4 ms·

Granted, I'm just massively struggling with the idea of excluding a whole radically diverse community (with some of the most civilized and self-moderating disco

Granted, I'm just massively struggling with the idea of excluding a whole radically diverse community (with some of the most civilized and self-moderating discourse on the internet) in the name of inclusiveness. To me, it's as ironic as it gets. On that end, I can't find any fault on HN's end enabling their 99.99% of their interested readers who didn't do any wrong to be included in the discourse around these ideas, on the free and open web.

kaba0 3y ago
And they are also free to (try to) restrict who has access to their site, so everyone is happy?
williamdclt 3y ago
> the idea of excluding a whole radically diverse community (with some of the most civilized and self-moderating discourse on the internet) in the name of inclusiveness. To me, it's as ironic as it gets. Not really more ironic than almost every non-trivial societal discussion, à la "if you want peace prepare for war". Anything non-trivial is multifaceted, and anybody who has an absolute opinion is probably missing most of the argument. Very quickly for this specific case: one can easily argue that excluding people is hardly inclusive, but one can also easily argue that a niche community with its own subculture _needs_ some sheltering from the rest of the world, or the subculture gets lost very quickly (so the sheltering is good for diversity in that it preserves the existence of the subculture). (I'm not pretending to present a fully-fledged argument here, just a taster to challenge absolute opinions, entire books could be written on this and probably have)
- mananaysiempre 3y ago
  Re your specific argument, see also under “Cultural appropriation” (IV.6) in Scott Alexander’s essay “The ideology is not the movement”[1]. On the other hand, the argument that is actually, literally written down in Asahi discussions usually paints the whole HN readership as a group with specific coherent opinions that are specifically bad, so I’m not sure to which degree I ought to judge them by the strongest argument they could be making as opposed to the one they actually are. (OK, there’s also the argument that HN will engage with people whose opinions the usual Asahi folks consider reprehensible—even if not necessarily often—and should thereby be treated as equally reprehensible unless they kick them out[2]. But, I don’t know. I’m a couple decades too young to have seen organized ostracism at the meetings of the Komsomol, but still, the only reaction I have when these kinds of social-isolation penalties are proposed is base animalistic terror. This includes people a decade younger in my own social circles proposing it, which is not even rare.) [1] https://slatestarcodex.com/2016/04/04/the-ideology-is-not-the-movement/ https://slatestarcodex.com/2016/04/04/the-ideology-is-not-th... [2] “Parable of the Nazi bar“, etc.

kaba0 3y ago

And they are also free to (try to) restrict who has access to their site, so everyone is happy?

williamdclt 3y ago

> the idea of excluding a whole radically diverse community (with some of the most civilized and self-moderating discourse on the internet) in the name of inclusiveness. To me, it's as ironic as it gets. Not really more ironic than almost every non-trivial societal discussion, à la "if you want peace prepare for war". Anything non-trivial is multifaceted, and anybody who has an absolute opinion is probably missing most of the argument. Very quickly for this specific case: one can easily argue that excluding people is hardly inclusive, but one can also easily argue that a niche community with its own subculture _needs_ some sheltering from the rest of the world, or the subculture gets lost very quickly (so the sheltering is good for diversity in that it preserves the existence of the subculture). (I'm not pretending to present a fully-fledged argument here, just a taster to challenge absolute opinions, entire books could be written on this and probably have)

mananaysiempre 3y ago
Re your specific argument, see also under “Cultural appropriation” (IV.6) in Scott Alexander’s essay “The ideology is not the movement”[1]. On the other hand, the argument that is actually, literally written down in Asahi discussions usually paints the whole HN readership as a group with specific coherent opinions that are specifically bad, so I’m not sure to which degree I ought to judge them by the strongest argument they could be making as opposed to the one they actually are. (OK, there’s also the argument that HN will engage with people whose opinions the usual Asahi folks consider reprehensible—even if not necessarily often—and should thereby be treated as equally reprehensible unless they kick them out[2]. But, I don’t know. I’m a couple decades too young to have seen organized ostracism at the meetings of the Komsomol, but still, the only reaction I have when these kinds of social-isolation penalties are proposed is base animalistic terror. This includes people a decade younger in my own social circles proposing it, which is not even rare.) [1] https://slatestarcodex.com/2016/04/04/the-ideology-is-not-the-movement/ https://slatestarcodex.com/2016/04/04/the-ideology-is-not-th... [2] “Parable of the Nazi bar“, etc.