5 ms·

>The "outrage mob" isn't real. You have got to be kidding me. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Online_shaming https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Online_shaming

balls187 6y ago
You mean consequences for your behavior?
- recursive 6y ago
  You mean like how domestic violence is just consequences for the victim's behavior?
  - shrimp_emoji 6y ago
    Having an opinion about my opinion is a violation of the NAP.
    - recursive 6y ago
      It may well be. I looked it up on wikipedia now, assuming you're talking about "Non-agression principle". I'm not sure I understand. Anyway, have a nice day.
  - balls187 6y ago
    Domestic Violence is about power and control caused of the DV Perpetrator/Aggressor towards the survivor. DV perpetrators use a myriad of tactics to control the relationship with the "victim": financial, physical, emotional, children, and sex. While the "victim" does bear some responsibility, it's usually with regards to how they are unable (or unwilling) to end a relationship with a DV perpetrator.
    - recursive 6y ago
      Damore should have just got a new job. I think I agree with this analogy.
      - balls187 6y ago
        You're being reductive about my explanation about the role a survivor plays in a DV relationship. Recognizing, understanding, and ultimately forgiving yourself for why a person was in a DV relationship is part of the process survivors go through in order to move past it. I know. I'm a survivor.
        recursive 6y ago
        In case it wasn't clear I don't actually think DV is the fundamentally the consequence of the victims action.
- jariel 6y ago
  "You mean consequences for your behavior?" Outrage mobs are by definition 'consequences for some behavior'. But the implication that someone should be vilified globally for having an earnest and not entirely unreasonable intellectual opinion makes his responders an 'outrage mob'. Damore had no malice, ill will, his opinion was made ostensibly for some positive will, among a relatively private group. If he was beating his wife, then there'd be a legit consequence for his behavior right? And some outrage would be justified. But that's obviously not the case. The response is the most 'outrage mob imaginable', with people still 'outraging' themselves on HN years later.
  - balls187 6y ago
    > not entirely unreasonable intellectual opinion Despite reasoning his point of view well, it does not mean it's right, healthy, or valid. And while Sexism and Racism are not equal, there do parallel in many ways. How different is his memo than writings that discuss how the Negroid is a lesser form of human species, and there for it's condition is justified? Scientifically, there is very little, if anything, that differs between a man and woman performing a job in tech. Why then do women continually report about discriminatory behavior in the work place? Are they just making things up?
    - jariel 6y ago
      You are crossing streams. This is not about whether Damore was 'right or wrong' - it's about whether he was within his right to make a reasonable statement and not get publicly murdered for it. Also - your comment has also demonstrated the intellectual dishonestly against him by misrepresenting the thrust of his argument. There are considerable differences between genders, this is not a scientifically controversial position, and in an entire 24 years of general upbringing, imbued with gendered differences and possibly marginal - but material - biological differences, is going to yield very different outcomes. There are many fields in society that have unequal gender ratios and it's not remotely specific to 'tech'. It's obviously a thorny subject, which requires some dispassionate thinking. We don't need people screaming 'Nazi' at the first hint that they might think someone, somewhere committed a 'thought crime' against their personal and very narrow view of the world. This is the kind of bigotry that is not 'right, healthy or valid'. The mob is much, much scarier than Damore.

balls187 6y ago

You mean consequences for your behavior?

recursive 6y ago
You mean like how domestic violence is just consequences for the victim's behavior?
- shrimp_emoji 6y ago
  Having an opinion about my opinion is a violation of the NAP.
  - recursive 6y ago
    It may well be. I looked it up on wikipedia now, assuming you're talking about "Non-agression principle". I'm not sure I understand. Anyway, have a nice day.
- balls187 6y ago
  Domestic Violence is about power and control caused of the DV Perpetrator/Aggressor towards the survivor. DV perpetrators use a myriad of tactics to control the relationship with the "victim": financial, physical, emotional, children, and sex. While the "victim" does bear some responsibility, it's usually with regards to how they are unable (or unwilling) to end a relationship with a DV perpetrator.
  - recursive 6y ago
    Damore should have just got a new job. I think I agree with this analogy.
    - balls187 6y ago
      You're being reductive about my explanation about the role a survivor plays in a DV relationship. Recognizing, understanding, and ultimately forgiving yourself for why a person was in a DV relationship is part of the process survivors go through in order to move past it. I know. I'm a survivor.
      - recursive 6y ago
        In case it wasn't clear I don't actually think DV is the fundamentally the consequence of the victims action.
jariel 6y ago
"You mean consequences for your behavior?" Outrage mobs are by definition 'consequences for some behavior'. But the implication that someone should be vilified globally for having an earnest and not entirely unreasonable intellectual opinion makes his responders an 'outrage mob'. Damore had no malice, ill will, his opinion was made ostensibly for some positive will, among a relatively private group. If he was beating his wife, then there'd be a legit consequence for his behavior right? And some outrage would be justified. But that's obviously not the case. The response is the most 'outrage mob imaginable', with people still 'outraging' themselves on HN years later.
- balls187 6y ago
  > not entirely unreasonable intellectual opinion Despite reasoning his point of view well, it does not mean it's right, healthy, or valid. And while Sexism and Racism are not equal, there do parallel in many ways. How different is his memo than writings that discuss how the Negroid is a lesser form of human species, and there for it's condition is justified? Scientifically, there is very little, if anything, that differs between a man and woman performing a job in tech. Why then do women continually report about discriminatory behavior in the work place? Are they just making things up?
  - jariel 6y ago
    You are crossing streams. This is not about whether Damore was 'right or wrong' - it's about whether he was within his right to make a reasonable statement and not get publicly murdered for it. Also - your comment has also demonstrated the intellectual dishonestly against him by misrepresenting the thrust of his argument. There are considerable differences between genders, this is not a scientifically controversial position, and in an entire 24 years of general upbringing, imbued with gendered differences and possibly marginal - but material - biological differences, is going to yield very different outcomes. There are many fields in society that have unequal gender ratios and it's not remotely specific to 'tech'. It's obviously a thorny subject, which requires some dispassionate thinking. We don't need people screaming 'Nazi' at the first hint that they might think someone, somewhere committed a 'thought crime' against their personal and very narrow view of the world. This is the kind of bigotry that is not 'right, healthy or valid'. The mob is much, much scarier than Damore.