4 ms·

Honest question; did you look at the commentary there? I was very curious, and am about as far as you can get from any sort of Trump supporter. Some of the qu

Honest question; did you look at the commentary there? I was very curious, and am about as far as you can get from any sort of Trump supporter. Some of the quotes had some meat to them and deserved more investigation, some were clearly inconspicuous things taken heavily out of context. Now, if you were to tear apart the suggestion that there is not more to offer there than is discussed in OP, that'd be very fair, but that doesn't seem to be your response. (which reads more knee jerk). Shutting down opposition as "cess pool of X" is what lead us to a situation wherein the opposition is pushed so far underground that we're surprised when it gains traction. I'm actually kinda bothered by this whole thread; since in the interim of my writing this post, the original was flagged to removal. For posterity, it featured a link to r/the donald/ discussing some other contents of the podesta emails. I thought it was valuable if for no other reason than to understand how that element of that group presents ideas and is looking at this scenario. Frankly, I find the response I've seen here (insult, remove, shut down) as being just as frightening as some of the stuff I'd read there. I encourage everyone to go on "cesspools of the opposition" and learn about them; this doesn't mean you have to agree, like, or even feel positively about what you read; I simply and truly see no other path to any sort of coming together or understanding without openness and questioning.

praneshp 10y ago
I look at that subredddit once in a week or so, and I agree with the other persons' opinion. Some of the quotes might have meat in them, but you should have the patience to wade through a bunch of (((, MAGA, Cuck, and other Trump slogans.
atomi 10y ago
It's a matter of credibility. /r/the_donald exists solely to attack Hillary and spin Donald's scandals. Without moderation this thread would devolve into baseless accusations and personal attacks, which have nothing to do with the posted topic.
- existencebox 10y ago
  I guess the problem I pose, however, is that a number of IRL trump supporters I've spoken to actually think of it as a legitimate source of some sort of thought. This makes it a very dangerous line to walk to moderate out inclusion of thoughts that _are in fact influencing people_ and thus as opposition _we should really be aware of_ (the overarching questions of "who draws that line"/what is acceptable at any given point in time/exposure to distasteful ideals/slippery slope towards echo chambers). I see why the people who would argue not even alluding to the firsthand datasource would take that stance, but I would hope that a combination of critical thinking and community-guided discourse would allow exposure to distasteful ideas without having them "leak" or be shut down entirely. Simply, flagging to deletion sits way too hard on one side of that continuum for my tastes. I would hope HN could remove the personal attacks and accusations but while still allowing for an informed discussion on the root cause and dogma; what surprised me in this chain was that the non-flagged top level response to OP was more of what you say in terms of personal attacks/accusations than the OP was, which is what motivated me to speak up.
joshontheweb 10y ago
I didn't click on this specific link but I have frequented this sub out of curiosity. As others have mentioned, there are decent comments from some but it is too painful for me to wade through the rest. It really isn't a great place to converse about the subject because there is really only one acceptable view point. This is all a bit of a generalization but sums up my experience there. While it is hard to completely eliminate bias in any forum/publication, the_donald doesn't even attempt to try. That is ok. It is their safe place to talk about their God King. It just isn't very valuable to those looking for good information.
joshontheweb 10y ago
As I commented elsewhere /r/wikileaks is the best place I've found to get less biased info on the leaks.

praneshp 10y ago

I look at that subredddit once in a week or so, and I agree with the other persons' opinion. Some of the quotes might have meat in them, but you should have the patience to wade through a bunch of (((, MAGA, Cuck, and other Trump slogans.

atomi 10y ago

It's a matter of credibility. /r/the_donald exists solely to attack Hillary and spin Donald's scandals. Without moderation this thread would devolve into baseless accusations and personal attacks, which have nothing to do with the posted topic.

existencebox 10y ago
I guess the problem I pose, however, is that a number of IRL trump supporters I've spoken to actually think of it as a legitimate source of some sort of thought. This makes it a very dangerous line to walk to moderate out inclusion of thoughts that _are in fact influencing people_ and thus as opposition _we should really be aware of_ (the overarching questions of "who draws that line"/what is acceptable at any given point in time/exposure to distasteful ideals/slippery slope towards echo chambers). I see why the people who would argue not even alluding to the firsthand datasource would take that stance, but I would hope that a combination of critical thinking and community-guided discourse would allow exposure to distasteful ideas without having them "leak" or be shut down entirely. Simply, flagging to deletion sits way too hard on one side of that continuum for my tastes. I would hope HN could remove the personal attacks and accusations but while still allowing for an informed discussion on the root cause and dogma; what surprised me in this chain was that the non-flagged top level response to OP was more of what you say in terms of personal attacks/accusations than the OP was, which is what motivated me to speak up.

joshontheweb 10y ago

I didn't click on this specific link but I have frequented this sub out of curiosity. As others have mentioned, there are decent comments from some but it is too painful for me to wade through the rest. It really isn't a great place to converse about the subject because there is really only one acceptable view point. This is all a bit of a generalization but sums up my experience there. While it is hard to completely eliminate bias in any forum/publication, the_donald doesn't even attempt to try. That is ok. It is their safe place to talk about their God King. It just isn't very valuable to those looking for good information.

joshontheweb 10y ago

As I commented elsewhere /r/wikileaks is the best place I've found to get less biased info on the leaks.