5 ms·

"I've inferred 90% of a word you didn't write. Verdict is you're racist."

ceejayoz 4y ago
Again, there’s more alleged than just the “n” thing; screenshots of Rimworld titled “Auschwitz”, modding the game by race, mockery of the George Floyd protests. Sometimes we infer things from a combination of evidence.
- donkeyd 4y ago
  > Sometimes we infer things from a combination of evidence. People seem unable to do this. They want to see all of these examples as unrelated things that coincidentally can all be considered racist by wokies. To me, it's a case of walking and swimming and talking like a duck.
- gitfan86 4y ago
  Which ironically is how white people during the Jim Crow era in the south decided guilt vs innocence of black people accused of crimes. No real evidence just assumptions of circumstances based off of the person's skin color.
  - ceejayoz 4y ago
    Circumstantial evidence is real evidence. People get convicted over it regularly. People in the Jim Crow era were convicted without evidence, or had exonerating evidence hidden by racist law enforcement and prosecutors. It’s hardly the same.
    - gitfan86 4y ago
      Seems like you have decided that based off of someone's race that all circumstantial evidence should be assumed to prove guilt
      - ceejayoz 4y ago
        On the off-chance that you're arguing in good faith: No. Circumstantial evidence becomes compelling only when there's a lot of it, all in one direction, without exonerating or at least contradictory evidence of some kind. If you have white robes with pointy hats, a noose, and a Confederate flag in your closet, I'm very comfortable assuming certain facts about you. If you can come up with a good explanation - perhaps you're an actor in a play about the civil rights era - I'm prepared to shift that conclusion, but "nuh uh, this doesn't prove anything!" isn't a compelling response to it.
        gitfan86 4y ago
        If I found out that someone had a KKK outfit and a noose hidden at their home, yes I would also expect an good explanation for why they had that. But if I found out that a black person had a picture of a white person on his computer under the "C" drive, I wouldn't assume that he named the drive "C" for cracker, and wouldn't expect him to prove the "real reason" his drive was named "C"
        ceejayoz 4y ago
        > But if I found out that a black person had a picture of a white person on his computer under the "C" drive, I wouldn't assume that he named the drive "C" for cracker, and wouldn't expect him to prove the "real reason" his drive was named "C" Agreed! If, however, all the other drives were named "Photos" and "Recipes" and other descriptive terms, leaving only the C drive as a letter, that'd be interesting. Even more interesting if it's a bunch of photos of white people, and nothing much else on said C drive. If that same person had previously criticized civil rights issues, and was cagey about why they have the one oddly-named drive (https://www.reddit.com/r/StableDiffusion/comments/xl8bj2/comment/ipi24ct/ https://www.reddit.com/r/StableDiffusion/comments/xl8bj2/com...), and had a history of putting out racially-focused mods for a game, we might begin to get outright suspicious. This is what circumstantial evidence is all about; more than one data point leading to a reasonable conclusion. You seem to want to redefine it to a single data point, which giving it's been explained several times now, I have to assume (circumstantial again!) is playing dumb intentionally.
    - deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
  - jasonlotito 4y ago
    > Which ironically is how white people during the Jim Crow era in the south decided guilt vs. innocence of black people accused of crimes. Civil vs. Criminal cases have different levels of guilt. Further, this isn't either, but a private company and its TOS. It's perfectly reasonable to hold different standards for different situations. I would hope that we hold a higher standard for criminal activity. What GitHub did was very much use the powers conservatives have fought long and hard to maintain.

Again, there’s more alleged than just the “n” thing; screenshots of Rimworld titled “Auschwitz”, modding the game by race, mockery of the George Floyd protests. Sometimes we infer things from a combination of evidence.

donkeyd 4y ago
> Sometimes we infer things from a combination of evidence. People seem unable to do this. They want to see all of these examples as unrelated things that coincidentally can all be considered racist by wokies. To me, it's a case of walking and swimming and talking like a duck.
gitfan86 4y ago
Which ironically is how white people during the Jim Crow era in the south decided guilt vs innocence of black people accused of crimes. No real evidence just assumptions of circumstances based off of the person's skin color.
- ceejayoz 4y ago
  Circumstantial evidence is real evidence. People get convicted over it regularly. People in the Jim Crow era were convicted without evidence, or had exonerating evidence hidden by racist law enforcement and prosecutors. It’s hardly the same.
  - gitfan86 4y ago
    Seems like you have decided that based off of someone's race that all circumstantial evidence should be assumed to prove guilt
    - ceejayoz 4y ago
      On the off-chance that you're arguing in good faith: No. Circumstantial evidence becomes compelling only when there's a lot of it, all in one direction, without exonerating or at least contradictory evidence of some kind. If you have white robes with pointy hats, a noose, and a Confederate flag in your closet, I'm very comfortable assuming certain facts about you. If you can come up with a good explanation - perhaps you're an actor in a play about the civil rights era - I'm prepared to shift that conclusion, but "nuh uh, this doesn't prove anything!" isn't a compelling response to it.
      - gitfan86 4y ago
        If I found out that someone had a KKK outfit and a noose hidden at their home, yes I would also expect an good explanation for why they had that. But if I found out that a black person had a picture of a white person on his computer under the "C" drive, I wouldn't assume that he named the drive "C" for cracker, and wouldn't expect him to prove the "real reason" his drive was named "C"
        ceejayoz 4y ago
        > But if I found out that a black person had a picture of a white person on his computer under the "C" drive, I wouldn't assume that he named the drive "C" for cracker, and wouldn't expect him to prove the "real reason" his drive was named "C" Agreed! If, however, all the other drives were named "Photos" and "Recipes" and other descriptive terms, leaving only the C drive as a letter, that'd be interesting. Even more interesting if it's a bunch of photos of white people, and nothing much else on said C drive. If that same person had previously criticized civil rights issues, and was cagey about why they have the one oddly-named drive (https://www.reddit.com/r/StableDiffusion/comments/xl8bj2/comment/ipi24ct/ https://www.reddit.com/r/StableDiffusion/comments/xl8bj2/com...), and had a history of putting out racially-focused mods for a game, we might begin to get outright suspicious. This is what circumstantial evidence is all about; more than one data point leading to a reasonable conclusion. You seem to want to redefine it to a single data point, which giving it's been explained several times now, I have to assume (circumstantial again!) is playing dumb intentionally.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
- jasonlotito 4y ago
  > Which ironically is how white people during the Jim Crow era in the south decided guilt vs. innocence of black people accused of crimes. Civil vs. Criminal cases have different levels of guilt. Further, this isn't either, but a private company and its TOS. It's perfectly reasonable to hold different standards for different situations. I would hope that we hold a higher standard for criminal activity. What GitHub did was very much use the powers conservatives have fought long and hard to maintain.