4 ms·

[removed]

by sillysaurus3 9y ago

[removed]

ghrifter 9y ago
what the fuck are you on about? wrong thread?
- sillysaurus3 9y ago
  Actually, I'm trying to have a nuanced conversation on a sensitive topic with an open mind. I get the feeling this is one of the things that no one wants to discuss, or at least it's a bad idea to try to discuss it. Note how violent and immediate the reaction was, right when I tried to point to a segment of people who are the most likely to be in the target segment of the original article. I don't feel like martyring myself, so I won't push it further. But suffice to say, it does not seem like we as a society are ready to have hard conversations about why people turn to drugs.
  - daxorid 9y ago
    When the status gap is large enough, high status people don't see low status people as human. Very few people on HN will care about incels killing themselves. Suicide hotlines and rehab clinics are for their status peers fallen on hard times, not the filthy incel underclass who dare act above their station.
    - gooseus 9y ago
      I invite you to post the best example of this incel subculture. These are the guys who were elevating Elliot Roger (UCSB killer) to hero status, no?
      - sillysaurus3 9y ago
        The subthread wasn't about that, though. It was about the fact that they might turn to drugs because their group is now banned. That's a weak hypothesis not supported by evidence, so it was stupid to bring it up. But given their situation, it didn't seem too far from the truth.
        gooseus 9y ago
        Ah yeah, I wasn't really responding to your whole thing... Honestly I wish you hadn't removed your post cause now there isn't any context for understanding all these replies. I'm curious about how close your hypothesis is to mine: I think the fact that young, white men are finding "solace" in opiods, neo-nazi and other fringe groups (including incels) may share a root cause in being brought up with unrealistic expectations of the world (sense of entitlement) and feelings of failure/disappointment with their current position in a post-recession reality. I also have no evidence, just an intuition born of reading various things and seeing some people close to me grow up and end up in rehab... no one close to me has died, thankfully. Anyways, the same intuition leads me to believe you probably made your comment in good faith and if that's true, I hope this community response doesn't discourage you from speaking your mind in the future. Unpopular speech made in good faith is far better than popular speech in bad faith.
        fe2ijwe99 9y ago
        You might be better off going outside, and advocating for better mental health services instead of trying to create a strawman about how shutting web forums kills people. Anyone that gets on drugs b/c their forum is shutoff/blocked has deeper addiction problems. And sitting on Reddit all day being angry isn't helping. It's just avoiding the underlying problem.
  - spaceseaman 9y ago
    Just to be clear for those coming to this after the fact: the reaction was not violent and immediate. Your comment was not nuanced. And it was very much not sensitive. You attempted to claim that such overdoses are in part due to Reddit (and society in general) ostracizing neo-nazis and members of hateful groups. Not only is this just wrong, it implies that many affected by the crisis are members of such groups, which they are not (as someone who has a family member addicted to opioids I'm very annoyed by your comparison). You just wanted to talk about your Neo-Nazi subreddits getting taken away and people called you out on it. Frankly, a Neo-nazi should be an outcast. A racist, sexist, etc should be excluded. And if they don't like that, then they should stop being a Nazi before turning to drugs.
    - sillysaurus3 9y ago
      I claimed no such thing. My point was solely "A certain subreddit got banned. Those people seem to have very few options, and maybe they were using it as a support group. They might turn to drugs now." The reaction violent and immediate: within 5 minutes of posting the comment, you're now trying to imply some very strange things about me. You're even going so far as to "clarify" things for readers by posting something I did not say. I'd like to end this conversation, because HN is optimized for good conversation and this isn't heading anywhere productive. Agreed? I have a family member affected by a similar crisis, though thankfully not quite as intense. I'm sorry that the comparison annoyed you, but I was just searching for answers.
      - Frondo 9y ago
        That is not a violent reaction. "We need to kick you out of the country" is a violent reaction. "What are you talking about this is dumb" is not a violent reaction. You shared your ideas, they obviously weren't taken as good ideas by the group here, and people told you so. No one called for violence against you, no one called you names (as far as I can tell), just no one agreed with you, and maybe a liiiiittle discourteously. That's not violence, that's discussion.
        sillysaurus3 9y ago
  - jameskegel 9y ago
    Why did you delete your comment? I'm compelled to hold you in a negative light just based on principle that you don't stand behind your own words.
    - sillysaurus3 9y ago
      It may be worth examining that tendency. I elected to take the Kolmogorov option: https://www.scottaaronson.com/blog/?p=3376 https://www.scottaaronson.com/blog/?p=3376 The question of whether or not your arguments have merit won’t even get entered upon, nor will the authority ever be able to repeat back your arguments in a form you’d recognize—for even repeating the arguments correctly could invite accusations of secretly agreeing with them. Instead, the sole subject of interest will be you: who you think you are, what your motivations were to utter something so divisive and hateful. Suffice to say, it wasn't too smart to even broach the topic. It derailed the conversation, for one. For two, it didn't lead anywhere productive.
      - nkurz 9y ago
        Personally, I appreciate your efforts at discussing sensitive topics. I encourage you to keep doing so, as honestly but sensitively as you can. While the "Kolmogorov option" might maximize your personal outcome, this doesn't mean it's best for the group to encourage you to take it. You probably already read the recent discussion by another Scott A? https://slatestarcodex.com/2017/10/23/kolmogorov-complicity-and-the-parable-of-lightning https://slatestarcodex.com/2017/10/23/kolmogorov-complicity-...
andrestan 9y ago
Probably the wrong thread :)
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
spaceseaman 9y ago
You're implying the opioid epidemic is in part due to Reddit banning subreddits filled with hateful speech?* Or what? You're also making some odd as hell "both sides"-ish argument somewhere in there that I can't even parse. I'm sorry, but we don't have to give spaces for people to be hateful - Reddit banning those assholes was the highlight of my week. I'm not trying to claim that these people should just be ignored, but you're conflating very separate problems. More importantly, the people being affected by the opioid crisis are predominantly not members of these hateful groups, and I'm pretty frustrated you would conflate them in such a way just so you can have an excuse to talk about the loss of a safe space for hateful rhetoric. *EDIT: After rereading what the poster wrote a few times, I believe they were attempting to claim that the subreddit bans would encourage more people to head to drug use, rather than vice-versa as I originally interpreted it - it's still pretty off-topic though, and again I'm not very sympathetic to people being sad they no longer have a place to be hateful.
- sillysaurus3 9y ago
  I'd appreciate it if you'd remove your comment since I tried to back out immediately from that line of conversation. Would you mind agreeing? If so, edit your comment to [removed] and I'll delete this one. Otherwise, I can try to explain my original motives, and what I observed. But it's a tricky conversation to have, and there's a high chance people's tendency to instantly turn to hatred will focus on me. I'd rather pass.
  - Frondo 9y ago
    Calling people out on nonsense isn't hatred. "Black people are stupid, we need a white ethno-state" is hatred. "You're wrong and your ideas are wrong" isn't hatred. Calling people out on bad ideas is a necessary part of the discussion, to weed out bad ideas.
  - alsetmusic 9y ago
    > I'd appreciate it if you'd remove your comment since I tried to back out immediately from that line of conversation. Would you mind agreeing? Two days ago, I saw you post something asinine and I tried to respond. You deleted your comment before I could hit the reply button, and I lost the opportunity to quote and refute you. If this is a recurring problem (that you change your mind about statements on a public forum), think a bit more before posting.

[removed]

ghrifter 9y ago

what the fuck are you on about? wrong thread?

sillysaurus3 9y ago
Actually, I'm trying to have a nuanced conversation on a sensitive topic with an open mind. I get the feeling this is one of the things that no one wants to discuss, or at least it's a bad idea to try to discuss it. Note how violent and immediate the reaction was, right when I tried to point to a segment of people who are the most likely to be in the target segment of the original article. I don't feel like martyring myself, so I won't push it further. But suffice to say, it does not seem like we as a society are ready to have hard conversations about why people turn to drugs.
- daxorid 9y ago
  When the status gap is large enough, high status people don't see low status people as human. Very few people on HN will care about incels killing themselves. Suicide hotlines and rehab clinics are for their status peers fallen on hard times, not the filthy incel underclass who dare act above their station.
  - gooseus 9y ago
    I invite you to post the best example of this incel subculture. These are the guys who were elevating Elliot Roger (UCSB killer) to hero status, no?
    - sillysaurus3 9y ago
      The subthread wasn't about that, though. It was about the fact that they might turn to drugs because their group is now banned. That's a weak hypothesis not supported by evidence, so it was stupid to bring it up. But given their situation, it didn't seem too far from the truth.
      - gooseus 9y ago
        Ah yeah, I wasn't really responding to your whole thing... Honestly I wish you hadn't removed your post cause now there isn't any context for understanding all these replies. I'm curious about how close your hypothesis is to mine: I think the fact that young, white men are finding "solace" in opiods, neo-nazi and other fringe groups (including incels) may share a root cause in being brought up with unrealistic expectations of the world (sense of entitlement) and feelings of failure/disappointment with their current position in a post-recession reality. I also have no evidence, just an intuition born of reading various things and seeing some people close to me grow up and end up in rehab... no one close to me has died, thankfully. Anyways, the same intuition leads me to believe you probably made your comment in good faith and if that's true, I hope this community response doesn't discourage you from speaking your mind in the future. Unpopular speech made in good faith is far better than popular speech in bad faith.
      - fe2ijwe99 9y ago
        You might be better off going outside, and advocating for better mental health services instead of trying to create a strawman about how shutting web forums kills people. Anyone that gets on drugs b/c their forum is shutoff/blocked has deeper addiction problems. And sitting on Reddit all day being angry isn't helping. It's just avoiding the underlying problem.
- spaceseaman 9y ago
  Just to be clear for those coming to this after the fact: the reaction was not violent and immediate. Your comment was not nuanced. And it was very much not sensitive. You attempted to claim that such overdoses are in part due to Reddit (and society in general) ostracizing neo-nazis and members of hateful groups. Not only is this just wrong, it implies that many affected by the crisis are members of such groups, which they are not (as someone who has a family member addicted to opioids I'm very annoyed by your comparison). You just wanted to talk about your Neo-Nazi subreddits getting taken away and people called you out on it. Frankly, a Neo-nazi should be an outcast. A racist, sexist, etc should be excluded. And if they don't like that, then they should stop being a Nazi before turning to drugs.
  - sillysaurus3 9y ago
    I claimed no such thing. My point was solely "A certain subreddit got banned. Those people seem to have very few options, and maybe they were using it as a support group. They might turn to drugs now." The reaction violent and immediate: within 5 minutes of posting the comment, you're now trying to imply some very strange things about me. You're even going so far as to "clarify" things for readers by posting something I did not say. I'd like to end this conversation, because HN is optimized for good conversation and this isn't heading anywhere productive. Agreed? I have a family member affected by a similar crisis, though thankfully not quite as intense. I'm sorry that the comparison annoyed you, but I was just searching for answers.
    - Frondo 9y ago
      That is not a violent reaction. "We need to kick you out of the country" is a violent reaction. "What are you talking about this is dumb" is not a violent reaction. You shared your ideas, they obviously weren't taken as good ideas by the group here, and people told you so. No one called for violence against you, no one called you names (as far as I can tell), just no one agreed with you, and maybe a liiiiittle discourteously. That's not violence, that's discussion.
      - sillysaurus3 9y ago
- jameskegel 9y ago
  Why did you delete your comment? I'm compelled to hold you in a negative light just based on principle that you don't stand behind your own words.
  - sillysaurus3 9y ago
    It may be worth examining that tendency. I elected to take the Kolmogorov option: https://www.scottaaronson.com/blog/?p=3376 https://www.scottaaronson.com/blog/?p=3376 The question of whether or not your arguments have merit won’t even get entered upon, nor will the authority ever be able to repeat back your arguments in a form you’d recognize—for even repeating the arguments correctly could invite accusations of secretly agreeing with them. Instead, the sole subject of interest will be you: who you think you are, what your motivations were to utter something so divisive and hateful. Suffice to say, it wasn't too smart to even broach the topic. It derailed the conversation, for one. For two, it didn't lead anywhere productive.
    - nkurz 9y ago
      Personally, I appreciate your efforts at discussing sensitive topics. I encourage you to keep doing so, as honestly but sensitively as you can. While the "Kolmogorov option" might maximize your personal outcome, this doesn't mean it's best for the group to encourage you to take it. You probably already read the recent discussion by another Scott A? https://slatestarcodex.com/2017/10/23/kolmogorov-complicity-and-the-parable-of-lightning https://slatestarcodex.com/2017/10/23/kolmogorov-complicity-...

andrestan 9y ago

Probably the wrong thread :)

deleted 9y ago

[deleted]

spaceseaman 9y ago

You're implying the opioid epidemic is in part due to Reddit banning subreddits filled with hateful speech?* Or what? You're also making some odd as hell "both sides"-ish argument somewhere in there that I can't even parse. I'm sorry, but we don't have to give spaces for people to be hateful - Reddit banning those assholes was the highlight of my week. I'm not trying to claim that these people should just be ignored, but you're conflating very separate problems. More importantly, the people being affected by the opioid crisis are predominantly not members of these hateful groups, and I'm pretty frustrated you would conflate them in such a way just so you can have an excuse to talk about the loss of a safe space for hateful rhetoric. *EDIT: After rereading what the poster wrote a few times, I believe they were attempting to claim that the subreddit bans would encourage more people to head to drug use, rather than vice-versa as I originally interpreted it - it's still pretty off-topic though, and again I'm not very sympathetic to people being sad they no longer have a place to be hateful.

sillysaurus3 9y ago
I'd appreciate it if you'd remove your comment since I tried to back out immediately from that line of conversation. Would you mind agreeing? If so, edit your comment to [removed] and I'll delete this one. Otherwise, I can try to explain my original motives, and what I observed. But it's a tricky conversation to have, and there's a high chance people's tendency to instantly turn to hatred will focus on me. I'd rather pass.
- Frondo 9y ago
  Calling people out on nonsense isn't hatred. "Black people are stupid, we need a white ethno-state" is hatred. "You're wrong and your ideas are wrong" isn't hatred. Calling people out on bad ideas is a necessary part of the discussion, to weed out bad ideas.
- alsetmusic 9y ago
  > I'd appreciate it if you'd remove your comment since I tried to back out immediately from that line of conversation. Would you mind agreeing? Two days ago, I saw you post something asinine and I tried to respond. You deleted your comment before I could hit the reply button, and I lost the opportunity to quote and refute you. If this is a recurring problem (that you change your mind about statements on a public forum), think a bit more before posting.