3 ms·

Excuse me?

testbot123 6y ago
I would not engage with the user "verdverm". They are arguing in bad faith, attempting to put anyone who disagrees with them on the defensive, and attempting to pivot the conversation when they're unable to do so. Below, I had a similar debate with this person. They attempted to get me on the defensive by turning the conversation to the 2014 murder of police officers in New York, and continually bringing it up as a way to deflect from legitimate claims. They are not interested in any kind of meaningful debate -- they are only interested in inflaming tensions through antagonistic language (e.g., "are you calmer yet?") and getting you to a point where you respond in anger. Flag and move on.
- verdverm 6y ago
  I only have weakly held opinions and many questions to understand better. I believe you are the one to avoid conversing with, to go so far as to make this comment I am replying to. Is the view that much better that from your moral pedestal? The point is to get you to think with a more open mind. Sometimes that takes ruffling a few feathers. I mean you no ill will. It is quite the opposite, if you learn to love without prejudice. This is a very difficult thing that few ever master. I am most definitely not among those who have. You will feel differently and better in time though. How long depends on your reaction, because that is all we can do, react. I cannot make you angry, only you can. This is not victim blaming, this is straight from the Dali Llama's mouth. I experience emotions, and later visit them without attachment and letting them control my condition again. I am a much happier person when I do this well, regardless of the original emotion, and equal treatment for both good and bad emotions. Getting overly enthusiastic is as bad as depression. Again, the only person you can ever hope to control is yourself.
  - komali2 6y ago
    > I cannot make you angry, only you can. Haha, victim blaming at its finest. You remind me of the classic LessWrong post about the irrationality of thinking emotions are irrational. https://www.lesswrong.com/s/5g5TkQTe9rmPS5vvM/p/RcZCwxFiZzE6X7nsv https://www.lesswrong.com/s/5g5TkQTe9rmPS5vvM/p/RcZCwxFiZzE6... This hailing of Spock as the Ultimate Scientist, the Ultimate Humanitarian - he didn't let emotions get in the way of rationality! He was a pure, thinking... uh.. well Machine, but not in the bad way! You can make people angry, and that doesn't make them irrational, and it doesn't make you right. Debate isn't as simple as making the other side feel feelings - all you're doing is hiding your own lack of self reflection behind a psuedo-zen shield. "Oh don't mind me, simple and emotional HN posters, I am merely here to tickle your little ape brains, and challenge you to Be Better!" Thinking yourself Spock on the enterprise over our planet. Come down to Earth with the rest of us. Acknowledge that emotions are rational, and acknowledge the feelings you aren't letting yourself feel are rational too.
- verdverm 6y ago
  Testbot, you are also relatively new to this community. It is very different and the best experiment into a social comment platform that actually works and brings greater knowledge and understanding to it's members, by it's members. HN is helpful, contemplative, and the best place I know to have civil discussions about the taboo. ( http://www.paulgraham.com/say.html http://www.paulgraham.com/say.html ) PG's essays are highly recommended and his thoughts have to some extent helped define this community. I hope that you continue to return, engage, and grow with us.
  - testbot123 6y ago
    Thanks, but I’ve been here a lot longer than my account age and I know how things work. Unfortunately, your behavior shows you to be a bad faith actor, and unfortunately for you a lot of the users on HN can recognize the gaslighting you’re attempting right now. Your patronizing post here really clinches it, as you yet again attempt to put me on the defensive and claim that your arguments are just honest debate on “taboo” subjects. You are not engaging in earnest debate. You are attempting to deflect and discredit, as in this post. I’m not new to this place or these tactics.
    - verdverm 6y ago
      @dang

Excuse me?

I would not engage with the user "verdverm". They are arguing in bad faith, attempting to put anyone who disagrees with them on the defensive, and attempting to pivot the conversation when they're unable to do so. Below, I had a similar debate with this person. They attempted to get me on the defensive by turning the conversation to the 2014 murder of police officers in New York, and continually bringing it up as a way to deflect from legitimate claims. They are not interested in any kind of meaningful debate -- they are only interested in inflaming tensions through antagonistic language (e.g., "are you calmer yet?") and getting you to a point where you respond in anger. Flag and move on.

verdverm 6y ago
I only have weakly held opinions and many questions to understand better. I believe you are the one to avoid conversing with, to go so far as to make this comment I am replying to. Is the view that much better that from your moral pedestal? The point is to get you to think with a more open mind. Sometimes that takes ruffling a few feathers. I mean you no ill will. It is quite the opposite, if you learn to love without prejudice. This is a very difficult thing that few ever master. I am most definitely not among those who have. You will feel differently and better in time though. How long depends on your reaction, because that is all we can do, react. I cannot make you angry, only you can. This is not victim blaming, this is straight from the Dali Llama's mouth. I experience emotions, and later visit them without attachment and letting them control my condition again. I am a much happier person when I do this well, regardless of the original emotion, and equal treatment for both good and bad emotions. Getting overly enthusiastic is as bad as depression. Again, the only person you can ever hope to control is yourself.
- komali2 6y ago
  > I cannot make you angry, only you can. Haha, victim blaming at its finest. You remind me of the classic LessWrong post about the irrationality of thinking emotions are irrational. https://www.lesswrong.com/s/5g5TkQTe9rmPS5vvM/p/RcZCwxFiZzE6X7nsv https://www.lesswrong.com/s/5g5TkQTe9rmPS5vvM/p/RcZCwxFiZzE6... This hailing of Spock as the Ultimate Scientist, the Ultimate Humanitarian - he didn't let emotions get in the way of rationality! He was a pure, thinking... uh.. well Machine, but not in the bad way! You can make people angry, and that doesn't make them irrational, and it doesn't make you right. Debate isn't as simple as making the other side feel feelings - all you're doing is hiding your own lack of self reflection behind a psuedo-zen shield. "Oh don't mind me, simple and emotional HN posters, I am merely here to tickle your little ape brains, and challenge you to Be Better!" Thinking yourself Spock on the enterprise over our planet. Come down to Earth with the rest of us. Acknowledge that emotions are rational, and acknowledge the feelings you aren't letting yourself feel are rational too.
verdverm 6y ago
Testbot, you are also relatively new to this community. It is very different and the best experiment into a social comment platform that actually works and brings greater knowledge and understanding to it's members, by it's members. HN is helpful, contemplative, and the best place I know to have civil discussions about the taboo. ( http://www.paulgraham.com/say.html http://www.paulgraham.com/say.html ) PG's essays are highly recommended and his thoughts have to some extent helped define this community. I hope that you continue to return, engage, and grow with us.
- testbot123 6y ago
  Thanks, but I’ve been here a lot longer than my account age and I know how things work. Unfortunately, your behavior shows you to be a bad faith actor, and unfortunately for you a lot of the users on HN can recognize the gaslighting you’re attempting right now. Your patronizing post here really clinches it, as you yet again attempt to put me on the defensive and claim that your arguments are just honest debate on “taboo” subjects. You are not engaging in earnest debate. You are attempting to deflect and discredit, as in this post. I’m not new to this place or these tactics.
  - verdverm 6y ago
    @dang