3 ms·

Who says your quote on the bottom doesn't describe you on the side you didn't intend to be on? Every time there's any political news, all I can see is people c

Who says your quote on the bottom doesn't describe you on the side you didn't intend to be on? Every time there's any political news, all I can see is people complaining about "shriekers". Have you considered that complaint in itself might be considered the "shrieking" you so despise?

dabbledash 4y ago
I guess it's possible i've been sending outraged missives to Hulu in my sleep, but I don't think so.
- malermeister 4y ago
  Seems to me you left one right here though. You might not consider it as such, but I'm sure neither did the people you complained about.
  - registeredcorn 4y ago
    So essentially, the problem you're addressing is not whether either side is "shrieking" but rather the inadequacy of conveying tone through text. WE CAN A LITTLE BIT I GUESS!?!!!?!?!! But not by much. Never been a fan of English because of the lack of overt tonal expression; with gusto.
_ea1k 4y ago
Its funny that you say that. I initially read his comment as being in favor of the move, despite the "shriekers" on twitter who he perceives to care too much about fairly mundane details of Disney's revenue model. Now I realize that its also possible that the "shriekers" were in favor of political ads and he's against them. Yeah, both sides look shriek-tastic to me.
BitwiseFool 4y ago
>"Have you considered that complaint in itself might be considered the "shrieking" you so despise?" No. In fact I see this as a very underhanded rhetorical cheap trick - essentially a catch-22. Only on the most basic level is criticism of critical people some kind of hypocritical indictment. 'You say you don't like people taking things too seriously, yet it sounds like YOU are the one taking things too seriously. Curious'.
- malermeister 4y ago
  It seems to me like you (and OP) are trying to police what is and what isn't acceptable criticism. Why is criticism of company policies "shrieking", but criticism of criticism not? Or to go a level further, why is my criticism of his criticism of their criticism a "rhetorical cheap trick", but your criticism to the power of four presumably legitimate? Is this fifth level of criticism a "rhetorical trick"/"shrieking" too? And will your potential riposte be legitimate again?
  - BitwiseFool 4y ago
    From what I have gleaned from the posts made by the so-called 'shriekers' on Twitter, their style is to post and react in hyperbolic and pearl-clutching way. To be worried about something is one thing, to be gravely concerned is another, but it seems like such people routinely catastrophize and grandstand on issues that the average person would not consider that serious. I suspect this is because there is a feedback loop due to the way engagement works on social media. I like your perspective of criticism to a power/derivative level, but that's not the angle I'm trying to come from. Rather, I am saying the nature of the criticism is what distinguishes between the two.
    - malermeister 4y ago
      I must admit, I'm not really a Twitter user and can't speak to the comments made there. I do, however, read HN and every time a company changes policy due to some outrage, the first comment is always somebody saying something along the lines of what OP was saying. That, to me, is just as annoying as I'm sure the original outrage was to OP. It's a low-effort rant about society and how it budges to spammy complaints without seeing the irony of being a spammy complaint itself. I don't think the nature is fundamentally different and that might be where we disagree.
      - BitwiseFool 4y ago
        >"That, to me, is just as annoying as I'm sure the original outrage was to OP. It's a low-effort rant about society and how it budges to spammy complaints without seeing the irony of being a spammy complaint itself." Understandable. And to be honest I'm increasingly fatigued in relation to what discourse has become. You had mentioned earlier that I was trying to police what is and isn't acceptable criticism, and in a way you're right. I would like to see a lot less hyperbolic pearl-clutching sophistry. But the downside is that trying to confront the use of such rhetoric is sadly perceived as negative or equivalent.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

dabbledash 4y ago

I guess it's possible i've been sending outraged missives to Hulu in my sleep, but I don't think so.

malermeister 4y ago
Seems to me you left one right here though. You might not consider it as such, but I'm sure neither did the people you complained about.
- registeredcorn 4y ago
  So essentially, the problem you're addressing is not whether either side is "shrieking" but rather the inadequacy of conveying tone through text. WE CAN A LITTLE BIT I GUESS!?!!!?!?!! But not by much. Never been a fan of English because of the lack of overt tonal expression; with gusto.

_ea1k 4y ago

Its funny that you say that. I initially read his comment as being in favor of the move, despite the "shriekers" on twitter who he perceives to care too much about fairly mundane details of Disney's revenue model. Now I realize that its also possible that the "shriekers" were in favor of political ads and he's against them. Yeah, both sides look shriek-tastic to me.

BitwiseFool 4y ago

>"Have you considered that complaint in itself might be considered the "shrieking" you so despise?" No. In fact I see this as a very underhanded rhetorical cheap trick - essentially a catch-22. Only on the most basic level is criticism of critical people some kind of hypocritical indictment. 'You say you don't like people taking things too seriously, yet it sounds like YOU are the one taking things too seriously. Curious'.

malermeister 4y ago
It seems to me like you (and OP) are trying to police what is and what isn't acceptable criticism. Why is criticism of company policies "shrieking", but criticism of criticism not? Or to go a level further, why is my criticism of his criticism of their criticism a "rhetorical cheap trick", but your criticism to the power of four presumably legitimate? Is this fifth level of criticism a "rhetorical trick"/"shrieking" too? And will your potential riposte be legitimate again?
- BitwiseFool 4y ago
  From what I have gleaned from the posts made by the so-called 'shriekers' on Twitter, their style is to post and react in hyperbolic and pearl-clutching way. To be worried about something is one thing, to be gravely concerned is another, but it seems like such people routinely catastrophize and grandstand on issues that the average person would not consider that serious. I suspect this is because there is a feedback loop due to the way engagement works on social media. I like your perspective of criticism to a power/derivative level, but that's not the angle I'm trying to come from. Rather, I am saying the nature of the criticism is what distinguishes between the two.
  - malermeister 4y ago
    I must admit, I'm not really a Twitter user and can't speak to the comments made there. I do, however, read HN and every time a company changes policy due to some outrage, the first comment is always somebody saying something along the lines of what OP was saying. That, to me, is just as annoying as I'm sure the original outrage was to OP. It's a low-effort rant about society and how it budges to spammy complaints without seeing the irony of being a spammy complaint itself. I don't think the nature is fundamentally different and that might be where we disagree.
    - BitwiseFool 4y ago
      >"That, to me, is just as annoying as I'm sure the original outrage was to OP. It's a low-effort rant about society and how it budges to spammy complaints without seeing the irony of being a spammy complaint itself." Understandable. And to be honest I'm increasingly fatigued in relation to what discourse has become. You had mentioned earlier that I was trying to police what is and isn't acceptable criticism, and in a way you're right. I would like to see a lot less hyperbolic pearl-clutching sophistry. But the downside is that trying to confront the use of such rhetoric is sadly perceived as negative or equivalent.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]