4 ms·

I'm actually fine with trying to be virtuous rather than promoting rapists, corruption, racists and so on. The important thing is that actions match words. Word

by davidw 2y ago

I'm actually fine with trying to be virtuous rather than promoting rapists, corruption, racists and so on. The important thing is that actions match words. Words alone aren't enough.

Over2Chars 2y ago
[flagged]
- wombatpm 2y ago
  Martha Stewart was INVESTIGATED for insider trading. She was CONVICTED of lying to the FBI. Just a reminder to never talk to the FBI without a lawyer
  - Over2Chars 2y ago
    Really? Hmmm "The grand jury returned an indictment on June 4, 2003, charging Stewart with conspiracy, obstruction of justice, making false statements, and securities fraud." https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/FSupp2/287/461/2476089/ https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/FSupp2/... I think she beat "securities fraud", but was convicted on conspiracy, obstruction, and making false statements: https://web.archive.org/web/20040307121033/https://money.cnn.com/2004/03/05/news/companies/martha_verdict/index.htm https://web.archive.org/web/20040307121033/https://money.cnn... So, yeah, technically she didn't get convicted of insider trading/securities fraud, but managed a felony conviction around the charges. Good catch. So I guess we can't easily dismiss Martha from our category of people we refuse to promote.
- ludston 2y ago
  > Mike Tyson Made his fortune from punching people in the head, so that is such a weird example of a person that you are expecting others to empathise with or support. A whole lot of people find sports that result in brain injuries to be pretty distasteful.
  - Over2Chars 2y ago
    I, for one, thoroughly enjoy boxing, and consider it an intangible part of our collective cultural heritage. Boxing, as a sport, goes back at least 2,000 years to ancient Rome and Greece. That people choose to find it distasteful is fine with me. I'm talking about Mike Tyson, the convicted rapist, not Mike Tyson as a boxer.
    - ludston 2y ago
      Good for you! You are legally allowed to enjoy it.
      - Over2Chars 2y ago
        Thank you, and I encourage you to enjoy the sweet science as well!
- Martinussen 2y ago
  You... Might want to check what Mel Gibson has gotten up to over the years if that's your impression of the man. Not much of an edge case, and you're being pretty intentionally obtuse if you're arguing Ford or Gandhi are useful comparisons here. Anyone promoting Bill Cosby the person is definitely doing something questionable, which is the relevant point.
  - Over2Chars 2y ago
    Sorry, I haven't followed Gibson's scandals, so I only know the drunken rant one. But I'm being kinda hypothetical here - where is the line? I'm bringing up Ford and Gandhi because I think they're generally considered respectable, but could be accused of being in the category of those to "shun" based on verbal statements or opinions. I am not aware that either did anything. Are we shunning people because they've advocated opinions that in their time weren't controversial, but are now? Bill Cosby's conviction was overturned on a technicality. Do we shun him even if the courts couldn't/didn't convict him? https://www.pbs.org/newshour/arts/why-bill-cosbys-conviction-was-overturned https://www.pbs.org/newshour/arts/why-bill-cosbys-conviction... Or similarly, "unconvicted" but alleged unsavory characters, perhaps pop musicians, TV hosts, presidents, presidential candidates, and so on. Do you just shun everyone who has simply been accused of misconduct? What if the accusers recant or are found to be lying? It's happened. Crystal Mangum, now incarcerated for murder, has recanted her rape accusation against the Duke la crosse players: https://www.yahoo.com/news/woman-falsely-accused-duke-lacrosse-163317537.html https://www.yahoo.com/news/woman-falsely-accused-duke-lacros...
    - defrost 2y ago
      On the specific: > Bill Cosby's conviction was overturned on a technicality. Do we shun him even if the courts couldn't/didn't convict him? Yes, the public is well entitled to shun him on the basis of what he did indeed confess to .. that is entirely orthogonal to that confession being rejected on a technicality and thus not being part of a formal legal conviction.
      - Over2Chars 2y ago
motorest 2y ago
> I'm actually fine with trying to be virtuous rather than promoting rapists, corruption, racists and so on. False dilemma. No one who ever mentioned the term "cargo cult" is endorsing oppression or promoting rapists, corruption, racists, or any nonsense of this sort. In fact, your comment reads a lot like a thinly veiled blanked and baseless accusation on anyone who disagrees with a silly hypothesis. The concept has a very specific meaning in tech circles. No one who uses it is even holding in mind anything related to Melanesia. You can waste as much time as you'd like on virtue signaling by championing a "master-slave vs leader-follower" rebranding, but it's a matter of time before someone out-virtues you and figures out how to frame your own PC term as oppressive. It's exhausting.
- KaiserPro 2y ago
  if you're attempting to go full reductive logic, this statement: > No one who ever mentioned the term "cargo cult" is endorsing oppression or promoting rapists, corruption, racists, or any nonsense of this sort. doesn't work, as you don't have sources for that. > No one who uses it is even holding in mind anything related to Melanesia. Which is the whole point of the article, to give you background. In the same way that some newspapers have listed "rawdogging" as one of their words of the year, saying "oh its ok you can use this" but neatly forgets to mention what the word _still_ means to a sizeable number of people. > figures out how to frame your own PC term as oppressive. It's exhausting. Come on. oppressive? The entire world of corporations is oppressive. You need to conform to not be fired. The "In" words change all the time. The list of banned phrases changes monthly. thats normally down to the whims of just a small bunch of people in the c-suite. If you transgress, you're yeeted out. That is oppression, not voluntarily reading article that makes you sad.
dudeinjapan 2y ago
[dead]
CRConrad 2y ago
> I'm actually fine with trying to be virtuous rather than promoting rapists, corruption, racists and so on. Stuff like that is exactly what's so dangerous with virtue signaling: It leads to conflating tiny, or possibly non-existent, infractions with serious evil. I'm sure you didn't mean to say people who talk about "cargo cult programming" are corrupt racists and rapists, did you? Or that they promote corruption, racism, and rape? Maybe you should have tried to find a way to express yourself that didn't make it sound quite so much like that was what you were saying. Or, you know, if this virtue-signaling article didn't exist, this discussion wouldn't exist either, and then you wouldn't have said it.

by davidw 2y ago

I'm actually fine with trying to be virtuous rather than promoting rapists, corruption, racists and so on. The important thing is that actions match words. Words alone aren't enough.

Over2Chars 2y ago

[flagged]

wombatpm 2y ago
Martha Stewart was INVESTIGATED for insider trading. She was CONVICTED of lying to the FBI. Just a reminder to never talk to the FBI without a lawyer
- Over2Chars 2y ago
  Really? Hmmm "The grand jury returned an indictment on June 4, 2003, charging Stewart with conspiracy, obstruction of justice, making false statements, and securities fraud." https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/FSupp2/287/461/2476089/ https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/FSupp2/... I think she beat "securities fraud", but was convicted on conspiracy, obstruction, and making false statements: https://web.archive.org/web/20040307121033/https://money.cnn.com/2004/03/05/news/companies/martha_verdict/index.htm https://web.archive.org/web/20040307121033/https://money.cnn... So, yeah, technically she didn't get convicted of insider trading/securities fraud, but managed a felony conviction around the charges. Good catch. So I guess we can't easily dismiss Martha from our category of people we refuse to promote.
ludston 2y ago
> Mike Tyson Made his fortune from punching people in the head, so that is such a weird example of a person that you are expecting others to empathise with or support. A whole lot of people find sports that result in brain injuries to be pretty distasteful.
- Over2Chars 2y ago
  I, for one, thoroughly enjoy boxing, and consider it an intangible part of our collective cultural heritage. Boxing, as a sport, goes back at least 2,000 years to ancient Rome and Greece. That people choose to find it distasteful is fine with me. I'm talking about Mike Tyson, the convicted rapist, not Mike Tyson as a boxer.
  - ludston 2y ago
    Good for you! You are legally allowed to enjoy it.
    - Over2Chars 2y ago
      Thank you, and I encourage you to enjoy the sweet science as well!
Martinussen 2y ago
You... Might want to check what Mel Gibson has gotten up to over the years if that's your impression of the man. Not much of an edge case, and you're being pretty intentionally obtuse if you're arguing Ford or Gandhi are useful comparisons here. Anyone promoting Bill Cosby the person is definitely doing something questionable, which is the relevant point.
- Over2Chars 2y ago
  Sorry, I haven't followed Gibson's scandals, so I only know the drunken rant one. But I'm being kinda hypothetical here - where is the line? I'm bringing up Ford and Gandhi because I think they're generally considered respectable, but could be accused of being in the category of those to "shun" based on verbal statements or opinions. I am not aware that either did anything. Are we shunning people because they've advocated opinions that in their time weren't controversial, but are now? Bill Cosby's conviction was overturned on a technicality. Do we shun him even if the courts couldn't/didn't convict him? https://www.pbs.org/newshour/arts/why-bill-cosbys-conviction-was-overturned https://www.pbs.org/newshour/arts/why-bill-cosbys-conviction... Or similarly, "unconvicted" but alleged unsavory characters, perhaps pop musicians, TV hosts, presidents, presidential candidates, and so on. Do you just shun everyone who has simply been accused of misconduct? What if the accusers recant or are found to be lying? It's happened. Crystal Mangum, now incarcerated for murder, has recanted her rape accusation against the Duke la crosse players: https://www.yahoo.com/news/woman-falsely-accused-duke-lacrosse-163317537.html https://www.yahoo.com/news/woman-falsely-accused-duke-lacros...
  - defrost 2y ago
    On the specific: > Bill Cosby's conviction was overturned on a technicality. Do we shun him even if the courts couldn't/didn't convict him? Yes, the public is well entitled to shun him on the basis of what he did indeed confess to .. that is entirely orthogonal to that confession being rejected on a technicality and thus not being part of a formal legal conviction.
    - Over2Chars 2y ago

motorest 2y ago

> I'm actually fine with trying to be virtuous rather than promoting rapists, corruption, racists and so on. False dilemma. No one who ever mentioned the term "cargo cult" is endorsing oppression or promoting rapists, corruption, racists, or any nonsense of this sort. In fact, your comment reads a lot like a thinly veiled blanked and baseless accusation on anyone who disagrees with a silly hypothesis. The concept has a very specific meaning in tech circles. No one who uses it is even holding in mind anything related to Melanesia. You can waste as much time as you'd like on virtue signaling by championing a "master-slave vs leader-follower" rebranding, but it's a matter of time before someone out-virtues you and figures out how to frame your own PC term as oppressive. It's exhausting.

KaiserPro 2y ago
if you're attempting to go full reductive logic, this statement: > No one who ever mentioned the term "cargo cult" is endorsing oppression or promoting rapists, corruption, racists, or any nonsense of this sort. doesn't work, as you don't have sources for that. > No one who uses it is even holding in mind anything related to Melanesia. Which is the whole point of the article, to give you background. In the same way that some newspapers have listed "rawdogging" as one of their words of the year, saying "oh its ok you can use this" but neatly forgets to mention what the word _still_ means to a sizeable number of people. > figures out how to frame your own PC term as oppressive. It's exhausting. Come on. oppressive? The entire world of corporations is oppressive. You need to conform to not be fired. The "In" words change all the time. The list of banned phrases changes monthly. thats normally down to the whims of just a small bunch of people in the c-suite. If you transgress, you're yeeted out. That is oppression, not voluntarily reading article that makes you sad.

dudeinjapan 2y ago

[dead]

CRConrad 2y ago

> I'm actually fine with trying to be virtuous rather than promoting rapists, corruption, racists and so on. Stuff like that is exactly what's so dangerous with virtue signaling: It leads to conflating tiny, or possibly non-existent, infractions with serious evil. I'm sure you didn't mean to say people who talk about "cargo cult programming" are corrupt racists and rapists, did you? Or that they promote corruption, racism, and rape? Maybe you should have tried to find a way to express yourself that didn't make it sound quite so much like that was what you were saying. Or, you know, if this virtue-signaling article didn't exist, this discussion wouldn't exist either, and then you wouldn't have said it.