3 ms·

Wow. Not sure I want to even try replying to this uninformed mess of a comment. I’ve never been more sure of the sad HN bubble.

• rendall 5y ago
  > They’re reporting on the increase in evil activities by anti-environmental mega corps Is there an increase, though? The BBC has sadly become known to be rather loose with facts. The answer to the upstream question here would let us know if there is an increase and what kind. Absolute? Relative? How big of a problem is this, really, or is it more of the BBC fomenting noise and anxiety for clicks. We're trying to get information to understand the world better. People who run around insisting that x piece of information is irrelevant and how dare you ask either don't understand the question or have something to hide
  • yunohn 5y ago
    You know what? Sure, let’s assume the BBC is “FUDing for clicks”. We’ll ignore the source report, and general common sense. Do you think that these murders (as stable or as decreasing as you believe them to be) should not be reported on? And that your statistical skills somehow matter to the real world activists dying?
    • rendall 5y ago
      > Do you think that these murders (as stable or as decreasing as you believe them to be) should not be reported on? Personally, I don't like this kind of discourse. It gets people excited, anxious, and not thinking clearly, as intended. That would be ok with me maybe, if there ever were some good results from that (e.g. effective environmental control, or good legislation), but there never, ever is. I could go through and answer your questions as if we were talking for real, but your response is kind of a poison pill, designed to put me on the defensive ("Oh, of course I didn't mean...") No. The adults in the room do need to know if activists are being murdered at an ever increasing rate, or if we can devote our limited time and attention to other very important matters. We don't like to be guided to the "proper" opinion by people who will shout But it's murder, you cold-hearted nerd! if we go off track and ask for accurate information
      • yunohn 5y ago
        Effectively you’re saying that a status quo of stable-percentage murders is okay. I (and others on this post) are saying that any non-zero percentage is bad. So I guess we fundamentally disagree then.
        • rendall 5y ago
          The article premise was not "Environmental Activists continue to be murdered at a rate higher than the general populace". It instead implies that it is an increasing problem, without giving us the tools to evaluate the claim or understand the scope of the problem. If you want to accept such claims as true, go ahead. That practice won't arm you to understand your world better, but will instead make you excitable and easily swayed.
        • kodah 5y ago
          Nobody thinks murder is okay, and if this is the way you conduct discourse you're probably working against your own goals. There is a lot more behind a statistic than just a number or trend-line, one which often requires single or multiple policy changes that could take years. So yes, observing that the trend line goes and keeps going down is good, a sharp rise is a cause for concern. That is not the same thing, at all, as thinking the status quo is just fine.
          • rendall 5y ago
            Well stated.
    • djbebs 5y ago
      There is a diference between reporting and propaganda
      • yunohn 5y ago
        And what’s the propaganda according to you? What’s the goal, and who’s pushing it via the BBC?