6 ms·

> Anyone with a platform whether it is sports, tech, culture should consider what message they are sending. They do, their message is usually related to their

by flukus 8y ago

> Anyone with a platform whether it is sports, tech, culture should consider what message they are sending. They do, their message is usually related to their field of expertise. A good sportsman will act as an example of how to be a good sport, how to conduct yourself when you lose, how to be a good winner, etc. A good OS maintainer will set an example through code and their leadership will show the team what is and isn't acceptable. > If you have listeners you have a responsibility for what you are saying whether you like it or not. It doesn't matter whether those 1M instagram followers just like to see you do backflips on a bicycle. If have 1M followers you have influence. If you have 10M followers you are a political force. Even if you just ride bikes on instagram. If you've got a million followers watching you do backflips on a bike then your audience is not there to hear your political opinions. It's a recipe to lose most of your audience, even the ones that agree aren't there to listen to it. Assuming you're American, half the countries politics are the opposite of yours, most of the worlds politics are the opposite of yours. Do you really want to be hearing those peoples opinions all the time? Many of those opinions will be quite hurtful to many people.

alkonaut 8y ago
> They do, their message is usually related to their field of expertise. A good sportsman will act as an example of how to be a good sport, how to conduct yourself when you lose, how to be a good winner, etc. A good OS maintainer will set an example through code and their leadership will show the team what is and isn't acceptable. It's rarely that easy. Suddenly you'll be forced to either accept a code of conduct, or actively choose not to do so. The decision will be seen as a political one regardless of whether the person making the decision thinks it is. The footballer will need to decide whether or not to take a knee during the national anthem, and by no decision of their own (it wasn't their protest!) they are now forced to take a political stance and probably motivate it. There So in some cases you are lucky and you can "just be an engineer" or "just be an athlete" and the positions you take are harmless and apolitical "I like charities and being a good sport!". But suddenly they will be forced to take positions that are both political and controversial. The audience wasn't there of course to hear Linus Torvalds' views on equality or some footballers stance on politics or racism - but there they are. You can't follow an engineer or a footballer that isn't also a human with opinions you may or may not like. So while it's some times nice to not have to worry about politics in some context - it's always just beneath the surface.
- flukus 8y ago
  > Suddenly you'll be forced to either accept a code of conduct, or actively choose not to do so. A strange example considering codes of conduct are forcing people to become more apolitcal. They force politics into venues were it didn't exist before. > The footballer will need to decide whether or not to take a knee during the national anthem Not kneeling is apolitical, it doesn't mean you condone any stance whatsoever. I'm getting the impression you only want political opinions that you agree with to be shared, s let's take a real political stance that isn't controversial on HN , "Should society accept homosexuality?". For me that's and easy yes and I'm sure most of HN would agree. I'm going to go out on a limb and assume you do as well, correct? Well a sizeable chunk of your country (which ever one it is), most of the middle east, most of Asia, most of Africa, most of Eastern Europe and much of the Latin America disagree (https://www.pewglobal.org/2013/06/04/the-global-divide-on-homosexuality/ https://www.pewglobal.org/2013/06/04/the-global-divide-on-ho...). Most of the world disagrees in fact. Are you telling me you want most of them to be spouting "We shouldn't accept homosexuality" on every video of them doing a backflip on a bike?
  - alkonaut 8y ago
    > Not kneeling is apolitical Is it? Who decides that? The athlete might not even know what political position they are taking. Or they might be seen as taking the opposite position as the one they think they are taking. It's all in the eye of the beholder. As soon as enough people believe that not adopting a CoC or not kneeling IS in fact a political stance/statement - then it also is. At that point, it doesn't matter whether a player says "I don't want to take any political side here so I'll just stand, thanks". It's out of their hands. This is an exaggerated example (the CoC one is more reasonable) but I hope you get my point - whether or not you take a political stance might not even be deliberate, or conscious. Some times it might be better to at least do it consciously then.
    - flukus 8y ago
      Now you've expanded the definition of political so much I simply don't care if something is political or not, the word has lost all meaning. You've also completely avoid my question, do you want the majority of the world who don't think society should accept homosexuality to be voicing their opinions more?

by flukus 8y ago

alkonaut 8y ago

> They do, their message is usually related to their field of expertise. A good sportsman will act as an example of how to be a good sport, how to conduct yourself when you lose, how to be a good winner, etc. A good OS maintainer will set an example through code and their leadership will show the team what is and isn't acceptable. It's rarely that easy. Suddenly you'll be forced to either accept a code of conduct, or actively choose not to do so. The decision will be seen as a political one regardless of whether the person making the decision thinks it is. The footballer will need to decide whether or not to take a knee during the national anthem, and by no decision of their own (it wasn't their protest!) they are now forced to take a political stance and probably motivate it. There So in some cases you are lucky and you can "just be an engineer" or "just be an athlete" and the positions you take are harmless and apolitical "I like charities and being a good sport!". But suddenly they will be forced to take positions that are both political and controversial. The audience wasn't there of course to hear Linus Torvalds' views on equality or some footballers stance on politics or racism - but there they are. You can't follow an engineer or a footballer that isn't also a human with opinions you may or may not like. So while it's some times nice to not have to worry about politics in some context - it's always just beneath the surface.

flukus 8y ago
> Suddenly you'll be forced to either accept a code of conduct, or actively choose not to do so. A strange example considering codes of conduct are forcing people to become more apolitcal. They force politics into venues were it didn't exist before. > The footballer will need to decide whether or not to take a knee during the national anthem Not kneeling is apolitical, it doesn't mean you condone any stance whatsoever. I'm getting the impression you only want political opinions that you agree with to be shared, s let's take a real political stance that isn't controversial on HN , "Should society accept homosexuality?". For me that's and easy yes and I'm sure most of HN would agree. I'm going to go out on a limb and assume you do as well, correct? Well a sizeable chunk of your country (which ever one it is), most of the middle east, most of Asia, most of Africa, most of Eastern Europe and much of the Latin America disagree (https://www.pewglobal.org/2013/06/04/the-global-divide-on-homosexuality/ https://www.pewglobal.org/2013/06/04/the-global-divide-on-ho...). Most of the world disagrees in fact. Are you telling me you want most of them to be spouting "We shouldn't accept homosexuality" on every video of them doing a backflip on a bike?
- alkonaut 8y ago
  > Not kneeling is apolitical Is it? Who decides that? The athlete might not even know what political position they are taking. Or they might be seen as taking the opposite position as the one they think they are taking. It's all in the eye of the beholder. As soon as enough people believe that not adopting a CoC or not kneeling IS in fact a political stance/statement - then it also is. At that point, it doesn't matter whether a player says "I don't want to take any political side here so I'll just stand, thanks". It's out of their hands. This is an exaggerated example (the CoC one is more reasonable) but I hope you get my point - whether or not you take a political stance might not even be deliberate, or conscious. Some times it might be better to at least do it consciously then.
  - flukus 8y ago
    Now you've expanded the definition of political so much I simply don't care if something is political or not, the word has lost all meaning. You've also completely avoid my question, do you want the majority of the world who don't think society should accept homosexuality to be voicing their opinions more?