3 ms·

> At least three people you’re responding to here don’t see how Intel is being “woke” in any pejorative sense. That's because they (claim to) not know what it

> At least three people you’re responding to here don’t see how Intel is being “woke” in any pejorative sense. That's because they (claim to) not know what it means and are unwilling or incapable of finding out. And your hypotheses are laughable. My hypotheses is that they are based on nothing but an infantile emotional reaction to somebody using the word woke, which is now well entrenched in common vernacular whether you like it or not. EDIT: You can see the deleted comment if you change your settings.

ben_w 5y ago
> That's because they (claim to) not know what it means and are unwilling or incapable of finding out. The definitions which you yourself have given, lead to my hypotheses. The fact you are digging in, using insults like “infantile” when you’re being given the chance to supply an alternative, actually makes me think worse — I always prefer to assume good faith, and in this case good faith was to assume you didn’t realise what you look like to others. Hence showing you and asking you to do better. All it would have taken to not lead to me thinking you’re using “woke” as an insult rather than an actual description would be for you to, y’know, not be snarky.
- throwawaylinux 5y ago
  You assume good faith in hypothesizing I'm fine with genocide. You're a laugh a minute. Lashing out like a toddler having a tantrum doesn't change meanings of words, sorry.
  - ben_w 5y ago
    To communicate is to put thoughts into someone else's head. Those thoughts — and one of those options was that there isn’t a genocide — were what your words put into mine. I want to think better of you than that, which is why I keep asking you to do better, even though from my point of you it’s you that is lashing out. If someone misunderstands me as badly as you say I’ve misunderstood you, my general response is of the pattern “oh no that’s not what I meant, what I meant was…”, but I can’t fill that ellipsis in for you. But if you don't care to, I'm not going to push it. My fursona isn't a sealion, if you get the reference. Happy holidays.

ben_w 5y ago

> That's because they (claim to) not know what it means and are unwilling or incapable of finding out. The definitions which you yourself have given, lead to my hypotheses. The fact you are digging in, using insults like “infantile” when you’re being given the chance to supply an alternative, actually makes me think worse — I always prefer to assume good faith, and in this case good faith was to assume you didn’t realise what you look like to others. Hence showing you and asking you to do better. All it would have taken to not lead to me thinking you’re using “woke” as an insult rather than an actual description would be for you to, y’know, not be snarky.

throwawaylinux 5y ago
You assume good faith in hypothesizing I'm fine with genocide. You're a laugh a minute. Lashing out like a toddler having a tantrum doesn't change meanings of words, sorry.
- ben_w 5y ago
  To communicate is to put thoughts into someone else's head. Those thoughts — and one of those options was that there isn’t a genocide — were what your words put into mine. I want to think better of you than that, which is why I keep asking you to do better, even though from my point of you it’s you that is lashing out. If someone misunderstands me as badly as you say I’ve misunderstood you, my general response is of the pattern “oh no that’s not what I meant, what I meant was…”, but I can’t fill that ellipsis in for you. But if you don't care to, I'm not going to push it. My fursona isn't a sealion, if you get the reference. Happy holidays.