12 ms·

You're using "socially accepted condition" as evidence for their being an outrage problem in society. Now you're claiming I am applying this to definitions. Y

• white-flame 10y ago
  First off, I'll continue arguing as much as what I understand you're trying to get at, but you're still not presenting anything, so you'll likely get nothing meaningful to your hidden investigation. If you want the most relevant answers from me, reveal your motive. I'm happy to talk as candidly as possible, and it strongly works against the conversation that you don't. "You're using "socially accepted condition" as evidence for their being an outrage problem in society." Let's step back. I said something to the effect that a lot of people are discussing the problems of outrage. The fact that media discusses the problems of outrage is a pretty objective evidence that "a lot of people are discussing the problems of outrage". It doesn't matter how you or I perceive the gravitas of that discussion, just the fact that the discussion is there is shown. Why are you so wound up and defensive about the posited notion of outrage being viewed as problematic by the general public? What are you trying to defend against? It's not a left/right issue. From brexit to the DNC corruption charges, it spreads across all walks.
  • tomlock 10y ago
    Why are you so invested in the notion of outrage being a real social issue? What are you trying to attack? Where have you seen it in relation to this thread, where you bought the issue up?
    • white-flame 10y ago
      I'm asking the question here, so answer for once. I made a simple statement and example using outrage, directly related to the labeling. I have no investment or bone to pick in shoving it down anybody's throat, and I'll even freely for the sake of argument consider it my own personal anecdotal observation if your insistence of its reach is so important to you. Yet you're down my throat trying to get me to say something expounding on it, which you're not revealing (which is starting to look quite childish, I might add). Now, answer why this is such a hot topic for you. You're the motive force in perpetuating it, by constantly demanding explanations of me for literally hours on end, and accepting no answer no matter how much I try to offer you what you seek, and attempt to meet your hidden predicates. That's simply not productive, and certainly not conducive to you getting the answer you want, until you start revealing more.
      • tomlock 10y ago
        Like I said before, no evidence you've provided for your broad claims about society has been convincing. You made the claim, I asked about it. You've continued to be invested in the idea for some reason. > (yes, I'm enjoying the pedantry of all of this. Hopefully you are, too. :-) )
        • white-flame 10y ago
          Yes, that's my reason. Exploration of pedantry, curiosity, entertainment, and digging into important topics. You, however, have revealed no explanation for your continued involvement and insistence on trying to extract something from me. Each of my reasons are significantly waning without your engagement in discourse, so you do have limited opportunity to complete your quest.
          • tomlock 10y ago
            > Like I said before, no evidence you've provided for your broad claims about society has been convincing.
            • white-flame 10y ago
              Then why do you keep asking for evidence? I threw out a perspective, with sensible (to me) backing social arguments (given that it's a social topic in nature), now rehashed in many different ways. Do you carry on in multi-hour interrogations with every single poster on hacker news that you have some unspoken disagreement with? What is different about this content that warrants this behavior from you? Surely you don't want all this seemingly very purposeful investment of your time just going to waste without resolution.
              • tomlock 10y ago
                Goodnight :)
                • 10y ago