3 ms·
Snarky reply replaced: I'm sincerely curious if that's really all you're taking away from my comment, including the explicit disclaimer. My advice was to pay cl
by thringsaround 10y ago
Snarky reply replaced: I'm sincerely curious if that's really all you're taking away from my comment, including the explicit disclaimer. My advice was to pay closer attention to the material, not to ignore it, so I'm perplexed as to how you managed to get the complete opposite message.
This seems exceptionally straightforward to me, so I'll make it as un-political as I can: There are lifetimes of new content available for your consumption every single day.
Maybe it's not all worthwhile. Maybe not 1% of it is. It doesn't matter-- you'll never get to see an infinitesimal fraction of it, even just the good, true, accurate stuff.
So how do you decide what to pay attention to with your mortal lifespan? Just as a first pass, I like to use filters like "is this notably excellent" or "does this make me want to throw up at all, even just a little".
Then if it's not excellent, or if the speaker doesn't agree with my politics, or especially both, I don't feel any remorse whatsoever about skipping it.
This isn't about shutting myself off. I think it's very important to expose myself to perspectives that differ from my own, to broaden my own frame of reference. I also think that feces play a critically important role in my metabolism, but that doesn't mean I'm excited to open a box of donuts and discover a frosted turd.
And I'll accept exactly 0 concern trolling around my publicly saying, just, hey... look in the box.
If it's a turd in there, you don't still have to eat it.
- jshevek 10y ago> if that's really all you're taking away I'm not commenting on everything, just the things I think are the most important. I can't read your mind, but in your own words you "encourage folks not to watch that video at least without..." Just my impression, but it appears to me that you aren't even trying to contribute to the actual topics of discussion in any meaningful way.
- thringsaround 10y ago> but in your own words you "encourage folks not to watch that video at least without..." Trying really hard not to get back on snark here, but... did you literally just stop reading there? Just finish my sentence: I "encourage folks not to watch that video, at least without [...] making an informed decision." So, do you think folks shouldn't make an informed decision, or do you think my decision is wrong? Just my impression, but it appears that you might be arguing one as a proxy for another.
- kd0amg 10y agoSo... watch several of his other videos and then decide whether to watch this one? And that's to save time spent on consuming non-worthwhile content? You could stand to be a lot more specific about what your beef is with this youtuber and how that links back to the arguments given in this video.
- thringsaround 10y agoNo. Just go to the channel, read the titles of some of the other videos, and then either walk away, or not, for your own reasons, or not. Or don't, if that really seems so hard. Again, weirded out that this is such a burdensome ask for some of you. Like, I'm not even talking about my politics, just pointing out that my politics exist.
- kd0amg 10y agoYou're also refusing to explain what they are or why they're relevant to this video.
- thringsaround 10y agoSo? I'm not asking anyone to adopt my politics. Don't you want everyone to form their own opinion, without my bias?
- kd0amg 10y agoThat's exactly what they would have done before you decided to poison the well.
- thringsaround 10y ago:D So y'all are doubling down on the idea that simply suggesting folks look at the context of the content they consume is some toxic bias? If I'd suggested actually reading some content, what would that be, the Jedi Mind Trick? See, this is why I'm not particularly worried about my politics. Even without expressing a viewpoint, your argument is utterly self-immolating.