4 ms·

> "Many people say" this because they aren't the ones with the power. No, they are saying it because they believe it. To use my prior example, they think it's

by javert 4y ago

> "Many people say" this because they aren't the ones with the power. No, they are saying it because they believe it. To use my prior example, they think it's better to transform the kind of power Dick Cheney or Bernie Sanders or Donald Trump could have, into the kind of power Bill Gates or Warren Buffett or Jeff Bezos could have. That makes a lot of sense. You can just accuse anyone you disagree with of being a hypocrite, but that's straw-manning them when you should be steel-manning them. You don't win arguments with the tactic you're using, and you don't win hearts and minds. You also don't win when you're just plain wrong, as you are in this case.

mbesto 4y ago
Big head scratch here... > You can just accuse anyone you disagree with of being a hypocrite, but that's straw-manning them when you should be steel-manning them. (1) Where did I call people hypocrites? > You don't win arguments with the tactic you're using, and you don't win hearts and minds. (2) You don't get in engage in civil discourse with people by saying things like "you're wrong" and "I'm definitely not missing the point." > You also don't win when you're just plain wrong, as you are in this case. (3) Telling people that "you're right and they are wrong" is something my 6 year old cousin does on the playground.
- javert 4y ago
  > "Many people say" this because they aren't the ones with the power. You're literally saying that here that everyone who makes the argument that bitcoin creates a positive transformation of power---which is at least tens of thousands of people---is only pretending to believe that because they want to transfer power to themselves. You are calling them all hypocrites. And I know that's wrong, because I know lots of people who actually believe this, including myself. Your argument here is not even an argument; it's not even remotely, distantly believable. Now, I suspect you don't understand your comment the way I do, which is why I'm taking the time to respond to you. But I think that's what is implied by what you have written. I'm radically dismissive of dishonest arguments, or arguments that are blatantly and obviously wrong. I don't think it's correct to respond to them as if they are real arguments. The most effective thing is just to dismiss them. Honest readers understand what you are doing. That's the most effective response. For example, if someone says "I think you missed the point," followed with a total non-sequitur, which creates a false appearance that I missed the point, when I did not miss the point, I'm going to just dismiss it out of hand, and I'm not going to discuss it. I think that's totally appropriate. You don't give people an honest, serious response when they are playing games. The 6 year old cousin analogy is apt. If someone acts like a six year old, I respond appropriately for that age. If someone acts like an adult, I respond appropriately for an adult. By the way, I'm not rude. I'm never rude. Saying "I didn't miss the point" is the most polite thing you can say to the kind of blatantly wrong comment I got in that instance. All it really signals is that I disagree with what was said and don't want to discuss it further. That is fair.
  - mbesto 4y ago
    > The most effective thing is just to dismiss them. Honest readers understand what you are doing. That's the most effective response. So then just don't respond to me...? This is the weirdest overall response I think I've read on HN. Probably explains the "I'm not a troll." disclaimer. Anyway, have a good day.
    - javert 4y ago
      > So then just don't respond to me...? This comes across as an admission that your earlier comment was not genuine, but I can't believe you actually mean that. It's also gross behavior, because you've encouraged me to enter into a conversation with you and then blamed me for doing it and walked away. There is nothing weird about anything I've said in this conversation about proper forum interaction. I've gone to great pains to explain my perfectly normal forum behavior to you, which you raised a nit pick objection about. You are the one who casually thousands of people of hypocrisy without appearing to be aware of it. Accusing me of weird behavior is completely missing the mark. No, this conversation doesn't explain the disclaimer on my profile. The disclaimer is there because I'm often outside the Overton window of much of the Silicon Valley crowd. I don't think that's the case in this particular conversation.

by javert 4y ago

mbesto 4y ago

Big head scratch here... > You can just accuse anyone you disagree with of being a hypocrite, but that's straw-manning them when you should be steel-manning them. (1) Where did I call people hypocrites? > You don't win arguments with the tactic you're using, and you don't win hearts and minds. (2) You don't get in engage in civil discourse with people by saying things like "you're wrong" and "I'm definitely not missing the point." > You also don't win when you're just plain wrong, as you are in this case. (3) Telling people that "you're right and they are wrong" is something my 6 year old cousin does on the playground.

javert 4y ago
> "Many people say" this because they aren't the ones with the power. You're literally saying that here that everyone who makes the argument that bitcoin creates a positive transformation of power---which is at least tens of thousands of people---is only pretending to believe that because they want to transfer power to themselves. You are calling them all hypocrites. And I know that's wrong, because I know lots of people who actually believe this, including myself. Your argument here is not even an argument; it's not even remotely, distantly believable. Now, I suspect you don't understand your comment the way I do, which is why I'm taking the time to respond to you. But I think that's what is implied by what you have written. I'm radically dismissive of dishonest arguments, or arguments that are blatantly and obviously wrong. I don't think it's correct to respond to them as if they are real arguments. The most effective thing is just to dismiss them. Honest readers understand what you are doing. That's the most effective response. For example, if someone says "I think you missed the point," followed with a total non-sequitur, which creates a false appearance that I missed the point, when I did not miss the point, I'm going to just dismiss it out of hand, and I'm not going to discuss it. I think that's totally appropriate. You don't give people an honest, serious response when they are playing games. The 6 year old cousin analogy is apt. If someone acts like a six year old, I respond appropriately for that age. If someone acts like an adult, I respond appropriately for an adult. By the way, I'm not rude. I'm never rude. Saying "I didn't miss the point" is the most polite thing you can say to the kind of blatantly wrong comment I got in that instance. All it really signals is that I disagree with what was said and don't want to discuss it further. That is fair.
- mbesto 4y ago
  > The most effective thing is just to dismiss them. Honest readers understand what you are doing. That's the most effective response. So then just don't respond to me...? This is the weirdest overall response I think I've read on HN. Probably explains the "I'm not a troll." disclaimer. Anyway, have a good day.
  - javert 4y ago
    > So then just don't respond to me...? This comes across as an admission that your earlier comment was not genuine, but I can't believe you actually mean that. It's also gross behavior, because you've encouraged me to enter into a conversation with you and then blamed me for doing it and walked away. There is nothing weird about anything I've said in this conversation about proper forum interaction. I've gone to great pains to explain my perfectly normal forum behavior to you, which you raised a nit pick objection about. You are the one who casually thousands of people of hypocrisy without appearing to be aware of it. Accusing me of weird behavior is completely missing the mark. No, this conversation doesn't explain the disclaimer on my profile. The disclaimer is there because I'm often outside the Overton window of much of the Silicon Valley crowd. I don't think that's the case in this particular conversation.