3 ms·

Why is this so important to you that you keep on? I don't care about the "grilling" in any negative sense, I'm just curious where you're driving this. I'm res

Why is this so important to you that you keep on? I don't care about the "grilling" in any negative sense, I'm just curious where you're driving this. I'm responding as a passenger in your mysterious investigation. Given all the many hot-topic major media issues I've listed, which saturate the airwaves, watercooler discussions, and online arguments, how do you dismiss them as just some "big claims" about the current social climate that need further evidence? "Clearly, you see some of these reflected in the Uber situation." Clearly, you're impervious to my stating that specificity to uber is not my point at all. But yeah, I've seen and heard my share of railing on this topic with the usual outrage claims & counter-claims, which isn't just some nebulous "reflection" of the overall "situation" I'm positing, but tired content I've seen. Get to the meat of what you're looking for, already, and stop reiterating non-claims.

tomlock 10y ago
People still believe vitamin C prevents the common cold. > what matters is how informed we are before hopping on the OutrageMobile. So you're saying you don't see outrage reflected in the Uber situation?
- white-flame 10y ago
  "People still believe vitamin C prevents the common cold." Non-sequitur. Please answer my query about your view on the massive global social discussion on outrage being an unfounded claim. "So you're saying you don't see outrage reflected in the Uber situation?" That was a general statement about outrage, as I've said over and over. Also, why did it take you that long to ask that question, if it's what you were trying to pry out from way back when that statement was made? If you'd simply make your partial understanding known, then we'd have a nice human conversation with mutual understanding.
  - tomlock 10y ago
    There's a massive global discussion on how Vitamin C helps prevent/cure the common cold. Appealing to massive global discussion solves nothing. > I'm trying to determine what made you think your view was relevant in this particular situation.
    - white-flame 10y ago
      oh my goodness. Are these links not evident? use term for pejorativeness! -> good term has been corrupted! -> term corruption is inevitable! -> implications when used in this context! -> watch out for fallacies in implications! and from there... you're laser-focused on extracting something. Which step isn't clear? Also, an implication of "your view is irrelevant" is completely antithetical to discussion forums at all (not to mention completely insulting), and yet here you are tons of replies later. At a purely technical level, your view of dissent of the flagged parent might be claimed not relevant, because it didn't agree with whatever they said. "There's a massive global discussion on how Vitamin C helps prevent/cure the common cold. Appealing to massive global discussion solves nothing." It's not in the media, and it's a pretty settled deal with some dissent, similar to flat earth or global warming or whatever. The media discredits or ignores that view of vitamin C. However, vitamin C isn't a social issue. The thrust is if continual presence in the media (where outrage is literally presented as a global discussion of social issues), and to a lesser extent continual presence in non-fringe major site internet discussions, are valid indicators of a major social issue? Also, have you made a somewhat tacit agreement that it is at least globally discussed? That's progress!
      - tomlock 10y ago
        Why are you focusing on global discussion? Perhaps you're trying to move the goalposts? Plenty of things are globally discussed. Bigfoot for example. I'm sorry you feel like I'm "laser-focused on extracting something". I'm just trying to determine your view.
        white-flame 10y ago
        I'm focusing on it as a step in showing it as evidence that outrage is a serious issue for many people and not some lone wolf claim by me. This is something you specifically requested evidence for and this backs the claim, which you've essentially agreed to now, and seem to be trying to find a backpedal approach. "I'm sorry you feel like I'm "laser-focused on extracting something". I'm just trying to determine your view." I don't believe you. In order to provide evidence that this is truly your purpose, explain what precondition makes you pore into my view in particular and not others. Also, explain the deficiencies in my many presentations and explanations to allow me to help you determine it. Plus, you're completely ignoring my requests to determine your view, so your persistence comes across as quite hypocritical.

tomlock 10y ago

People still believe vitamin C prevents the common cold. > what matters is how informed we are before hopping on the OutrageMobile. So you're saying you don't see outrage reflected in the Uber situation?

white-flame 10y ago
"People still believe vitamin C prevents the common cold." Non-sequitur. Please answer my query about your view on the massive global social discussion on outrage being an unfounded claim. "So you're saying you don't see outrage reflected in the Uber situation?" That was a general statement about outrage, as I've said over and over. Also, why did it take you that long to ask that question, if it's what you were trying to pry out from way back when that statement was made? If you'd simply make your partial understanding known, then we'd have a nice human conversation with mutual understanding.
- tomlock 10y ago
  There's a massive global discussion on how Vitamin C helps prevent/cure the common cold. Appealing to massive global discussion solves nothing. > I'm trying to determine what made you think your view was relevant in this particular situation.
  - white-flame 10y ago
    oh my goodness. Are these links not evident? use term for pejorativeness! -> good term has been corrupted! -> term corruption is inevitable! -> implications when used in this context! -> watch out for fallacies in implications! and from there... you're laser-focused on extracting something. Which step isn't clear? Also, an implication of "your view is irrelevant" is completely antithetical to discussion forums at all (not to mention completely insulting), and yet here you are tons of replies later. At a purely technical level, your view of dissent of the flagged parent might be claimed not relevant, because it didn't agree with whatever they said. "There's a massive global discussion on how Vitamin C helps prevent/cure the common cold. Appealing to massive global discussion solves nothing." It's not in the media, and it's a pretty settled deal with some dissent, similar to flat earth or global warming or whatever. The media discredits or ignores that view of vitamin C. However, vitamin C isn't a social issue. The thrust is if continual presence in the media (where outrage is literally presented as a global discussion of social issues), and to a lesser extent continual presence in non-fringe major site internet discussions, are valid indicators of a major social issue? Also, have you made a somewhat tacit agreement that it is at least globally discussed? That's progress!
    - tomlock 10y ago
      Why are you focusing on global discussion? Perhaps you're trying to move the goalposts? Plenty of things are globally discussed. Bigfoot for example. I'm sorry you feel like I'm "laser-focused on extracting something". I'm just trying to determine your view.
      - white-flame 10y ago
        I'm focusing on it as a step in showing it as evidence that outrage is a serious issue for many people and not some lone wolf claim by me. This is something you specifically requested evidence for and this backs the claim, which you've essentially agreed to now, and seem to be trying to find a backpedal approach. "I'm sorry you feel like I'm "laser-focused on extracting something". I'm just trying to determine your view." I don't believe you. In order to provide evidence that this is truly your purpose, explain what precondition makes you pore into my view in particular and not others. Also, explain the deficiencies in my many presentations and explanations to allow me to help you determine it. Plus, you're completely ignoring my requests to determine your view, so your persistence comes across as quite hypocritical.