4 ms·

I'm ignoring most of your questions because they are, to put it shortly, amazingly stupid. >And how sure are you that you could look that guy from the boat in

I'm ignoring most of your questions because they are, to put it shortly, amazingly stupid. >And how sure are you that you could look that guy from the boat in the eye, and tell him that yes, the workers in those warehouses are slaves, same as he was No, because I said they weren't really equatable. Someone sick with a cold and someone sick with cancer are obviously fairly different. But we still treat the cold, and we still call the people who are ailed by the cold "sick." Sorry you can't seem to appreciate basic semantics. >If we waste our strongest language on ordinary wrongs, and then the worst comes, then what words will we have left to express it? I mean, your contention is that we're wasting it, which you'll need to prove. I don't think we've ever had a problem with word selection and creation to express the gravity of certain situations, so you'll need to further explain this vocabulary doomsday scenario you're describing.

tripletao 8y ago
Why the insults ("amazingly stupid", "can't seem to appreciate basic semantics")? Do you think they'll help convince other people reading that you're right? I'm spending my time here with them in mind, not you. Or do you consider this to be a normal way for people to interact? I can assure you that it's not. If it is for you, then your experience is different from most of the world's, in a way that I suspect makes your life worse. If someone is coerced using physical force to work, and forbidden to leave under that same threat, then I would call them a slave. I would use the word only in that context. You disagree. It's common for people on the Internet to disagree. But then what word would you use to distinguish the guy on the fishing boat from the Amazon workers? How would you express that unique human evil? I saw a newspaper headline: "There are 40 million slaves worldwide, most are women and girls". I'm pretty sure that's not counting the Amazon workers. How would you rewrite that headline to fix the undercount (without changing the 40M)? I'm still trying to understand your definition for the word "slave". I understand that you think the Amazon workers are slaves. Are all warehouse employees? Only those with the rigid, machine-enforced discipline of Amazon's warehouse? Those paid less than some threshold? Manufacturing workers, on the long lines where each worker repeats a single step over and over? Fast food workers reading their instructions off a monitor? A trader glued to his Bloomberg terminal? If these questions are "amazingly stupid", why?
- kadenshep 8y ago
  > I'm spending my time here with them in mind, not you. I'm pretty sure you're here to hear yourself speak. I'm being terse because you're not fooling anyone else but yourself. You're concern trolling at best. You still have not sufficiently pinpointed your personal deviance with the very vanilla definition of the word slave and how it could ever be disrespectful in the currently used context about Amazon workers. It would be my pleasure to give you a direct link to the definition: https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/slave https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/slave >Or do you consider this to be a normal way for people to interact? Yep.
  - tripletao 8y ago
    If I judge correctly from your words "concern trolling", you've made assumptions about my political beliefs. You think that I care neither for the slaves on the Thai fishing boat nor for the Amazon workers, and that I'm pretending to care about the first in order to minimize the situation of the second. So, you think all of this is fake. You don't think I believe anything I'm saying, so you feel no need to engage with it. If you did, then you'd be falling for my trick. So, better just to tell me--tersely--how bad I am and move on. Am I right? I'm a stranger on the Internet. You know nothing about me. You don't know what experiences I've had in my life. By attacking me instead of engaging, you've abandoned any chance to find common ground. (Maybe you think I'm too far gone, hopeless, evil, Republican. Are you sure? Why?) So the world is dangerously polarized already, and it gets a tiny quantum worse. If you want to discuss, then I've asked many questions. You could answer, or even just explain what makes one so "amazingly stupid". You might convince me of something, or I might convince you. (Have you ever changed someone's mind? What kind of language, arguments did you use? Maybe it would work this time?) If you want to do that, I'm here. Otherwise, I'm out. Oh, and you got me--I'm writing because I can manage a polite, constructive discussion with almost everyone I meet, even when we disagree. So, this thread nags at me. I'll see how it goes.
    - kadenshep 8y ago
      >I'm a stranger on the Internet. You know nothing about me I don't need to know anything about you. I just need to know that what you're saying is not rationally or logically consistent. You're playing a game with your statements. I responded directly to and directly labeled your statements. You are the only one in this thread that made a direct personal assumption in your previous post. >I'm writing because I can manage a polite, constructive discussion with almost everyone I mean that's pretty blatantly false. You engaged in a direct unprovoked vague personal judgement because you didn't like being called out for being disingenuous. Notice you still have not been able to respond to a direct link for the definition of the word slavery, but you contine to make pretty pitiful claims about other people and being "attacked" despite not being able to quote anything to back that up.

tripletao 8y ago

Why the insults ("amazingly stupid", "can't seem to appreciate basic semantics")? Do you think they'll help convince other people reading that you're right? I'm spending my time here with them in mind, not you. Or do you consider this to be a normal way for people to interact? I can assure you that it's not. If it is for you, then your experience is different from most of the world's, in a way that I suspect makes your life worse. If someone is coerced using physical force to work, and forbidden to leave under that same threat, then I would call them a slave. I would use the word only in that context. You disagree. It's common for people on the Internet to disagree. But then what word would you use to distinguish the guy on the fishing boat from the Amazon workers? How would you express that unique human evil? I saw a newspaper headline: "There are 40 million slaves worldwide, most are women and girls". I'm pretty sure that's not counting the Amazon workers. How would you rewrite that headline to fix the undercount (without changing the 40M)? I'm still trying to understand your definition for the word "slave". I understand that you think the Amazon workers are slaves. Are all warehouse employees? Only those with the rigid, machine-enforced discipline of Amazon's warehouse? Those paid less than some threshold? Manufacturing workers, on the long lines where each worker repeats a single step over and over? Fast food workers reading their instructions off a monitor? A trader glued to his Bloomberg terminal? If these questions are "amazingly stupid", why?

kadenshep 8y ago
> I'm spending my time here with them in mind, not you. I'm pretty sure you're here to hear yourself speak. I'm being terse because you're not fooling anyone else but yourself. You're concern trolling at best. You still have not sufficiently pinpointed your personal deviance with the very vanilla definition of the word slave and how it could ever be disrespectful in the currently used context about Amazon workers. It would be my pleasure to give you a direct link to the definition: https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/slave https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/slave >Or do you consider this to be a normal way for people to interact? Yep.
- tripletao 8y ago
  If I judge correctly from your words "concern trolling", you've made assumptions about my political beliefs. You think that I care neither for the slaves on the Thai fishing boat nor for the Amazon workers, and that I'm pretending to care about the first in order to minimize the situation of the second. So, you think all of this is fake. You don't think I believe anything I'm saying, so you feel no need to engage with it. If you did, then you'd be falling for my trick. So, better just to tell me--tersely--how bad I am and move on. Am I right? I'm a stranger on the Internet. You know nothing about me. You don't know what experiences I've had in my life. By attacking me instead of engaging, you've abandoned any chance to find common ground. (Maybe you think I'm too far gone, hopeless, evil, Republican. Are you sure? Why?) So the world is dangerously polarized already, and it gets a tiny quantum worse. If you want to discuss, then I've asked many questions. You could answer, or even just explain what makes one so "amazingly stupid". You might convince me of something, or I might convince you. (Have you ever changed someone's mind? What kind of language, arguments did you use? Maybe it would work this time?) If you want to do that, I'm here. Otherwise, I'm out. Oh, and you got me--I'm writing because I can manage a polite, constructive discussion with almost everyone I meet, even when we disagree. So, this thread nags at me. I'll see how it goes.
  - kadenshep 8y ago
    >I'm a stranger on the Internet. You know nothing about me I don't need to know anything about you. I just need to know that what you're saying is not rationally or logically consistent. You're playing a game with your statements. I responded directly to and directly labeled your statements. You are the only one in this thread that made a direct personal assumption in your previous post. >I'm writing because I can manage a polite, constructive discussion with almost everyone I mean that's pretty blatantly false. You engaged in a direct unprovoked vague personal judgement because you didn't like being called out for being disingenuous. Notice you still have not been able to respond to a direct link for the definition of the word slavery, but you contine to make pretty pitiful claims about other people and being "attacked" despite not being able to quote anything to back that up.