4 ms·

I wasn't born yesterday.

DonHopkins 3y ago
I love babies! ...I just can't eat a whole one.
defrost 3y ago
Hmm - a self evident non sequitur that fails to address a real point about the actual world and the assumptions made by people about both violence and cannabalism. That's a poor comment from yourself- I'd hoped for better.
- maxbond 3y ago
  If you'd like a higher quality response, sophistry and performative disappointment isn't the way to get it. I'm not going to give a serious detailed response to an unserious comment, I'm going to find a better use for my time.
  - defrost 3y ago
    I don't follow you at all I'm afraid. I'm completely serious about the facts here: * You don't have to kill people in order to eat them, * I've had cannibals as babysitters in PNG as a child, * I'm much the same age as Mike Alpers own children who I know from my days in university. etc. You claim to not be engaged with such topics because <<violence>> and I've quite accurately pointed out that violence isn't a neccesity here. Why, exactly, are you having a little tantrum here?
    - maxbond 3y ago
      If you need further clarification about why I don't take it seriously when I talk about a meme about a violent uprising and you pivot the conversation to ritual cannibalism, I encourage you to consult your preferred dictionary regarding "sophistry". If you want to convince me that you're earnestly trying to have a real conversation, being insulting isn't going to help.
      - defrost 3y ago
        I didn't pivot at all, if you scroll back you'll see for a fact that it was yourself that introduced the topic of eating the rich. You advocated for raising that as a thread topic. I'm familar with several dictionares, nothing I have said has been false. Be explicit - what exactly do you consider to be sophistry here? We can talk about prion disease and its relation to eating brain matter (the Fore and mad cow disease), the history of funerary practices, the European fad for eating ground up mummies, the UK practice of eating parts of executed criminals, etc. All of these relate to the topic that you suggested .. and the topic you apparently wish to tap out on when faced with someone happy to take it on.
        maxbond 3y ago
        Sorry to disappoint you, but I'm not interested in taking the bait today. Good luck finding the kind of discussion you're looking for. Have a pleasant day.
        defrost 3y ago
        > taking the bait today. What bait? > I wasn't born yesterday. It appears to my eye that you bought the attitude to what was a good faith discussion from my side. It was a missed opportunity to discuss an unpopular subject. I suggest you return to this sometime later and reread this entire exchange.
        maxbond 3y ago
        On the off chance this is a genuine misunderstanding (which, given you indicated that you understood I was referencing slogans, that cannibalism is a nonsequiter to a discussion of HN's political bias, that my initial response to you contained further clarification I was referencing a political slogan, and that you then peppered me with insults and attempted to bait me into an argument, I don't believe to be the case, but I've been wrong before), here is the misunderstanding: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eat_the_rich https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eat_the_rich > "Eat the rich" is a political slogan associated with anti-capitalism and left-wing politics. It may variously be used as a metaphor for class conflict, a demand for wealth redistribution, or a literal call to violence. The phrase is commonly attributed to political philosopher Jean-Jacques Rousseau, from a quote first popularized during the French Revolution: "When the people shall have nothing more to eat, they will eat the rich".

I love babies! ...I just can't eat a whole one.

Hmm - a self evident non sequitur that fails to address a real point about the actual world and the assumptions made by people about both violence and cannabalism. That's a poor comment from yourself- I'd hoped for better.

maxbond 3y ago
If you'd like a higher quality response, sophistry and performative disappointment isn't the way to get it. I'm not going to give a serious detailed response to an unserious comment, I'm going to find a better use for my time.
- defrost 3y ago
  I don't follow you at all I'm afraid. I'm completely serious about the facts here: * You don't have to kill people in order to eat them, * I've had cannibals as babysitters in PNG as a child, * I'm much the same age as Mike Alpers own children who I know from my days in university. etc. You claim to not be engaged with such topics because <<violence>> and I've quite accurately pointed out that violence isn't a neccesity here. Why, exactly, are you having a little tantrum here?
  - maxbond 3y ago
    If you need further clarification about why I don't take it seriously when I talk about a meme about a violent uprising and you pivot the conversation to ritual cannibalism, I encourage you to consult your preferred dictionary regarding "sophistry". If you want to convince me that you're earnestly trying to have a real conversation, being insulting isn't going to help.
    - defrost 3y ago
      I didn't pivot at all, if you scroll back you'll see for a fact that it was yourself that introduced the topic of eating the rich. You advocated for raising that as a thread topic. I'm familar with several dictionares, nothing I have said has been false. Be explicit - what exactly do you consider to be sophistry here? We can talk about prion disease and its relation to eating brain matter (the Fore and mad cow disease), the history of funerary practices, the European fad for eating ground up mummies, the UK practice of eating parts of executed criminals, etc. All of these relate to the topic that you suggested .. and the topic you apparently wish to tap out on when faced with someone happy to take it on.
      - maxbond 3y ago
        Sorry to disappoint you, but I'm not interested in taking the bait today. Good luck finding the kind of discussion you're looking for. Have a pleasant day.
        defrost 3y ago
        > taking the bait today. What bait? > I wasn't born yesterday. It appears to my eye that you bought the attitude to what was a good faith discussion from my side. It was a missed opportunity to discuss an unpopular subject. I suggest you return to this sometime later and reread this entire exchange.
        maxbond 3y ago
        On the off chance this is a genuine misunderstanding (which, given you indicated that you understood I was referencing slogans, that cannibalism is a nonsequiter to a discussion of HN's political bias, that my initial response to you contained further clarification I was referencing a political slogan, and that you then peppered me with insults and attempted to bait me into an argument, I don't believe to be the case, but I've been wrong before), here is the misunderstanding: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eat_the_rich https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eat_the_rich > "Eat the rich" is a political slogan associated with anti-capitalism and left-wing politics. It may variously be used as a metaphor for class conflict, a demand for wealth redistribution, or a literal call to violence. The phrase is commonly attributed to political philosopher Jean-Jacques Rousseau, from a quote first popularized during the French Revolution: "When the people shall have nothing more to eat, they will eat the rich".