5 ms·

As someone I guess not in the loop with the latest in outrage culture... what exactly is offensive about the name?

by jjcon 6y ago

floatingatoll 6y ago
My issues with it stem from something unpublished in the late 90s, which is not something 'dismissable' that you can simply set aside using the negation-by-framing of 'outrage culture', so I can't offer any reply to your question. Please accept my apologies for how far off the mark my reasons are from your assumptions; perhaps another time we'll be better aligned.
- ubercow13 6y ago
  On the contrary, intentionally obtuse and unsubstantive references to some unpublished something-or-other, and unspecified personal objections which are claimed to be 'common sense', are pretty vapid and dismissable.
  - floatingatoll 6y ago
    Noted, thanks!
- jjcon 6y ago
  > something unpublished in the late 90s Why should anyone care about this? I’m still confused.
  - floatingatoll 6y ago
    I'm not here to help you determine whether you should care or not. That's entirely up to you. For some unknown reason you seem to care, and I certainly can't figure out why from the replies so far. As best as I can guess from the evidence available, you're looking for some vector to "No, you're wrong!" disprove some aspect of my personal view of this. This will, of course, go nowhere. I didn't submit my personal view as some sort of entry in a debate, and I'm making no effort to persuade anyone to my view. If you can't find a way to derive value or relevance from my viewpoint, other than trying to disprove it or debate it, then you'll just have to move on. I'm not going to try to pressure you, persuade you, influence you, argue with you, or otherwise make any effort to interfere with your freedoms of thought and choice. That would be inappropriate for an unsubstantiated personal view such as the one I have provided.
    - EricE 6y ago
      >I'm not here to help you determine whether you should care or not. Other than attention seeking what was the point of your original post? It certainly wasn't for dialog since you can't have a dialog unless you are willing to put all the points of discussion on the table. People are rightly puzzled by your posting because this site is about dialog - not one direction orations. That you are attempting to act "above the fray" is even more amazing.
      - floatingatoll 6y ago
        I can think of several interesting and relevant dialogues that could occur, but I also predicted that a viewpoint on this topic not couched in SSC-compatible rationality terms would be rejected and attacked by other HN commenters. Having confirmed that prediction, I’m content not to share any further details about my biasing experiences so as not to offend further, and avoid being emotionally vulnerable to y’all in the process. Or, restated, I was able to verify that the non-logical nature of my experiences and viewpoint remains intolerable within HN’s limits as a forum. I will continue to keep this in mind going forward as I have previously but it’s necessary to recheck assumptions now and then and this served that purpose acceptably.
        jjcon 6y ago
        I think it’s pretty clear that what was being discussed was a freedom of expression issue (as a value not a law). Doesn’t matter now though cause Apple backed down and the dev noted this in his response: “We may not all agree, but I am happy we all still have the freedom to express ourselves today” I think that sums things up well https://www.macrumors.com/2021/01/02/amphetamine-app-store-removal-threat/ https://www.macrumors.com/2021/01/02/amphetamine-app-store-r...
        floatingatoll 6y ago
        I’m sad to see this outcome, but it’s kind of you to ensure that I see it again for a fourth time today. Thanks and be well.

As someone I guess not in the loop with the latest in outrage culture... what exactly is offensive about the name?

by jjcon 6y ago

As someone I guess not in the loop with the latest in outrage culture... what exactly is offensive about the name?

My issues with it stem from something unpublished in the late 90s, which is not something 'dismissable' that you can simply set aside using the negation-by-framing of 'outrage culture', so I can't offer any reply to your question. Please accept my apologies for how far off the mark my reasons are from your assumptions; perhaps another time we'll be better aligned.

ubercow13 6y ago
On the contrary, intentionally obtuse and unsubstantive references to some unpublished something-or-other, and unspecified personal objections which are claimed to be 'common sense', are pretty vapid and dismissable.
- floatingatoll 6y ago
  Noted, thanks!
jjcon 6y ago
> something unpublished in the late 90s Why should anyone care about this? I’m still confused.
- floatingatoll 6y ago
  I'm not here to help you determine whether you should care or not. That's entirely up to you. For some unknown reason you seem to care, and I certainly can't figure out why from the replies so far. As best as I can guess from the evidence available, you're looking for some vector to "No, you're wrong!" disprove some aspect of my personal view of this. This will, of course, go nowhere. I didn't submit my personal view as some sort of entry in a debate, and I'm making no effort to persuade anyone to my view. If you can't find a way to derive value or relevance from my viewpoint, other than trying to disprove it or debate it, then you'll just have to move on. I'm not going to try to pressure you, persuade you, influence you, argue with you, or otherwise make any effort to interfere with your freedoms of thought and choice. That would be inappropriate for an unsubstantiated personal view such as the one I have provided.
  - EricE 6y ago
    >I'm not here to help you determine whether you should care or not. Other than attention seeking what was the point of your original post? It certainly wasn't for dialog since you can't have a dialog unless you are willing to put all the points of discussion on the table. People are rightly puzzled by your posting because this site is about dialog - not one direction orations. That you are attempting to act "above the fray" is even more amazing.
    - floatingatoll 6y ago
      I can think of several interesting and relevant dialogues that could occur, but I also predicted that a viewpoint on this topic not couched in SSC-compatible rationality terms would be rejected and attacked by other HN commenters. Having confirmed that prediction, I’m content not to share any further details about my biasing experiences so as not to offend further, and avoid being emotionally vulnerable to y’all in the process. Or, restated, I was able to verify that the non-logical nature of my experiences and viewpoint remains intolerable within HN’s limits as a forum. I will continue to keep this in mind going forward as I have previously but it’s necessary to recheck assumptions now and then and this served that purpose acceptably.
      - jjcon 6y ago
        I think it’s pretty clear that what was being discussed was a freedom of expression issue (as a value not a law). Doesn’t matter now though cause Apple backed down and the dev noted this in his response: “We may not all agree, but I am happy we all still have the freedom to express ourselves today” I think that sums things up well https://www.macrumors.com/2021/01/02/amphetamine-app-store-removal-threat/ https://www.macrumors.com/2021/01/02/amphetamine-app-store-r...
        floatingatoll 6y ago
        I’m sad to see this outcome, but it’s kind of you to ensure that I see it again for a fourth time today. Thanks and be well.