3 ms·

I absolutely despise this particular flavor of HN-style discourse. A few easy steps: 1. Do or advocate for something unreasonable (banning and blocking people

I absolutely despise this particular flavor of HN-style discourse. A few easy steps: 1. Do or advocate for something unreasonable (banning and blocking people for having different politics than you, even if they're inside the Overton Window, even if their opinion is mainstream and perfectly fine); 2. Pretend the other party is being unreasonable ("I'm not seeing the problem here.", "Can you see the issue with that?" "Not really, no"), "gaslighting" them as the kids say; 3. When further pressed for detail or explanation deflect and feign ignorance ("I have no idea what you advocate for, honestly"), even if what the other person is asking is very clear (Do you think people should be de-federated or otherwise censored for expressing political opinions which are not your own?). It is extremely, extremely obvious what the person you are replying to is concerned about but you don't actually care, do you?

JohnFen 3y ago
> Do or advocate for something unreasonable I am neither banning/blocking anyone, nor am I advocating doing so. I am arguing that that instances have the right to do so, and that them doing so doesn't make the platform useless to others. I never asserted that I agree with instances actually doing this. > "gaslighting" them as the kids say In what world does "I disagree" count as gaslighting? > It is extremely, extremely obvious what the person you are replying to is concerned about but you don't actually care, do you? It is not so obvious to me, no. If I take what he's saying literally, then I struggle with inconsistencies. If I don't, then I'm assuming that he has a certain perspective, and I don't want to do that because I can't actually read his mind. However, as I said in my comment, for the purposes of this conversation it doesn't really matter what he's concerned about. My stance and argument would be the same regardless of his sociopolitical viewpoint.

JohnFen 3y ago

> Do or advocate for something unreasonable I am neither banning/blocking anyone, nor am I advocating doing so. I am arguing that that instances have the right to do so, and that them doing so doesn't make the platform useless to others. I never asserted that I agree with instances actually doing this. > "gaslighting" them as the kids say In what world does "I disagree" count as gaslighting? > It is extremely, extremely obvious what the person you are replying to is concerned about but you don't actually care, do you? It is not so obvious to me, no. If I take what he's saying literally, then I struggle with inconsistencies. If I don't, then I'm assuming that he has a certain perspective, and I don't want to do that because I can't actually read his mind. However, as I said in my comment, for the purposes of this conversation it doesn't really matter what he's concerned about. My stance and argument would be the same regardless of his sociopolitical viewpoint.