4 ms·

Probably the last bit talking about how you think Obama is awesome. (I didn't downvote you, btw, just my guess.) Also possibly mentioning casual sex in the sa

by dlytle 18y ago

Probably the last bit talking about how you think Obama is awesome. (I didn't downvote you, btw, just my guess.) Also possibly mentioning casual sex in the same category as bigotry. It went somewhat over the top, and presented your comment in a light that made it seem very biased and unprofessional. That completely eradicated the point you were trying to make early on. Professionalism certainly isn't a requirement for posting, but a clear bias will make downvotes a lot more likely.

time_management 18y ago
I have no idea whether or not Obama will be a great president, though I suspect he will. What makes him unusual, if not earth-shaking, as far as successful politicians go, is that he seems to be a truly great human being. I'm not pol-bashing; I don't think most of them are bad people. I just don't think many of them are great people either. Casual sex is an example of the crudeness and nastiness of the current era, and I cited it as such. Bigotry is much less appropriate as an example of the Reagan-through-Bush-2 era's nastiness, because even though it's a lot more evil than casual sex, it's been a problem more or less throughout this country's history.
- dlytle 18y ago
  You asked for reasons why you got downvoted, which is what you got. Your reasons for posting those were fairly clear, the issue is that people disagree with you. I certainly don't see casual sex as being an example of "nastiness" or "evil", and it may be that this is what most downvoters are taking offense to. Plus, it's off-topic. The article is about being rude, callous, and insensitive towards others. Specifically, about the hypocrisy and cowardice involved in doing so anonymously. Your post was both off-topic and (potentially) offensive, and as such you're getting hit with two different sticks.
  - yters 18y ago
    While I don't agree with all his opinions, it is definitely not off topic. Plus, he should not be downvoted because he thinks casual sex is emotionally destructive. That, in fact, ties into his broader point. He thinks Obama will ease the polarization that leads to so many vehement disagreements, which he thinks bleed over to the online world. This goes hand in hand with the other poster's highly upvoted comment about PCness breeding repressed anger that is expressed online, of which the downvoting due to offense is a symptom.
    - time_management 18y ago
      He thinks Obama will ease the polarization that leads to so many vehement disagreements, which he thinks bleed over to the online world. I think a lot of the nastiness will fade away, and we'll have a lot more pragmatic disagreements, and fewer mean-spirited, petty ones. Disagreement over bailout plans and solutions to economic problems is healthy. Impeaching a president over personal behavior (as caddish and comdemnable as that personal behavior was) is not good for the country.
      - anamax 18y ago
        > I think a lot of the nastiness will fade away Why? Will the folks who hated Bush become nice? Will the folks who supported him become nice? Are you arguing that Obama's election obligates his opponents to behave differently than Bush's elections obligated his opponents? What goes around, comes around. Reap and sow.
- fallentimes 18y ago
  Casual sex is an example of the crudeness and nastiness of the current era Have sex with friendlier girls. Seriously though how is that an example of it?
  - time_management 18y ago
    Hookup-style casual sex is the ruination of unwilling participants' future romantic partners... unless you like dropping pens in coffee mugs. Ok, that comment was crass and bitter... but seriously: I don't think anyone should have sex with a partner who doesn't put the other person's emotional well-being at the same level of concern as his or her own.
    - unalone 18y ago
      Our society encourages freedom of choice. That's a bad thing? I don't drink, don't party, most likely will never like casual sex. But I know people who do, and they like it well enough. I upvoted you here, since you're not being inflammatory and you're contributing to a discussion, but I also think you're wrong. Society is changing. Social attitudes towards sex never stay the same from generation to generation. It's each individual's choice to participate, though, and that individual freedom matters.
      - yters 18y ago
        At a certain point, free choice is unmaintainable. People obviously have to be self controlled in their personal lives. Since our personal lives affect each other, the need for self control must extend to the society as well.
        unalone 18y ago
        How is free choice unmaintainable? There are people of both genders who like casual sex. Am I missing something?
        time_management 18y ago
- robotron 18y ago
  The lumping of casual sex in with the other things is a bit much. It doesn't make sense and comes across as a moral judgement that you're making on other people that aren't out to hurt someone.
- anamax 18y ago
  > What makes [Obama] unusual, if not earth-shaking, as far as successful politicians go, is that he seems to be a truly great human being. Obama's being a great human being can't possibly have the effects that you're predicting. That's not to say that he's bad. (Although the evidence for "great" is lacking.) Jesus H. Christ on a pogostick couldn't do those things. That leaves us with a choice between "fanboy", "confused", and "troll".[1] Which of them is a reason to upvoting your comments? Me - I'm going with fanboy because I like to think the best of others. [1] Your extended comments about casual sex confirm that those are the likely possibilities. In other news, nothing that you cited as "80s and later" actually started or even changed then. Digital watches are cool, but people haven't changed.
  - time_management 18y ago
    Obama's being a great human being can't possibly have the effects that you're predicting. I think an inspirational leader like Kennedy or Obama can inspire people greatly to better themselves, and this inspiration has all sorts of ripple effects. A mustard seed, if you will. Finally we have a president whom, if I had kids, I would consider to be a decent role model for them to aspire to be like.
    - anamax 18y ago
      > I think an inspirational leader like Kennedy or Obama can inspire people greatly to better themselves, and this inspiration has all sorts of ripple effects. I'm willing to believe that you do think that. One of my points is that it doesn't actually happen. (Another is that your "since 1980s" claims are completely wrong.) Self-delusion is one of the most important human impulses and I'm not suggesting that you should change yours. You do know that the 100th monkey story was just that, a story, right? That thing about Tinkerbelle also doesn't happen.
      - yters 18y ago
        I'd say heads of state affect people. Look at how divisive people in America are because so many don't like Bush. Think that kind of tension doesn't affect people's aspirations and motivation?

by dlytle 18y ago

time_management 18y ago

I have no idea whether or not Obama will be a great president, though I suspect he will. What makes him unusual, if not earth-shaking, as far as successful politicians go, is that he seems to be a truly great human being. I'm not pol-bashing; I don't think most of them are bad people. I just don't think many of them are great people either. Casual sex is an example of the crudeness and nastiness of the current era, and I cited it as such. Bigotry is much less appropriate as an example of the Reagan-through-Bush-2 era's nastiness, because even though it's a lot more evil than casual sex, it's been a problem more or less throughout this country's history.

dlytle 18y ago
You asked for reasons why you got downvoted, which is what you got. Your reasons for posting those were fairly clear, the issue is that people disagree with you. I certainly don't see casual sex as being an example of "nastiness" or "evil", and it may be that this is what most downvoters are taking offense to. Plus, it's off-topic. The article is about being rude, callous, and insensitive towards others. Specifically, about the hypocrisy and cowardice involved in doing so anonymously. Your post was both off-topic and (potentially) offensive, and as such you're getting hit with two different sticks.
- yters 18y ago
  While I don't agree with all his opinions, it is definitely not off topic. Plus, he should not be downvoted because he thinks casual sex is emotionally destructive. That, in fact, ties into his broader point. He thinks Obama will ease the polarization that leads to so many vehement disagreements, which he thinks bleed over to the online world. This goes hand in hand with the other poster's highly upvoted comment about PCness breeding repressed anger that is expressed online, of which the downvoting due to offense is a symptom.
  - time_management 18y ago
    He thinks Obama will ease the polarization that leads to so many vehement disagreements, which he thinks bleed over to the online world. I think a lot of the nastiness will fade away, and we'll have a lot more pragmatic disagreements, and fewer mean-spirited, petty ones. Disagreement over bailout plans and solutions to economic problems is healthy. Impeaching a president over personal behavior (as caddish and comdemnable as that personal behavior was) is not good for the country.
    - anamax 18y ago
      > I think a lot of the nastiness will fade away Why? Will the folks who hated Bush become nice? Will the folks who supported him become nice? Are you arguing that Obama's election obligates his opponents to behave differently than Bush's elections obligated his opponents? What goes around, comes around. Reap and sow.
fallentimes 18y ago
Casual sex is an example of the crudeness and nastiness of the current era Have sex with friendlier girls. Seriously though how is that an example of it?
- time_management 18y ago
  Hookup-style casual sex is the ruination of unwilling participants' future romantic partners... unless you like dropping pens in coffee mugs. Ok, that comment was crass and bitter... but seriously: I don't think anyone should have sex with a partner who doesn't put the other person's emotional well-being at the same level of concern as his or her own.
  - unalone 18y ago
    Our society encourages freedom of choice. That's a bad thing? I don't drink, don't party, most likely will never like casual sex. But I know people who do, and they like it well enough. I upvoted you here, since you're not being inflammatory and you're contributing to a discussion, but I also think you're wrong. Society is changing. Social attitudes towards sex never stay the same from generation to generation. It's each individual's choice to participate, though, and that individual freedom matters.
    - yters 18y ago
      At a certain point, free choice is unmaintainable. People obviously have to be self controlled in their personal lives. Since our personal lives affect each other, the need for self control must extend to the society as well.
      - unalone 18y ago
        How is free choice unmaintainable? There are people of both genders who like casual sex. Am I missing something?
        time_management 18y ago
robotron 18y ago
The lumping of casual sex in with the other things is a bit much. It doesn't make sense and comes across as a moral judgement that you're making on other people that aren't out to hurt someone.
anamax 18y ago
> What makes [Obama] unusual, if not earth-shaking, as far as successful politicians go, is that he seems to be a truly great human being. Obama's being a great human being can't possibly have the effects that you're predicting. That's not to say that he's bad. (Although the evidence for "great" is lacking.) Jesus H. Christ on a pogostick couldn't do those things. That leaves us with a choice between "fanboy", "confused", and "troll".[1] Which of them is a reason to upvoting your comments? Me - I'm going with fanboy because I like to think the best of others. [1] Your extended comments about casual sex confirm that those are the likely possibilities. In other news, nothing that you cited as "80s and later" actually started or even changed then. Digital watches are cool, but people haven't changed.
- time_management 18y ago
  Obama's being a great human being can't possibly have the effects that you're predicting. I think an inspirational leader like Kennedy or Obama can inspire people greatly to better themselves, and this inspiration has all sorts of ripple effects. A mustard seed, if you will. Finally we have a president whom, if I had kids, I would consider to be a decent role model for them to aspire to be like.
  - anamax 18y ago
    > I think an inspirational leader like Kennedy or Obama can inspire people greatly to better themselves, and this inspiration has all sorts of ripple effects. I'm willing to believe that you do think that. One of my points is that it doesn't actually happen. (Another is that your "since 1980s" claims are completely wrong.) Self-delusion is one of the most important human impulses and I'm not suggesting that you should change yours. You do know that the 100th monkey story was just that, a story, right? That thing about Tinkerbelle also doesn't happen.
    - yters 18y ago
      I'd say heads of state affect people. Look at how divisive people in America are because so many don't like Bush. Think that kind of tension doesn't affect people's aspirations and motivation?