3 ms·

You’re probably right to some degree, but remember that your argument is bi-directional. (I’m sure someone can explain this better, but I’ll give it a shot.)

by afpx 9y ago

You’re probably right to some degree, but remember that your argument is bi-directional. (I’m sure someone can explain this better, but I’ll give it a shot.) As a silly example, let’s say 85% of an area believes that carbonation is harmful to health. 10% are indifferent, and 5% believe that it’s good for health. One carbonation lover happens to be bold enough to drink carbonated beverages in public. Many bystanders walk past thinking, “Wow - that guy is nuts. But, oh well, it’s his life.” One of the carbonation haters walks by and happens to be bold enough to challenge the guy and say, “Drinking carbonated beverages is stupid, man!” The carbonation lover and hater then get into a visible argument. Naturally, a few more people get involved in the discussion. Ultimately, outnumbered, the carbonation lover goes home feeling misunderstood and defeated. He meets up with a buddy of his at the carbonation lovers group, and they trade similar stories and conclude that the area is just intolerant of carbonation lovers. The next time, they decide to drink in public more defiantly and with some defensiveness. They start to wear T-shirt’s that say, “Carbonation is not a crime!” What they missed is that for that one person out of 100 who challenged them in public, 84 walked by and didn’t.

rdtsc 9y ago
That's a good example, I can see how in general it is a bidirectional thing. In this case I think the outcome is that the carbonation lover who drank in public is then fired from their job (Denise Young Smith or D'Amore, not that I personally agree or condone what they said or did, just using them as examples here). Not only that even discussing carbonation at all is swept under the rug and covered up quickly (for example, this whole thread is already flagged). They probably expect to be able to say they like carbonation or even drink it in public and even argue and face criticism for it. What they don't expect is to be attacked, fired or punished for it.

by afpx 9y ago

rdtsc 9y ago

That's a good example, I can see how in general it is a bidirectional thing. In this case I think the outcome is that the carbonation lover who drank in public is then fired from their job (Denise Young Smith or D'Amore, not that I personally agree or condone what they said or did, just using them as examples here). Not only that even discussing carbonation at all is swept under the rug and covered up quickly (for example, this whole thread is already flagged). They probably expect to be able to say they like carbonation or even drink it in public and even argue and face criticism for it. What they don't expect is to be attacked, fired or punished for it.