make an effort to insult everyone therefore if anyone is insulted they must be a zealot. It's certainly not possible for reasonable people to take offence to an insult so long as I also insult the "other side" of the debate. I'm not entirely sure that the "social math" you're attempting to use here actually works in real life. But to digress further, even if this "social math" worked out, statements like "Trump is popular" are not necessarily contested even by people that disagree with Trump, while statement like "feminism annexed academia" is a much more inflammatory and contested statement.
- batz 11y ago
  Inflammatory, by that do you mean, problematic, citizen? It's not my social math, it's from the book I mentioned in the original post. There is a political calculus to power, and there are some good game theory models of it. It would be hard to deny that academia has seen a sea change in political thinking in the last 20 years (unless we've always been at war with eurasia), just as against all reason and sense, Trump has managed to become a contender. Stuff changes. There are models to describe some of it. Sorry if I tipped a sacred cow. I thought this was hacker news not reddit.
  - pyre 11y ago
    My "social math" comment was directed at this comment that you made: > I make an effort to be sufficiently even handed that only a committed partisan could take offense not at attacking the contents of the book that you are discussing in your original post. I have not read that book, therefore I am not on sufficient ground to debate its contents. On the other hand, your idea that you have been "sufficiently even handed" requires more explanation. From what I've read from you in this comment thread, that appears to mean, "I've made comments that people all over the political spectrum might not like, therefore somehow upsetting someone on the 'left' and someone on the 'right' balances out to upsetting no one. Therefore, only extremely committed zealots will be upset by my comments." This is the "social math" that does not work. > Sorry if I tipped a sacred cow. I thought this was hacker news not reddit. I could direct the same comment at you. Making comments like this is meant to put me on the defensive. You're claiming that I'm acting like an "irrational Redditor" rather than a "intelligent HN reader." Ending all of your comments with the equivalent of, "I'm just saying the truth that no one wants to hear" gives you more in common with Trump that you may like to admit.
caoilte 11y ago
Not much of an effort apparently.

Actually, I make an effort to be sufficiently even handed that only a committed partisan could take offense.

by batz 11y ago

Actually, I make an effort to be sufficiently even handed that only a committed partisan could take offense.

pyre 11y ago

Reading what you wrote, and this comment seems to translate as: > I make an effort to insult everyone therefore if anyone is insulted they must be a zealot. It's certainly not possible for reasonable people to take offence to an insult so long as I also insult the "other side" of the debate. I'm not entirely sure that the "social math" you're attempting to use here actually works in real life. But to digress further, even if this "social math" worked out, statements like "Trump is popular" are not necessarily contested even by people that disagree with Trump, while statement like "feminism annexed academia" is a much more inflammatory and contested statement.

batz 11y ago
Inflammatory, by that do you mean, problematic, citizen? It's not my social math, it's from the book I mentioned in the original post. There is a political calculus to power, and there are some good game theory models of it. It would be hard to deny that academia has seen a sea change in political thinking in the last 20 years (unless we've always been at war with eurasia), just as against all reason and sense, Trump has managed to become a contender. Stuff changes. There are models to describe some of it. Sorry if I tipped a sacred cow. I thought this was hacker news not reddit.
- pyre 11y ago
  My "social math" comment was directed at this comment that you made: > I make an effort to be sufficiently even handed that only a committed partisan could take offense not at attacking the contents of the book that you are discussing in your original post. I have not read that book, therefore I am not on sufficient ground to debate its contents. On the other hand, your idea that you have been "sufficiently even handed" requires more explanation. From what I've read from you in this comment thread, that appears to mean, "I've made comments that people all over the political spectrum might not like, therefore somehow upsetting someone on the 'left' and someone on the 'right' balances out to upsetting no one. Therefore, only extremely committed zealots will be upset by my comments." This is the "social math" that does not work. > Sorry if I tipped a sacred cow. I thought this was hacker news not reddit. I could direct the same comment at you. Making comments like this is meant to put me on the defensive. You're claiming that I'm acting like an "irrational Redditor" rather than a "intelligent HN reader." Ending all of your comments with the equivalent of, "I'm just saying the truth that no one wants to hear" gives you more in common with Trump that you may like to admit.

caoilte 11y ago

Not much of an effort apparently.