3 ms·

"a call-out" is a very distinct entity from "being called out". Nobody was calling you out; rather, Dan made a particular point that the author appreciated bein

by Twisol 5y ago

"a call-out" is a very distinct entity from "being called out". Nobody was calling you out; rather, Dan made a particular point that the author appreciated being raised.

zepto 5y ago
> a call-out" is a very distinct entity from "being called out". Sometimes, sometimes not. It depends on the context. This is atypical behavior for HN. > Nobody was calling you out; rather, Dan made a particular point that the author appreciated being raised. You don’t actually know this. It’s one viewpoint on what was happening.
- Twisol 5y ago
  > You don’t actually know this. Then we can be overly confident together, without acrimony, in our readings of somebody else's words.
  - zepto 5y ago
    Can we? Why did you feel the need to correct me on what was happening? Does it make the discussion more substantive?
    - Twisol 5y ago
      It's painful to see such frustration between people who are all trying to make themselves understood. I hoped you would be relieved with the possibility that you weren't being personally attacked. I don't really care whether you're correct or not; I care that you are heard.
      - zepto 5y ago
        Ok - I appreciate that motivation and believe you. The impact however was the opposite, since it just seemed like an attempt to contradict my perceptions. I also felt less heard since most of my comment wasn’t even about the ‘call out’ part, and for me that was over once Dan clarified his intentions. Note that Dan acknowledged that the author might be being defensive.
        Twisol 5y ago
        > I also feel less heard since most of my comment wasn’t even about the ‘call out’ part I totally get that. Not to belabor the point, but I think the original author probably feels much the same about some of the other criticisms being shared on HN. It's hard to engage with a whole work when there are particular highlights that hit you the wrong way. I'd like to hope that a shared understanding of what "call out" might mean will help everybody move past it to appreciate the rest of what you're trying to share. > The impact however was the opposite, since it just seemed like an attempt to contradict my perceptions. I'll take that on board; I'm still on my own personal journey of relating to people effectively.
        zepto 5y ago
        Re: call out. I think part of the issue is that chiming in to voice support for someone who is arguing on your behalf without adding any content automatically creates a ‘ganging up’ situation, so even if they hadn’t used the phrase “call out”, it would still have been an issue. Re: engaging with the whole work. The piece as a whole doesn’t contain anything I haven’t seen before in autistic advocacy. I agree with a bunch of it, although it’s hard to get a lot of people to understand the double empathy problem. So, the parts that are going to be critiqued are the parts that have conceptual issues - e.g. the two cultures problem idea, which is not universally shared amongst autistic people.
        mbilokonsky 5y ago
        For what it's worth, I meant "thank you for pointing out the arguments that I would have otherwise had to do the work of pointing out." The phrase "call out" isn't a universal dog whistle for bogey men to come drag you to the gulag for wrongthink. Your reaction to it has been exhausting.
        zepto 5y ago
        > The phrase "call out" isn't a universal dog whistle for bogey men to come drag you to the gulag for wrongthink. Your reaction to it has been exhausting. Once again you are completely out of line with the site guidelines. There is a reason your comments are getting flagged. Please take a look at them. This isn’t twitter. HN has its own culture which you seem not to understand.

by Twisol 5y ago

"a call-out" is a very distinct entity from "being called out". Nobody was calling you out; rather, Dan made a particular point that the author appreciated being raised.

zepto 5y ago

> a call-out" is a very distinct entity from "being called out". Sometimes, sometimes not. It depends on the context. This is atypical behavior for HN. > Nobody was calling you out; rather, Dan made a particular point that the author appreciated being raised. You don’t actually know this. It’s one viewpoint on what was happening.

Twisol 5y ago
> You don’t actually know this. Then we can be overly confident together, without acrimony, in our readings of somebody else's words.
- zepto 5y ago
  Can we? Why did you feel the need to correct me on what was happening? Does it make the discussion more substantive?
  - Twisol 5y ago
    It's painful to see such frustration between people who are all trying to make themselves understood. I hoped you would be relieved with the possibility that you weren't being personally attacked. I don't really care whether you're correct or not; I care that you are heard.
    - zepto 5y ago
      Ok - I appreciate that motivation and believe you. The impact however was the opposite, since it just seemed like an attempt to contradict my perceptions. I also felt less heard since most of my comment wasn’t even about the ‘call out’ part, and for me that was over once Dan clarified his intentions. Note that Dan acknowledged that the author might be being defensive.
      - Twisol 5y ago
        > I also feel less heard since most of my comment wasn’t even about the ‘call out’ part I totally get that. Not to belabor the point, but I think the original author probably feels much the same about some of the other criticisms being shared on HN. It's hard to engage with a whole work when there are particular highlights that hit you the wrong way. I'd like to hope that a shared understanding of what "call out" might mean will help everybody move past it to appreciate the rest of what you're trying to share. > The impact however was the opposite, since it just seemed like an attempt to contradict my perceptions. I'll take that on board; I'm still on my own personal journey of relating to people effectively.
        zepto 5y ago
        Re: call out. I think part of the issue is that chiming in to voice support for someone who is arguing on your behalf without adding any content automatically creates a ‘ganging up’ situation, so even if they hadn’t used the phrase “call out”, it would still have been an issue. Re: engaging with the whole work. The piece as a whole doesn’t contain anything I haven’t seen before in autistic advocacy. I agree with a bunch of it, although it’s hard to get a lot of people to understand the double empathy problem. So, the parts that are going to be critiqued are the parts that have conceptual issues - e.g. the two cultures problem idea, which is not universally shared amongst autistic people.
        mbilokonsky 5y ago
        For what it's worth, I meant "thank you for pointing out the arguments that I would have otherwise had to do the work of pointing out." The phrase "call out" isn't a universal dog whistle for bogey men to come drag you to the gulag for wrongthink. Your reaction to it has been exhausting.
        zepto 5y ago
        > The phrase "call out" isn't a universal dog whistle for bogey men to come drag you to the gulag for wrongthink. Your reaction to it has been exhausting. Once again you are completely out of line with the site guidelines. There is a reason your comments are getting flagged. Please take a look at them. This isn’t twitter. HN has its own culture which you seem not to understand.