5 ms·

Let's Occams Razor this: Which is more likely? - Applebaum is an abuser, as widely reported by multiple independent witnesses - Various three-letter-agencies

by s_kilk 10y ago

Let's Occams Razor this: Which is more likely? - Applebaum is an abuser, as widely reported by multiple independent witnesses - Various three-letter-agencies are orchestrating a conspiracy to defame him

mtgx 10y ago
> Applebaum is an abuser, as widely reported by multiple independent witnesses And who are those witnesses? "Anonymous" witnesses don't count. If Appelbaum has done harm to you, whether you're a woman or man, come out and say it. You can't just say "we heard from anonymous sources that Obama raped someone" and expect to be taken seriously. Also, you could use your logic to say: "Who is right here? Thousands of government employees who say they haven't broken the law and haven't done mass surveillance, or this just one high-school dropout guy who fled to Russia?" (obviously talking about Snowden here). I don't know if that's how Occam's Razor is supposed to work, but if that's how it works, then it's clearly a pretty flawed theory, that at best can be used as a "guideline" not as as hard rule.
- daxorid 10y ago
  The implication of the pro-conspiracy crowd is that Andrea, Meredith, and Nick are all working for the Feds. Is this really the conclusion you're expecting us to reach?
- Kristine1975 10y ago
  >I don't know if that's how Occam's Razor is supposed to work, but if that's how it works, then it's clearly a pretty flawed theory, that at best can be used as a "guideline" not as as hard rule. That's all Occam's Razor is, really: A rule of thumb to help decide where to look next.
comboy 10y ago
It could be a bit of both.
agd 10y ago
You're attacking a strawman here. I (as stated in my post) don't know whether he is an abuser or not. I was only commenting on how I don't think the orchestrated campaign mentioned is helpful to anyone (including the alleged victims). I also didn't say that three letter agencies are orchestrating anything. I raised the possibility that outside actors might try and exacerbate the situation (on both sides). This is not tin-foil thinking but very possible given the existence of Snowden documents describing these kinds of tactics.[1] [1] https://theintercept.com/2014/02/24/jtrig-manipulation/ https://theintercept.com/2014/02/24/jtrig-manipulation/
- Bartweiss 10y ago
  It's good to remember that the best places to stir up trouble are the ones where real trouble already exists. Anyone from strongly-invested bad actors to random trolls have an opportunity to create conflict here, totally aside from the status of the core claims.
PavlovsCat 10y ago
One thing is plainly evident however, with a probability of 1: what you're proposing is a false dichotomy.
- s_kilk 10y ago
  I'll accept it's possible the claims are (mostly) real, but with other 'interested parties' jumping on to stir up shit. As you said, a false dichotomy.

by s_kilk 10y ago

mtgx 10y ago

> Applebaum is an abuser, as widely reported by multiple independent witnesses And who are those witnesses? "Anonymous" witnesses don't count. If Appelbaum has done harm to you, whether you're a woman or man, come out and say it. You can't just say "we heard from anonymous sources that Obama raped someone" and expect to be taken seriously. Also, you could use your logic to say: "Who is right here? Thousands of government employees who say they haven't broken the law and haven't done mass surveillance, or this just one high-school dropout guy who fled to Russia?" (obviously talking about Snowden here). I don't know if that's how Occam's Razor is supposed to work, but if that's how it works, then it's clearly a pretty flawed theory, that at best can be used as a "guideline" not as as hard rule.

daxorid 10y ago
The implication of the pro-conspiracy crowd is that Andrea, Meredith, and Nick are all working for the Feds. Is this really the conclusion you're expecting us to reach?
Kristine1975 10y ago
>I don't know if that's how Occam's Razor is supposed to work, but if that's how it works, then it's clearly a pretty flawed theory, that at best can be used as a "guideline" not as as hard rule. That's all Occam's Razor is, really: A rule of thumb to help decide where to look next.

comboy 10y ago

It could be a bit of both.

agd 10y ago

You're attacking a strawman here. I (as stated in my post) don't know whether he is an abuser or not. I was only commenting on how I don't think the orchestrated campaign mentioned is helpful to anyone (including the alleged victims). I also didn't say that three letter agencies are orchestrating anything. I raised the possibility that outside actors might try and exacerbate the situation (on both sides). This is not tin-foil thinking but very possible given the existence of Snowden documents describing these kinds of tactics.[1] [1] https://theintercept.com/2014/02/24/jtrig-manipulation/ https://theintercept.com/2014/02/24/jtrig-manipulation/

Bartweiss 10y ago
It's good to remember that the best places to stir up trouble are the ones where real trouble already exists. Anyone from strongly-invested bad actors to random trolls have an opportunity to create conflict here, totally aside from the status of the core claims.

PavlovsCat 10y ago

One thing is plainly evident however, with a probability of 1: what you're proposing is a false dichotomy.

s_kilk 10y ago
I'll accept it's possible the claims are (mostly) real, but with other 'interested parties' jumping on to stir up shit. As you said, a false dichotomy.