4 ms·

I'm confused what you are arguing. What specific claim did you dispute (as I recall none), and what do you believe I conceded? In that thread I concluded you h

I'm confused what you are arguing. What specific claim did you dispute (as I recall none), and what do you believe I conceded? In that thread I concluded you had no substantive disagreement and were merely looking for excuses to call me racist. (Why you enjoy that so much I don't know, but I don't mind so enjoy.) As far as the argument I make here, what do you believe this refutes?

dang 10y ago
> In that thread I concluded you had no substantive disagreement and were merely looking for excuses to call me racist. (Why you enjoy that so much I don't know, but I don't mind so enjoy.) I haven't read all of your and tptacek's recent exchanges, but in the ones I have, he has been meticulously respectful to a fault, so this seems like an unfortunate lapse. Since I know you care about the principle of charity, I'm sure you won't mind my asking you not to do this again.
solutionyogi 10y ago
I would agree with Dang here. I am a big fan of you and Thomas. And I love reading your discussions on a topic and have read most of them. I tend to agree with your arguments more but I must say that Thomas is very respectful while disagreeing and I haven't seen him call you a racist. Feel free to link to his comment where he does and I will stand corrected.
- yummyfajitas 10y ago
  Here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13184555 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13184555 Context here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13173952 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13173952 The remainder of the thread had no substantive disagreement, just questioning my motives for discussing a factual claim.
  - tptacek 10y ago
    For the argument you're trying to make, this is such a weird cite. The thing I was "wrong" about was that you weren't a white supremacist, and my wrongness was due to the immediately preceding comment in which you stated directly that white supremacists were "mostly factually correct". I still don't believe you. You're right: the comment you cited was a moment of incivility (specifically: I was sarcastically dismissing you). I don't believe that you think white supremacists are mostly factually correct. I think you get a rise out of zapping this particular raw nerve, and feel like you're so gifted at rationalizing message board comments that nobody will pin you down on that.
    - yummyfajitas 10y ago
      The parent asked whether you really did call me a racist, I provided a case where you did (and you just agreed that you called me a white supremacist). That's all. I don't mind the attack, I just wish it were easier to tell when you were interested in intellectual discussion. Intellectual disagreement is fun, but threads like the one I linked to feel like getting rickrolled. Less fun.
      - deleted 10y ago
        [deleted]

dang 10y ago

> In that thread I concluded you had no substantive disagreement and were merely looking for excuses to call me racist. (Why you enjoy that so much I don't know, but I don't mind so enjoy.) I haven't read all of your and tptacek's recent exchanges, but in the ones I have, he has been meticulously respectful to a fault, so this seems like an unfortunate lapse. Since I know you care about the principle of charity, I'm sure you won't mind my asking you not to do this again.

solutionyogi 10y ago

I would agree with Dang here. I am a big fan of you and Thomas. And I love reading your discussions on a topic and have read most of them. I tend to agree with your arguments more but I must say that Thomas is very respectful while disagreeing and I haven't seen him call you a racist. Feel free to link to his comment where he does and I will stand corrected.

yummyfajitas 10y ago
Here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13184555 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13184555 Context here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13173952 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13173952 The remainder of the thread had no substantive disagreement, just questioning my motives for discussing a factual claim.
- tptacek 10y ago
  For the argument you're trying to make, this is such a weird cite. The thing I was "wrong" about was that you weren't a white supremacist, and my wrongness was due to the immediately preceding comment in which you stated directly that white supremacists were "mostly factually correct". I still don't believe you. You're right: the comment you cited was a moment of incivility (specifically: I was sarcastically dismissing you). I don't believe that you think white supremacists are mostly factually correct. I think you get a rise out of zapping this particular raw nerve, and feel like you're so gifted at rationalizing message board comments that nobody will pin you down on that.
  - yummyfajitas 10y ago
    The parent asked whether you really did call me a racist, I provided a case where you did (and you just agreed that you called me a white supremacist). That's all. I don't mind the attack, I just wish it were easier to tell when you were interested in intellectual discussion. Intellectual disagreement is fun, but threads like the one I linked to feel like getting rickrolled. Less fun.
    - deleted 10y ago
      [deleted]