3 ms·
The usage here clearly refers to what Wikipedia calls "Pejorative Usage"[0]. The clearest definition there is "public, empty gestures intended to convey sociall
by shaki-dora 9y ago
The usage here clearly refers to what Wikipedia calls "Pejorative Usage"[0]. The clearest definition there is "public, empty gestures intended to convey socially approved attitude without any associated risk or sacrifice". This does not apply, because the $20 million are clearly an "associated sacrifice".
The Dropbox Foundation does better fit the traditional definition in signalling theory, i. e. "costly rituals, performed publicly, as a hard-to-fake sign of commitment.". But OP did not intend to use that definition, clearly shown by their term "cynical virtue signalling".
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtue_signalling#Pejorative_usage https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtue_signalling#Pejorative_u...
- tgb 9y agoSorry, I don't understand. Are you saying that "costless/riskless" is part of the "actual" definition? That's what your first post said, but this one citing Wikipedia appears to suggest you think that is misusing the term in a pejorative sense. Though, in fact, that quoted you pulled form Wikipedia is from the same source that I cited in my previous post as an author claiming they invented the term at least 5 years after it was already in use. So I'm not sure we should take it to be at all definitive. Either way, I think you can use this idea pejoratively with or without that part of the definition: Dropbox says they support the community and these stated values, they drop some money on it and go back to doing whatever else they were doing that ignores these values. That's "signalling virtues" (by some definition) that you don't actually live by, except when it suits you to signal them. (Note, I don't know enough about Dropbox to say that they are not actually living by these virtues.)