6 ms·

Who knows, the people you disagree with might not actually be zombies. They might have good reasons for thinking the way they do.

by b6 10y ago

deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
monkmartinez 10y ago
There is no room for contrarian thought here! Obviously, everyone is wrong except us! /s
- haimez 10y ago
  Meta
- tremon 10y ago
  A simple variation on "the Others are stupid" is not contrarian at all. It is intellectually lazy and will not improve anything.
aplummer 10y ago
Yea, but also they might actually be zombies, without good reasons for thinking the way they do.
ghostDancer 10y ago
Yes it's god's will and a punishment for gay marriage. /s
- grzm 10y ago
  Not even funny as a joke.
  - ghostDancer 10y ago
    It's the same people that believes in creationism, that their bible is an history book, denies climate change and blames hurricanes and earthquakes on gay marriage and now they have won the elections in USA
    - grzm 10y ago
      I understood the intent and context. It's not civil or constructive and it's needlessly inflammatory.
      - ghostDancer 10y ago
        Those are the reasons why they deny climate change and do not want to do anything
        grzm 10y ago
        If that's your opinion, please express it civilly, or not at all.
        ghostDancer 10y ago
        Please if you can point me the exact place where i'm not being civil or have a i insulted anyone?. Just pointed their beliefs and that's the reason why they look the other way. No opinion about their beliefs or themselves. Or maybe i'm offending your beliefs? Cause really i can't see where i'm not being civil.
        grzm 10y ago
        Yes it's god's will and a punishment for gay marriage. /s Right here. You're using sarcasm, which is a form of ridicule or mockery, and it's dismissive. If you were having a face-to-face conversation with someone who held these beliefs, would you say this in this way? I would hope not, because it would be impolite to do so. Also, how would you express this without being snide or snarky? I tried, but had a hard time coming up with something that was fair. In this thread, that's your first comment, and the first one that alludes to conservative Christian beliefs as a reason people don't act to protect the environment (or something, as the more I try to figure out exactly what you're trying to imply by just that statement in the context of this conversation, the more trouble I have). Let me try, though. Given you've said very little, I'm fully aware I'm making a lot of assumptions which could very well be wrong, so feel free to correct me. That's also part of the point. By saying so little, you're forcing people to make assumptions of what you mean or imply. This is particularly problematic in online discussions on contentious topics where people are less likely to interpret you charitably, sometimes even without intending to. People who deny climate change and don't care about the environment are Christians who interpret the Bible literally and blame hurricanes and earthquakes on gay marriage. Is that a fair rephrasing of what you meant with your first comment? I've taken some of it from what you've said in your subsequent explanations. I'm aiming to be fair and accurate, so if I'm not, please correct me. Generalizing all who deny climate change in this way is unfair and attributes beliefs to them that many (most?) don't have. There are a lot of people who deny climate change for a variety of reasons. There are also a lot of Christians who care deeply about the environment and believe that climate change is something we need to address as stewards of God's creation. There are also Christians who are not opposed to gay marriage, and many more who don't believe hurricanes and earthquakes are caused by it. If you don't mean to make such sweeping generalizations in your first comment (or even your subsequent ones, frankly), you're not being very nuanced in your statements. The percentage of people who hold the beliefs you describe I suspect is a significant minority. If at this point you honestly don't see how your comment isn't civil or constructive (or at the very least is likely to be construed as impolite), I don't think anything more I can say will make a difference (which is on me), and more likely make you think I'm being vindictive or needlessly argumentative (which if I continue the discussion, I would be). Be well.
- sctb 10y ago
  Inciting religious flamewars is absolutely not OK on Hacker News, and neither is going on about it when others users have rightly pointed this out. > Be civil. Don't say things you wouldn't say in a face-to-face conversation. Avoid gratuitous negativity. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
  - ghostDancer 10y ago
    Ok no religious talking . But I'd say that face to face. I don't say things i'd would not dare to say. But i understand, i'll censor all my religion comments from now on. Thanks for the clarification.

Who knows, the people you disagree with might not actually be zombies. They might have good reasons for thinking the way they do.

by b6 10y ago

Who knows, the people you disagree with might not actually be zombies. They might have good reasons for thinking the way they do.

deleted 10y ago

[deleted]

monkmartinez 10y ago

There is no room for contrarian thought here! Obviously, everyone is wrong except us! /s

haimez 10y ago
Meta
tremon 10y ago
A simple variation on "the Others are stupid" is not contrarian at all. It is intellectually lazy and will not improve anything.

aplummer 10y ago

Yea, but also they might actually be zombies, without good reasons for thinking the way they do.

ghostDancer 10y ago

Yes it's god's will and a punishment for gay marriage. /s

grzm 10y ago
Not even funny as a joke.
- ghostDancer 10y ago
  It's the same people that believes in creationism, that their bible is an history book, denies climate change and blames hurricanes and earthquakes on gay marriage and now they have won the elections in USA
  - grzm 10y ago
    I understood the intent and context. It's not civil or constructive and it's needlessly inflammatory.
    - ghostDancer 10y ago
      Those are the reasons why they deny climate change and do not want to do anything
      - grzm 10y ago
        If that's your opinion, please express it civilly, or not at all.
        ghostDancer 10y ago
        Please if you can point me the exact place where i'm not being civil or have a i insulted anyone?. Just pointed their beliefs and that's the reason why they look the other way. No opinion about their beliefs or themselves. Or maybe i'm offending your beliefs? Cause really i can't see where i'm not being civil.
        grzm 10y ago
        Yes it's god's will and a punishment for gay marriage. /s Right here. You're using sarcasm, which is a form of ridicule or mockery, and it's dismissive. If you were having a face-to-face conversation with someone who held these beliefs, would you say this in this way? I would hope not, because it would be impolite to do so. Also, how would you express this without being snide or snarky? I tried, but had a hard time coming up with something that was fair. In this thread, that's your first comment, and the first one that alludes to conservative Christian beliefs as a reason people don't act to protect the environment (or something, as the more I try to figure out exactly what you're trying to imply by just that statement in the context of this conversation, the more trouble I have). Let me try, though. Given you've said very little, I'm fully aware I'm making a lot of assumptions which could very well be wrong, so feel free to correct me. That's also part of the point. By saying so little, you're forcing people to make assumptions of what you mean or imply. This is particularly problematic in online discussions on contentious topics where people are less likely to interpret you charitably, sometimes even without intending to. People who deny climate change and don't care about the environment are Christians who interpret the Bible literally and blame hurricanes and earthquakes on gay marriage. Is that a fair rephrasing of what you meant with your first comment? I've taken some of it from what you've said in your subsequent explanations. I'm aiming to be fair and accurate, so if I'm not, please correct me. Generalizing all who deny climate change in this way is unfair and attributes beliefs to them that many (most?) don't have. There are a lot of people who deny climate change for a variety of reasons. There are also a lot of Christians who care deeply about the environment and believe that climate change is something we need to address as stewards of God's creation. There are also Christians who are not opposed to gay marriage, and many more who don't believe hurricanes and earthquakes are caused by it. If you don't mean to make such sweeping generalizations in your first comment (or even your subsequent ones, frankly), you're not being very nuanced in your statements. The percentage of people who hold the beliefs you describe I suspect is a significant minority. If at this point you honestly don't see how your comment isn't civil or constructive (or at the very least is likely to be construed as impolite), I don't think anything more I can say will make a difference (which is on me), and more likely make you think I'm being vindictive or needlessly argumentative (which if I continue the discussion, I would be). Be well.
sctb 10y ago
Inciting religious flamewars is absolutely not OK on Hacker News, and neither is going on about it when others users have rightly pointed this out. > Be civil. Don't say things you wouldn't say in a face-to-face conversation. Avoid gratuitous negativity. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- ghostDancer 10y ago
  Ok no religious talking . But I'd say that face to face. I don't say things i'd would not dare to say. But i understand, i'll censor all my religion comments from now on. Thanks for the clarification.