4 ms·
> every thread on this topic turns into a flame war with a bunch of people crying racism/religionism Isn't that the first step in the flame war, attacking, dis
by wolverine876 4y ago
> every thread on this topic turns into a flame war with a bunch of people crying racism/religionism
Isn't that the first step in the flame war, attacking, dismissing, and blaming one side (and before they even say something)? How will someone with a good faith interest in discussing concerns about racism or religionism act, seeing this comment - they will feel shut down, and like they won't be heard and will be attacked. There's already no room for those discussions.
There is a lack of trust - a situation that is the goal of people trying to disrupt open societies and the trolls that help them. Whatever we say or do, the primary goal needs to be to build trust. People who are alarmed act badly - that's why trolls try to alarm people (even if they aren't quite conscious of how it works). Even when people are acting badly, if you can build their trust then very often the situation will improve.
It would be extremely valuable to society to find a way to conduct constructive conversations; I think we are improving, but not nearly quickly enough.
- ReactiveJelly 4y ago> It would be extremely valuable to society to find a way to conduct constructive conversations It's tough. I mean this sincerely - It requires heavy moderation. The government can uphold a free speech ideal, but the good conversations happen in bubbles where someone can't create a burner account and start talking shit as loud as anyone else. Some years ago, Christopher Hitchens gave a talk about free speech. It's very compelling. Nobody yelled "FIRST!" over him, cause it wasn't an Internet comment thread. Maybe we should distinguish between free speech and "free-for-all" speech. I'll listen to Hitchens saying we have the Right To Read about Holocaust deniers, but I don't want any given thread to be over-run by the same Holocaust deniers.