3 ms·

Actually it's 3 examples, which I think is enough to show a bias towards one of two sides (c'mon, nobody chooses one side out of two 3 times in a row accidental

by _yosefk 11y ago

Actually it's 3 examples, which I think is enough to show a bias towards one of two sides (c'mon, nobody chooses one side out of two 3 times in a row accidentally, and if he chose a side with equal probability for each example - yeah right - the result we got is a 1 in 8 event, so not a great support for that hypothesis), and as to "familiar to his target audience" - again, come on, his target audience will be familiar with their fellow extremists' arguments just as much as it will be familiar with the other side's extremists. As to what I think of my comment - I think it shouldn't be removed by a forum moderator, nor should your (IMO tremendously biased) comment be removed by a moderator, and neither comment constitutes "trolling" or "comment thread poison." A moderator removing either and doing similar things consistently is creating a forum I would not like to participate in either as a reader or a commenter.

tinco 11y ago
> Actually it's 3 examples, which I think is enough to show a bias towards one of two sides (c'mon, nobody chooses one side out of two 3 times in a row accidentally, and if he chose a side with equal probability for each example - yeah right - the result we got is a 1 in 8 event, so not a great support for that hypothesis), That is a straw man argument, as you can see nowhere I claim that he chose his examples randomly. Quite the opposite as you quote directly, I think he chose his example to speak to his target audience. > again, come on, his target audience will be familiar with their fellow extremists' arguments just as much as it will be familiar with the other side's extremists. Perhaps, but this is a writing style issue. Anyway sure, it's a valid point you could ask of the writer to always perfectly balance his examples between minority and majority viewpoints of his readership. I don't think the "come on" is warranted though, do you really feel it's that obvious that the author should consider this instead of considering for example the sting the nice black/white examples that he uses give? As to what you think of your comment, I didn't ask what you thought about your comment. I asked whether you realized your argument was exaggerated. I didn't downvote your reply nor do I think a moderator should remove it. I was just curious as to why you would be artificially polarizing this discussion.
- _yosefk 11y ago
  If you seriously believe this moderator was biased in his examples because that's his "writing style" but that he wasn't equally biased in his moderation, fine (I'd bet money on you being wrong if I could.) And I don't think I was artificially polarizing this discussion, I think you were, which is exactly the kind of disagreement illustrating the need for moderate moderators who wouldn't delete either comment, which was my only point all along (and apparently we're mostly agreeing there.)

by _yosefk 11y ago

tinco 11y ago

> Actually it's 3 examples, which I think is enough to show a bias towards one of two sides (c'mon, nobody chooses one side out of two 3 times in a row accidentally, and if he chose a side with equal probability for each example - yeah right - the result we got is a 1 in 8 event, so not a great support for that hypothesis), That is a straw man argument, as you can see nowhere I claim that he chose his examples randomly. Quite the opposite as you quote directly, I think he chose his example to speak to his target audience. > again, come on, his target audience will be familiar with their fellow extremists' arguments just as much as it will be familiar with the other side's extremists. Perhaps, but this is a writing style issue. Anyway sure, it's a valid point you could ask of the writer to always perfectly balance his examples between minority and majority viewpoints of his readership. I don't think the "come on" is warranted though, do you really feel it's that obvious that the author should consider this instead of considering for example the sting the nice black/white examples that he uses give? As to what you think of your comment, I didn't ask what you thought about your comment. I asked whether you realized your argument was exaggerated. I didn't downvote your reply nor do I think a moderator should remove it. I was just curious as to why you would be artificially polarizing this discussion.

_yosefk 11y ago
If you seriously believe this moderator was biased in his examples because that's his "writing style" but that he wasn't equally biased in his moderation, fine (I'd bet money on you being wrong if I could.) And I don't think I was artificially polarizing this discussion, I think you were, which is exactly the kind of disagreement illustrating the need for moderate moderators who wouldn't delete either comment, which was my only point all along (and apparently we're mostly agreeing there.)