5 ms·

Except that "normie" is the name a particular in-group gives to their out-group. It's not a name that out-group adopted. Most normal people seeing "normie" will

Except that "normie" is the name a particular in-group gives to their out-group. It's not a name that out-group adopted. Most normal people seeing "normie" will both intuit what it means (a normal person), but also recognize the person using it is also signaling in-group status.

lliamander 7y ago
And? Nothing inherently insulting about that, especially when us "normies"[0] sometimes use that to refer to ourselves. [0]speaking as someone who is not an urbit user.
- GavinMcG 7y ago
  I'm curious what you mean by "inherently insulting". Do you think there are words that are insulting "inherently" whereas there are other words that are only contingently insulting? I ask because it seems to me there's nothing inherent at all about the use of any word, so whether or not "normie" is insulting comes down to the degree to which people tend to use it insultingly. And I believe common use is overwhelmingly derogatory. There may be exceptions, of course, and you personally may even be more familiar with the exceptions than the typical usage.
  - lliamander 7y ago
    Hm.. when talking about the inherent meaning of a word (and whether there is such a thing) I might make reference to denotation vs. connotation, but I'm not prepared to dig into the semantics here. I would say that my experience with regard to the use of the word "normie" is indeed different from yours. Regardless, on a site called Hacker News, in an era where "geek" has a neutral or even slightly positive connotation (despite it's history and origins) I think the default should be to assess how an author actually uses a word, rather than how it often used in broader society.
- scott_s 7y ago
  When your goal is to initiate those in the out-group, it's counter-productive to use an in-group term in the title, especially when that term refers to members of the out-group itself. Insulting has nothing to do with it; in-group terms are not welcoming to the out-group.
GavinMcG 7y ago
And, I'd add, gives to them specifically to be dismissive and to imply that the out group is failing to (or maybe isn't able to) understand things with the special insight the in-group has.
- lliamander 7y ago
  If the title had been "Urbit Is Not for Normies: How Urbit Will Save the Elect from Eternal September" I would agree. As it stands, the intent here seems to be to disarm the reader's own insecurities about how whether they are able to (or welcome to) grasp what the Urbit project is about.
- nineteen999 7y ago
  Insults are in the ears of the beholder. A bit of context goes a long way, when you realize that that the "in-group" is miniscule, and the the "out-group" is the vast majority. If you frame it that way, it should be obvious that the "in-group" in this case would appear, on the surface, to be a bunch of deluded eccentrics, hardly anything to feel insulted about.
catalogia 7y ago
Is it really more offensive than "for dummies", which obviously resonated with the general public?
- lliamander 7y ago
  Exactly.

lliamander 7y ago

And? Nothing inherently insulting about that, especially when us "normies"[0] sometimes use that to refer to ourselves. [0]speaking as someone who is not an urbit user.

GavinMcG 7y ago
I'm curious what you mean by "inherently insulting". Do you think there are words that are insulting "inherently" whereas there are other words that are only contingently insulting? I ask because it seems to me there's nothing inherent at all about the use of any word, so whether or not "normie" is insulting comes down to the degree to which people tend to use it insultingly. And I believe common use is overwhelmingly derogatory. There may be exceptions, of course, and you personally may even be more familiar with the exceptions than the typical usage.
- lliamander 7y ago
  Hm.. when talking about the inherent meaning of a word (and whether there is such a thing) I might make reference to denotation vs. connotation, but I'm not prepared to dig into the semantics here. I would say that my experience with regard to the use of the word "normie" is indeed different from yours. Regardless, on a site called Hacker News, in an era where "geek" has a neutral or even slightly positive connotation (despite it's history and origins) I think the default should be to assess how an author actually uses a word, rather than how it often used in broader society.
scott_s 7y ago
When your goal is to initiate those in the out-group, it's counter-productive to use an in-group term in the title, especially when that term refers to members of the out-group itself. Insulting has nothing to do with it; in-group terms are not welcoming to the out-group.

GavinMcG 7y ago

And, I'd add, gives to them specifically to be dismissive and to imply that the out group is failing to (or maybe isn't able to) understand things with the special insight the in-group has.

lliamander 7y ago
If the title had been "Urbit Is Not for Normies: How Urbit Will Save the Elect from Eternal September" I would agree. As it stands, the intent here seems to be to disarm the reader's own insecurities about how whether they are able to (or welcome to) grasp what the Urbit project is about.
nineteen999 7y ago
Insults are in the ears of the beholder. A bit of context goes a long way, when you realize that that the "in-group" is miniscule, and the the "out-group" is the vast majority. If you frame it that way, it should be obvious that the "in-group" in this case would appear, on the surface, to be a bunch of deluded eccentrics, hardly anything to feel insulted about.

catalogia 7y ago

Is it really more offensive than "for dummies", which obviously resonated with the general public?

lliamander 7y ago
Exactly.