4 ms·
Do you have evidence that lobbying is what produced this outcome?
by tt24 5mo ago
Do you have evidence that lobbying is what produced this outcome?
- Forgeties79 5mo agoPlease don’t do that.
- pfdietz 5mo agoHow dare he ask for evidence!
- ceejayoz 5mo agoThis poster likes to demand evidence of others (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48135626 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48135626) and bristle when the same standard is applied to them (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48137932 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48137932). Someone else did provide evidence, though: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48153756 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48153756
- Forgeties79 5mo agoIt’s the phrasing/tone. It’s such a red flag. As to his being answered: somebody responding to him in good faith does not suddenly validate what he was doing.
- tt24 5mo agoThere was nothing wrong or offensive with my phrasing.
- ChadNauseam 5mo agoI'm surprised that your comment is dead. Apparently there was evidence (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48153756 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48153756), so I don't see the problem with having asked.
- tt24 5mo agoIt’s surprising to me as well. Such an innocuous question. Don’t fully understand why people found it offensive enough to flag.
- deleted 5mo ago[deleted]
- tt24 5mo agoAsking for evidence of claims is very offensive to those who don’t have any. They feel very strongly about a topic, but it’s entirely based on their various personal experiences. They arrive at the conclusion first, and then try to arrange reality around their opinions.
- Forgeties79 5mo agoWhen people write it that way it’s as useless as going “source?” I hope I don’t have to to explain the problem with that approach to discussion, but I will anyway. It takes no effort and almost always obfuscates the fact that they object but would rather try and put a bunch of burden on the person rather than actually articulate their disagreement. It also gives them the semblance of being “above the fray” and “just asking questions.” It’s this nonsense https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48154443 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48154443 on repeat. It’s plausible deniability. I am very surprised this has to be explained on HN. This is an old debate tactic and one that is frequently, as well as lazily, deployed on the internet. It’s a close cousin to sealioning and usually morphs into it. You are engaging in a tactic that covers your rear, requires no actual expression of opinions or values, and burdens others. It is very unlikely you don’t have an opinion on this subject and yet you are acting like a casual observer with no opinion. If I’m wrong then I bet wrong on otherwise smart money and I apologize for the mistake.
- tt24 5mo agoI very much have an opinion on the subject and never claimed otherwise. My opinion is that lobbying is a nonissue and there’s very little money in politics, and that money doesn’t really impact political outcomes. What makes you think that this is something I’m obscuring?
- Forgeties79 5mo ago> I very much have an opinion on the subject and never claimed otherwise Of course you do. That’s why I said something. Your omission is the problem, you intentionally didn’t say anything. > What makes you think that this is something I’m obscuring? This entire comment chain explains why I think that I don’t know why we’re playing games here - just be straight with people out the gate. Opacity doesn’t facilitate conversation. I know you understand what I’m talking about and I won’t belabor the point further.