2 ms·

> That’s why it was critical to respond. The comment I responded to is overtly and unequivocally expressing arrogant repression No, it isn't: It wasn't critica

> That’s why it was critical to respond. The comment I responded to is overtly and unequivocally expressing arrogant repression No, it isn't: It wasn't critical for you to respond (particularly with insults) nor was the comment "repression". > If you think my comment is a personal attack Your first comment is a personal attack, and so is this one. You continue calling the first commenter you replied to a "thug". There's really no room for opinions or different thoughts; that you insulted that person is undeniable. > The parent comment is the one behaving that way The parent comment didn't insult anyone here, it's really odd that you're trying to say otherwise when we all can read the comment and can see that there's no insult to anyone here in it. > it is absolutely fair and uncontroversial to point out their own words demonstrating thuggish repression. It isn't. > In fact, not challenging their comment on these reprehensible points would be the far worse action. No, it wouldn't be, much less with insults.

mlthoughts2018 6y ago
> “ Your first comment is a personal attack, and so is this one. You continue calling the first commenter you replied to a "thug".” No, you are wrong. The parent commenter expressed thuggish ideas - they did that and it is critical to hold them to account for it. I didn’t make them state awful thuggish repressive comments like completely voiding out core personal identities of coworkers. I am not putting any spin or embellishment on their comment - they chose to write it. Calling it thuggish or arrogant is not unfair or insulting whatsoever - that is unequivocally what they chose to express. It deserves to be called out and for people to stand against that type of repressive attitude. It is absolutely not insulting or personally attacking to do so. The commenter’s words simply have these consequences, regardless of you using completely unsubstantiated gainsaying to reply to me. The original comment is deeply uncivil, and it highlights extremely broken community norms if you or others think that a reply which calls out that lack of civility (where calling it thuggish or arrogant is absolutely fair and not an insult at all based on the comment’s own terms) is somehow itself uncivil.

mlthoughts2018 6y ago

> “ Your first comment is a personal attack, and so is this one. You continue calling the first commenter you replied to a "thug".” No, you are wrong. The parent commenter expressed thuggish ideas - they did that and it is critical to hold them to account for it. I didn’t make them state awful thuggish repressive comments like completely voiding out core personal identities of coworkers. I am not putting any spin or embellishment on their comment - they chose to write it. Calling it thuggish or arrogant is not unfair or insulting whatsoever - that is unequivocally what they chose to express. It deserves to be called out and for people to stand against that type of repressive attitude. It is absolutely not insulting or personally attacking to do so. The commenter’s words simply have these consequences, regardless of you using completely unsubstantiated gainsaying to reply to me. The original comment is deeply uncivil, and it highlights extremely broken community norms if you or others think that a reply which calls out that lack of civility (where calling it thuggish or arrogant is absolutely fair and not an insult at all based on the comment’s own terms) is somehow itself uncivil.