5 ms·

Where I chose to clearly express my opinion, you chose to be extremely rude and dismissive. Who's really trolling?

by k33n 15y ago

davidw 15y ago
My opinion is that a white guy (you: https://twitter.com/#!/mikekeen https://twitter.com/#!/mikekeen ) saying that people getting upset about racism are 'backwards' is either mind-boggling insensitive or out and out trolling. Nothing rude about it - that's how I see it. I can accept people saying "luckily, in this day and age, I think it's not so much of a problem" as something up for debate, but to state that those angered by discrimination are "backwards" and "just like the racists" is one of the most vile comments I have ever read here.
- k33n 15y ago
  davidw, If you think your last comment was in the spirit of respectful debate then you should go back and re-read it a few times. If you don't want to respect my opinion, that is not my problem. Racism is irrelevant. Racists are irrelevant. Society doesn't take them seriously. Racists would have zero power over anyone if nobody took their actions or words seriously. Someone doesn't want to give you a job because they are racist? Their loss. Move on. Would you really want to work for someone like that anyway?
  - davidw 15y ago
    I do not believe your comment was worthy of respect, frankly. If you'd started with your comment above saying that "racism is irrelevant", perhaps I'd have called it a bit naive, but taken no offense. To make the connection between people incensed by discrimination to those who perpetrate it is very, very offensive. Racism is very much relevant as long as people have power over other people (which is part and parcel of all complex societies), be it political or economic. You can't disregard someone not selling you a house or giving you a job or letting you marry who you wish, or burning a cross on your lawn. Are things better these days? Certainly! Is racism a non-issue? I don't think so. Are people like Brad Feld, who get angry about discrimination "backwards"? Hell no!
    - chernevik 15y ago
      The "racist" tag has become a contemporary excommunication. That might be good were it always applied accurately. But perhaps the diligence of a Soledad O'Brien, interested more in arresting video than strict fairness to subject, makes the tag something very dangerous. There was a day when people thought witches necessarily worse than the people who spotted witches. Go look at how that turned out. But of course you and yours wouldn't be so stupid and unfair. HELLO DOWN-VOTERS. Why bother framing a response when you can just misuse a forum moderation tool? It's intelligence of a kind . . .
      - davidw 15y ago
        Due to its seriousness, it certainly is not a label to be bandied about lightly, but that's entirely besides the point in this case. I was talking about whether people who get offended at actual, real cases of racism are "backwards" or not.
- oldcigarette 15y ago
  What does his being white have to do with anything? I smell racismz
- gizmo 15y ago
  So his opinion should be dismissed 'cuz he's white? It's a topic where white people aren't allowed to talk about, except if we wish to talk in politically correct platitudes? I agree with you that racism is still a real problem and that k33n's comment seems somewhat out of touch. However, what you say is tantamount to "shut up because you're white", and that's not cool either. You actually went to the trouble of looking up his race in order to make your point. Think about that for a second. You looked up his race in order make a judgement about what he wrote. Didn't your irony detectors go off at that point?
  - davidw 15y ago
    I didn't say "shut up because you're white". I said that someone who, in the US, is not likely to be the victim of much discrimination due to the color of his skin should have a little bit more respect for those who are, and those, in general, who are angered by discrimination. Saying he doesn't think racism is an issue is one thing, calling people who are victims of it 'backwards' is galling.
    - gizmo 15y ago
      It is tantamount to "shut up". That's what I said. You dismissed his point of view because of his skin color. You looked up his race and based your opinion on him based on that. Had he been of black or asian descent you wouldn't have made the argument you made. You even acknowledge this. You wanted to make an argument but you quickly had to look up if his race matched your preconceived notions about his race because otherwise your argument wouldn't have been valid. On the internet. I don't know how to spell this out further. Are you really this obtuse?
      - davidw 15y ago
        I would have been equally offended had he been black or asian. I didn't look at his profile until after my first response to him, and I looked because I was curious if I really was interacting with someone who was simply trolling for fun.
  - k33n 15y ago
- wpietri 15y ago
  I see you're taking some heat for this comment, but I agree entirely. Trolling seems the more polite interpretation, because otherwise you'd be accusing somebody of levels of ignorance and arrogance that are mind-boggling to me. Racism does of course exist and is a problem. There's a ton of research on this. Here's a good place to start: http://www.projectimplicit.net/media.php http://www.projectimplicit.net/media.php http://www.projectimplicit.net/articles.php http://www.projectimplicit.net/articles.php But one great example is a study where they sent out the same resumes with different names at the top; some sounded black and some sounded white. The "black" resumes got significantly fewer callbacks, and on "black" resumes increases in skill and experience mattered significantly less: http://www.chicagobooth.edu/capideas/spring03/racialbias.html http://www.chicagobooth.edu/capideas/spring03/racialbias.htm...
  - stonemetal 15y ago
    some sounded black and some sounded white. The research on what people name their children shows very little racial correlation after controlling for wealth. Though it does show high correlation with wealth and status. So showing a bias against names poor people choose regardless of race then claiming it is about blacks is poor form.
    - wpietri 15y ago
      If you're curious about their particular experimental design, you can read the paper here: http://www.chicagobooth.edu/pdf/bertrand.pdf http://www.chicagobooth.edu/pdf/bertrand.pdf

Where I chose to clearly express my opinion, you chose to be extremely rude and dismissive. Who's really trolling?

by k33n 15y ago

Where I chose to clearly express my opinion, you chose to be extremely rude and dismissive. Who's really trolling?

My opinion is that a white guy (you: https://twitter.com/#!/mikekeen https://twitter.com/#!/mikekeen ) saying that people getting upset about racism are 'backwards' is either mind-boggling insensitive or out and out trolling. Nothing rude about it - that's how I see it. I can accept people saying "luckily, in this day and age, I think it's not so much of a problem" as something up for debate, but to state that those angered by discrimination are "backwards" and "just like the racists" is one of the most vile comments I have ever read here.

k33n 15y ago
davidw, If you think your last comment was in the spirit of respectful debate then you should go back and re-read it a few times. If you don't want to respect my opinion, that is not my problem. Racism is irrelevant. Racists are irrelevant. Society doesn't take them seriously. Racists would have zero power over anyone if nobody took their actions or words seriously. Someone doesn't want to give you a job because they are racist? Their loss. Move on. Would you really want to work for someone like that anyway?
- davidw 15y ago
  I do not believe your comment was worthy of respect, frankly. If you'd started with your comment above saying that "racism is irrelevant", perhaps I'd have called it a bit naive, but taken no offense. To make the connection between people incensed by discrimination to those who perpetrate it is very, very offensive. Racism is very much relevant as long as people have power over other people (which is part and parcel of all complex societies), be it political or economic. You can't disregard someone not selling you a house or giving you a job or letting you marry who you wish, or burning a cross on your lawn. Are things better these days? Certainly! Is racism a non-issue? I don't think so. Are people like Brad Feld, who get angry about discrimination "backwards"? Hell no!
  - chernevik 15y ago
    The "racist" tag has become a contemporary excommunication. That might be good were it always applied accurately. But perhaps the diligence of a Soledad O'Brien, interested more in arresting video than strict fairness to subject, makes the tag something very dangerous. There was a day when people thought witches necessarily worse than the people who spotted witches. Go look at how that turned out. But of course you and yours wouldn't be so stupid and unfair. HELLO DOWN-VOTERS. Why bother framing a response when you can just misuse a forum moderation tool? It's intelligence of a kind . . .
    - davidw 15y ago
      Due to its seriousness, it certainly is not a label to be bandied about lightly, but that's entirely besides the point in this case. I was talking about whether people who get offended at actual, real cases of racism are "backwards" or not.
oldcigarette 15y ago
What does his being white have to do with anything? I smell racismz
gizmo 15y ago
So his opinion should be dismissed 'cuz he's white? It's a topic where white people aren't allowed to talk about, except if we wish to talk in politically correct platitudes? I agree with you that racism is still a real problem and that k33n's comment seems somewhat out of touch. However, what you say is tantamount to "shut up because you're white", and that's not cool either. You actually went to the trouble of looking up his race in order to make your point. Think about that for a second. You looked up his race in order make a judgement about what he wrote. Didn't your irony detectors go off at that point?
- davidw 15y ago
  I didn't say "shut up because you're white". I said that someone who, in the US, is not likely to be the victim of much discrimination due to the color of his skin should have a little bit more respect for those who are, and those, in general, who are angered by discrimination. Saying he doesn't think racism is an issue is one thing, calling people who are victims of it 'backwards' is galling.
  - gizmo 15y ago
    It is tantamount to "shut up". That's what I said. You dismissed his point of view because of his skin color. You looked up his race and based your opinion on him based on that. Had he been of black or asian descent you wouldn't have made the argument you made. You even acknowledge this. You wanted to make an argument but you quickly had to look up if his race matched your preconceived notions about his race because otherwise your argument wouldn't have been valid. On the internet. I don't know how to spell this out further. Are you really this obtuse?
    - davidw 15y ago
      I would have been equally offended had he been black or asian. I didn't look at his profile until after my first response to him, and I looked because I was curious if I really was interacting with someone who was simply trolling for fun.
- k33n 15y ago
wpietri 15y ago
I see you're taking some heat for this comment, but I agree entirely. Trolling seems the more polite interpretation, because otherwise you'd be accusing somebody of levels of ignorance and arrogance that are mind-boggling to me. Racism does of course exist and is a problem. There's a ton of research on this. Here's a good place to start: http://www.projectimplicit.net/media.php http://www.projectimplicit.net/media.php http://www.projectimplicit.net/articles.php http://www.projectimplicit.net/articles.php But one great example is a study where they sent out the same resumes with different names at the top; some sounded black and some sounded white. The "black" resumes got significantly fewer callbacks, and on "black" resumes increases in skill and experience mattered significantly less: http://www.chicagobooth.edu/capideas/spring03/racialbias.html http://www.chicagobooth.edu/capideas/spring03/racialbias.htm...
- stonemetal 15y ago
  some sounded black and some sounded white. The research on what people name their children shows very little racial correlation after controlling for wealth. Though it does show high correlation with wealth and status. So showing a bias against names poor people choose regardless of race then claiming it is about blacks is poor form.
  - wpietri 15y ago
    If you're curious about their particular experimental design, you can read the paper here: http://www.chicagobooth.edu/pdf/bertrand.pdf http://www.chicagobooth.edu/pdf/bertrand.pdf