3 ms·

My sister has gone down the same rabbit hole. She really thinks she's "fighting the good fight" by posting a fresh outrage every day. She's glued to a changing

My sister has gone down the same rabbit hole. She really thinks she's "fighting the good fight" by posting a fresh outrage every day. She's glued to a changing handful of posts, replying rapid-fire to anyone who disagrees. I used to post (4-5 times per year) photos of my vacations, but I don't want to feed the whole lifestyle porn/envy cycle.

octorian 8y ago
> She really thinks she's "fighting the good fight" by posting a fresh outrage every day. I have a few people in my feed who do this, from both sides. It almost feels like they've turned into nothing but meme/share-bots. It gets so annoying that I should probably block them already. If you try to call out the content, you either get childishly shouted down because you're on "the other side", or called out as "the problem" because you don't agree with their group-think.
- newsbinator 8y ago
  > or called out as "the problem" because you don't agree with their group-think. It feels good to have someone verbalize this. I can't enjoy much social media anymore because there's an expectation that discussing anything opinionated requires a preface about what side you're on. Making a politically neutral statement means you're with the enemy (where the enemy is on the side opposite whoever reads your neutral statement). I'm not even referring to politics or discussion of world events: even more futurist/what-if thoughts about how society works/could work. HN is the calmest place to have a discussion with someone, because no one's looking for clues about your personal beliefs and what side you're ostensibly warring for. 9 times out of 10, only the content of your comment seems to matter. As it should be.
  - gammateam 8y ago
    > HN is the calmest place to have a discussion with someone, because no one's looking for clues about your personal beliefs and what side you're ostensibly warring for. just scroll to the bottom where everything is downvote-collapsed already, anything that isn't Silicon Valley political echo chamber isn't really discussed holistically and garners the same "you're the enemy" or "you're not in the middle if you don't already agree with me" response as other networks need a patch for this My thoughts are that Americans need a credible external threat for unity, and currently we don't have one. The Cold War thing jumped the shark decades ago and just doesn't have unifying consensus as being a problem for America, the religious extremist story has fallen apart with everyone knowing its all part of our cozy relationship with the House of Saud. So here we are
- incompatible 8y ago
  It's hard to argue with people who think that a debate is won by finding the best ad-hominem put-down. It's probably not even worth trying, unless you enjoy a kind of rational trolling where you state your case and ignore the responses.
randycupertino 8y ago
I used to waste time doing this and would argue with right-winger family who was brainwashed by Fox news. I finally realized no matter how good your points are, and no matter how eloquently said or rationally stated you will just flat out never convince someone or change their opinion on policy based on a facebook discussion. Literally the only thing arguing politics on there does is polarize people, and further entrench everyone onto their already premade opinions. I started putting myself in their shoes and realized how futile their arguments were because I'd never consider a right wing perspective. Then I realized what a waste of time it was to even engage at all. I unfollowed everyone, stopped logging in and have been a lot happier. If I want to check up on someone specifically I search them and go straight to their page. Otherwise I don't even bother reading the timeline anymore. I went from daily checking facebook to about 2x a month. It's awesome.
- johnsonjo 8y ago
  This may not be received well, but I’ll try anyway. Yeah debate can definitely be polarizing, but I appreciate people that bring a reasoned argument to the table without being conflicting. When that happens I have a little more faith in humanity even when their opinions are different than my own. It’s a give and take and it sounds like in your situation you felt like you were the only one trying to have a civil discussion. That is exhausting. Honestly if I talk/debate with someone long enough I can tell if they won’t be convinced, but sometimes it’s not the person you are debating that you are going to convince, but someone on the sidelines. Honestly the people that are most vocal are likely the ones that are already polarized and irrational, but that doesn’t mean the world is full of irrational people. Sometimes I believe not participating in an online debate is the right thing to do, but on the other hand the only way the tone will change about politics is if people change it.
  - randycupertino 8y ago
    I think you make a good point and I'd be open to having rational discussions about it, but these are people posting "O'Bummer" Obama memes... imo just not even worth wading into. They're not looking for my input, as the poster below mentioned they just post as a rallying cry to get likes from their other right wing family members.

octorian 8y ago

> She really thinks she's "fighting the good fight" by posting a fresh outrage every day. I have a few people in my feed who do this, from both sides. It almost feels like they've turned into nothing but meme/share-bots. It gets so annoying that I should probably block them already. If you try to call out the content, you either get childishly shouted down because you're on "the other side", or called out as "the problem" because you don't agree with their group-think.

newsbinator 8y ago
> or called out as "the problem" because you don't agree with their group-think. It feels good to have someone verbalize this. I can't enjoy much social media anymore because there's an expectation that discussing anything opinionated requires a preface about what side you're on. Making a politically neutral statement means you're with the enemy (where the enemy is on the side opposite whoever reads your neutral statement). I'm not even referring to politics or discussion of world events: even more futurist/what-if thoughts about how society works/could work. HN is the calmest place to have a discussion with someone, because no one's looking for clues about your personal beliefs and what side you're ostensibly warring for. 9 times out of 10, only the content of your comment seems to matter. As it should be.
- gammateam 8y ago
  > HN is the calmest place to have a discussion with someone, because no one's looking for clues about your personal beliefs and what side you're ostensibly warring for. just scroll to the bottom where everything is downvote-collapsed already, anything that isn't Silicon Valley political echo chamber isn't really discussed holistically and garners the same "you're the enemy" or "you're not in the middle if you don't already agree with me" response as other networks need a patch for this My thoughts are that Americans need a credible external threat for unity, and currently we don't have one. The Cold War thing jumped the shark decades ago and just doesn't have unifying consensus as being a problem for America, the religious extremist story has fallen apart with everyone knowing its all part of our cozy relationship with the House of Saud. So here we are
incompatible 8y ago
It's hard to argue with people who think that a debate is won by finding the best ad-hominem put-down. It's probably not even worth trying, unless you enjoy a kind of rational trolling where you state your case and ignore the responses.

randycupertino 8y ago

I used to waste time doing this and would argue with right-winger family who was brainwashed by Fox news. I finally realized no matter how good your points are, and no matter how eloquently said or rationally stated you will just flat out never convince someone or change their opinion on policy based on a facebook discussion. Literally the only thing arguing politics on there does is polarize people, and further entrench everyone onto their already premade opinions. I started putting myself in their shoes and realized how futile their arguments were because I'd never consider a right wing perspective. Then I realized what a waste of time it was to even engage at all. I unfollowed everyone, stopped logging in and have been a lot happier. If I want to check up on someone specifically I search them and go straight to their page. Otherwise I don't even bother reading the timeline anymore. I went from daily checking facebook to about 2x a month. It's awesome.

johnsonjo 8y ago
This may not be received well, but I’ll try anyway. Yeah debate can definitely be polarizing, but I appreciate people that bring a reasoned argument to the table without being conflicting. When that happens I have a little more faith in humanity even when their opinions are different than my own. It’s a give and take and it sounds like in your situation you felt like you were the only one trying to have a civil discussion. That is exhausting. Honestly if I talk/debate with someone long enough I can tell if they won’t be convinced, but sometimes it’s not the person you are debating that you are going to convince, but someone on the sidelines. Honestly the people that are most vocal are likely the ones that are already polarized and irrational, but that doesn’t mean the world is full of irrational people. Sometimes I believe not participating in an online debate is the right thing to do, but on the other hand the only way the tone will change about politics is if people change it.
- randycupertino 8y ago
  I think you make a good point and I'd be open to having rational discussions about it, but these are people posting "O'Bummer" Obama memes... imo just not even worth wading into. They're not looking for my input, as the poster below mentioned they just post as a rallying cry to get likes from their other right wing family members.