4 ms·

I hate so much this "repetition into conformity" thing. Making someone to repeat a "credo" is a known trick for installing beliefs into other peoples mind witho

I hate so much this "repetition into conformity" thing. Making someone to repeat a "credo" is a known trick for installing beliefs into other peoples mind without them realizing that the "free", "peoples though" are orchestrated by the key members in the group. This is "how to become sheep 101". I don't like financial abusers but putting this people on power, assemblies in witch "everybody is equal", so experienced, documented and common sense advice is ignored, but with "some people more equal than others"(read Orwell books that talk about what Orwell himself lived) is the worse that could happen to America, Europe, or any other country.

joejohnson 15y ago
How are you getting "repetition into conformity" from the link?
- sp332 15y ago
  The "speaker" says something, then people a little distance away repeat the message so that those further away can hear what was said. GP's point is that most people will hear each statement repeated several times, by multiple people. This has strong psychological effects.
tiles 15y ago
The "People's Mic" isn't about repetition or credos at all. It's about emulating the effects of a wired PA system where none exists, with the added benefit that it has the force of dozens or hundreds of people joining in and adding their weight behind the speaker's sentiment. If a single speaker were talking to an Occupy gathering and had a speaker system behind him, it would be just as representative of their goals. It's a low-tech solution, and the linked article is also a relatively low-tech solution. Pretty cool.
- sp332 15y ago
  I don't understand your post. A PA system adds 0 weight behind a speaker's sentiment. Well, maybe a little bit because they're louder, plus a little because someone decided to give them a mike. But if dozens of people repeat the message, it adds a lot of weight to the sentiment. This is a downside, since it's obviously not the case that each person in the system will critically evaluate what is being said before repeating it. But they are still adding to the psychological "weight" of the statement.
  - morsch 15y ago
    I think you're overstating the psychological effects and underestimate the self-controlling influence of needing other people to repeat what you say. A single raving lunatic with a PA can cause a lot of stress in a gathering, it's almost impossible to shut him or her up. OTOH if you rely on Mic Check, people will simply stop repeating what you're saying if you're an ass or even if you can't stop rambling.
    - sp332 15y ago
      A raving lunatic with a PA isn't likely to convince anyone. But a reasonable-sounding person can recite a few lines, and with a bunch of people repeating him, can convince a crowd of a lot of nonsense. Repeated information, especially from multiple sources, is much more convincing and can break down a person's critical reasoning abilities much more easily than a raving lunatic.

joejohnson 15y ago

How are you getting "repetition into conformity" from the link?

sp332 15y ago
The "speaker" says something, then people a little distance away repeat the message so that those further away can hear what was said. GP's point is that most people will hear each statement repeated several times, by multiple people. This has strong psychological effects.

tiles 15y ago

The "People's Mic" isn't about repetition or credos at all. It's about emulating the effects of a wired PA system where none exists, with the added benefit that it has the force of dozens or hundreds of people joining in and adding their weight behind the speaker's sentiment. If a single speaker were talking to an Occupy gathering and had a speaker system behind him, it would be just as representative of their goals. It's a low-tech solution, and the linked article is also a relatively low-tech solution. Pretty cool.

sp332 15y ago
I don't understand your post. A PA system adds 0 weight behind a speaker's sentiment. Well, maybe a little bit because they're louder, plus a little because someone decided to give them a mike. But if dozens of people repeat the message, it adds a lot of weight to the sentiment. This is a downside, since it's obviously not the case that each person in the system will critically evaluate what is being said before repeating it. But they are still adding to the psychological "weight" of the statement.
- morsch 15y ago
  I think you're overstating the psychological effects and underestimate the self-controlling influence of needing other people to repeat what you say. A single raving lunatic with a PA can cause a lot of stress in a gathering, it's almost impossible to shut him or her up. OTOH if you rely on Mic Check, people will simply stop repeating what you're saying if you're an ass or even if you can't stop rambling.
  - sp332 15y ago
    A raving lunatic with a PA isn't likely to convince anyone. But a reasonable-sounding person can recite a few lines, and with a bunch of people repeating him, can convince a crowd of a lot of nonsense. Repeated information, especially from multiple sources, is much more convincing and can break down a person's critical reasoning abilities much more easily than a raving lunatic.