3 ms·
Getting downvotes for this, not because there's any solid argument against what I'm saying, but because people are upset. The reason why I had to say something
by h0l0cube 6y ago
Getting downvotes for this, not because there's any solid argument against what I'm saying, but because people are upset. The reason why I had to say something is because the GPs comment highlights much of what is wrong with online discourse.
That 'The New York Post has more merit than people afford it' might be worthy claim, but making a bunch of loud baseless claims isn't the way to convince people of it.
- robertlagrant 6y agoIt's not people being upset, it's that talking about irony and juxtaposition is not helpful. Making a simple case is a lot more effective than vague comments on other people's cases.
- h0l0cube 6y ago> It's not people being upset If it wasn't they would have critiqued my comment as you have. But instead it was a string of drive-by down-votes. > it's that talking about irony and juxtaposition is not helpful I think it is important to point out bad faith dialogue wherever it is seen. And that's what I did, by pointing out the contradictions in the moral stance made, and then the poster completely disregarding them in the same breath. > vague comments on other people's cases. They weren't vague at all, they were very specific. The poster was making a rhetorical play rather than furthering the discussion, and I pointed it out with direct quotes.