4 ms·

The upload war for the territory of Kosovo is not a lame one, it is still a highly heated dialogue amongst politicians of both countries. While this topic had c

by milot 6y ago

The upload war for the territory of Kosovo is not a lame one, it is still a highly heated dialogue amongst politicians of both countries. While this topic had consequences during the 1999 war between Kosovo and Serbia, is still present today for which US is actively involved in this dialogue for that particular map this wouldn't classify as lame.

MatekCopatek 6y ago
An edit war being lame doesn't mean the article topic is lame. The lameness comes from both sides taking their own opinion and using the article to present it as the one and only truth. An atheist and a christian could have an edit war on the article of Jesus, changing it between "Son of God and our Saviour" and "fairy tale character used to control masses", which would be absolutely lame despite the objective importance of the religious figure in question. And while sensible people can at least resolve religious issues by accepting that they simply have opposing beliefs and no ability to disprove the other side, politics are even more complex in the sense that they include a lot of historical facts, not just ideological beliefs. This makes it more likely for people to feel like their truth is objective.
- milot 6y ago
  Understood, but again this is not an easy topic such as the example you gave between an Atheist and a Christian. This is something tangible which is still present and not something fictional or a belief.
  - MatekCopatek 6y ago
    This is what I was referring to in my last paragraph. We didn't discover concepts like country and nation, we invented them. They're very real and have a profound effect on our lives, but at the same time they are completely fictional. If everyone ceases to believe in them, they disappear.
dmos62 6y ago
Are these descriptions mutually exclusive? Is a territory dispute inherently above heritage dispute (in terms of vanity)? When something escalates to violence, does it become less vain (supposing vanity is what causes "lameness")? I would not say that people feeling strongly about something (and willing to act boldly because of it) somehow validates them or their conflict. That's what lameness means: is something socially accepted or condemned.
gwd 6y ago
FWIW read the WHO's COVID-19 situation reports [1] pretty regularly, and was interested yesterday to find Kosovo listed with the following footnote: > All references to Kosovo should be understood to be in the context of the United Nations Security Council resolution 1244 (1999). Which means, AFAICT, "We're not saying whether Kosovo is or is not a separate country, please don't flame us about it." [1] https://www.who.int/emergencies/diseases/novel-coronavirus-2019/situation-reports https://www.who.int/emergencies/diseases/novel-coronavirus-2...
- milot 6y ago
  Hence a sensitive topic that can't be classified as lame.

by milot 6y ago

MatekCopatek 6y ago

An edit war being lame doesn't mean the article topic is lame. The lameness comes from both sides taking their own opinion and using the article to present it as the one and only truth. An atheist and a christian could have an edit war on the article of Jesus, changing it between "Son of God and our Saviour" and "fairy tale character used to control masses", which would be absolutely lame despite the objective importance of the religious figure in question. And while sensible people can at least resolve religious issues by accepting that they simply have opposing beliefs and no ability to disprove the other side, politics are even more complex in the sense that they include a lot of historical facts, not just ideological beliefs. This makes it more likely for people to feel like their truth is objective.

milot 6y ago
Understood, but again this is not an easy topic such as the example you gave between an Atheist and a Christian. This is something tangible which is still present and not something fictional or a belief.
- MatekCopatek 6y ago
  This is what I was referring to in my last paragraph. We didn't discover concepts like country and nation, we invented them. They're very real and have a profound effect on our lives, but at the same time they are completely fictional. If everyone ceases to believe in them, they disappear.

dmos62 6y ago

Are these descriptions mutually exclusive? Is a territory dispute inherently above heritage dispute (in terms of vanity)? When something escalates to violence, does it become less vain (supposing vanity is what causes "lameness")? I would not say that people feeling strongly about something (and willing to act boldly because of it) somehow validates them or their conflict. That's what lameness means: is something socially accepted or condemned.

gwd 6y ago

FWIW read the WHO's COVID-19 situation reports [1] pretty regularly, and was interested yesterday to find Kosovo listed with the following footnote: > All references to Kosovo should be understood to be in the context of the United Nations Security Council resolution 1244 (1999). Which means, AFAICT, "We're not saying whether Kosovo is or is not a separate country, please don't flame us about it." [1] https://www.who.int/emergencies/diseases/novel-coronavirus-2019/situation-reports https://www.who.int/emergencies/diseases/novel-coronavirus-2...

milot 6y ago
Hence a sensitive topic that can't be classified as lame.