3 ms·

>He was merely explaining a phenomenon, with no reference to other phenomena. Only some statements imply comparison, not all. It's worst than that. Re-reading

by batista 15y ago

>He was merely explaining a phenomenon, with no reference to other phenomena. Only some statements imply comparison, not all. It's worst than that. Re-reading it, he explicitly states: "most people are not libertarian, AND SO they down vote comments that don't fit their ideology" (emphasis mine). "AND SO" implies directly and explicitly that "most people"'s downvoting is BECAUSE they "are not libertarian". Which is the same as to say that if they were libertarians they wouldn't downvote in that way. That is a claim about the downvoting habits of libertarians, if I ever saw one.

nirvana 15y ago
You're wrong. All I was communicating was that libertarianism is a minority of ideologies and thus since most people (including libertarians) tend to down vote comments that support ideologies they disagree with, libertarianism is often under-represented. Further the rest of your comment was equally fallacious. But by pedantically arguing for your right to put words in my mouth, you have managed to derail the topic into a meta discussion. So, you illustrate another tactic-- besides downvoting- that is used to prevent effective discussion of libertarianism on social news sites.
- batista 15y ago
  >You're wrong. All I was communicating was that libertarianism is a minority of ideologies and thus since most people (including libertarians) tend to down vote comments that support ideologies they disagree with, libertarianism is often under-represented. If that's "all you was communicating", then you phrased it badly. "most people are not libertarian, AND SO they down vote comments that don't fit their ideology". AND SO explicitly states that the reason people vote down post they disagree with is because they are not libertarians. What you probably WANTED to write --which is made clear only by your subsequent clarification-- is: "most people are not libertarian AND SO libertarian comments (as well as comments of other marginal ideologies) are voted down more". Not the same at all.

by batista 15y ago

nirvana 15y ago

You're wrong. All I was communicating was that libertarianism is a minority of ideologies and thus since most people (including libertarians) tend to down vote comments that support ideologies they disagree with, libertarianism is often under-represented. Further the rest of your comment was equally fallacious. But by pedantically arguing for your right to put words in my mouth, you have managed to derail the topic into a meta discussion. So, you illustrate another tactic-- besides downvoting- that is used to prevent effective discussion of libertarianism on social news sites.

batista 15y ago
>You're wrong. All I was communicating was that libertarianism is a minority of ideologies and thus since most people (including libertarians) tend to down vote comments that support ideologies they disagree with, libertarianism is often under-represented. If that's "all you was communicating", then you phrased it badly. "most people are not libertarian, AND SO they down vote comments that don't fit their ideology". AND SO explicitly states that the reason people vote down post they disagree with is because they are not libertarians. What you probably WANTED to write --which is made clear only by your subsequent clarification-- is: "most people are not libertarian AND SO libertarian comments (as well as comments of other marginal ideologies) are voted down more". Not the same at all.