Someone is WRONG on the Internet!
POSTED BY: dreamtrove
UPDATED: Saturday, July 20, 2024 14:12
VIEWED: 4231
PAGE 2 of 8
Rap
Good point, esp. #2. This is what I was saying I wasn't saying. I'm in 24 hour work mode, currently taking a break because inventory is making my neck hurt.
Geezer. Good point. Sources to be independent can't be parroting data from the same source. I hope everyone caught that the chinese woman being sentenced to a year of hard labor for retweeting, not being the actual original twit. A person who shall go nameless but is related to me was executed for letting a friend stay at his house overnight. He was unaware that his friend was on a communist watchlist, but nonetheless was executed for aiding and abetting the following day. When his daughter complained that this was not fair, she was sentenced to 20 years hard labor and torture, which left her disfigured.
That's Mike's libertarian paradise. There's a reason everyone on that side of the family has moved here, this year. Because present day China is just so liberty loving they can't stand it anymore.
Mike, sorry, sometimes you just saying something that's pretty f-ing ignorant and I get offended. No offense. I was serious when I asked if you'd been to China.
Niki, trolls have no interest in netequette. Ignore them. Bear in mind that anyone else with no interest in it is also likely to be slated as a troll and ignored.
CTS
Yes, but there's another part of it too. Don't waste anyone's time, including yours. Someone may post a ten minute video to illustrate a point that they could spend a little effort writing out in a paragraph that could be read in one min.
Also, don't clutter the information environment, or people will not be able to access the actual topical information of debate. Not only do spams and trolls create clutter, people can clutter their own posts so that their own salient points are missed by their audience.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Geezer
I just had this thought so I signed on to add it:
Sometimes mainstream or otherwise credible news sources are also deriving their information from the same source, but create the illusion of consensus.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Some of my dislikes of internet discussions
1. Posting links to videos as an argument
2. Posts that are incredibly wordy - if I have to scroll down a couple of pages, I generally give up. Most people don't write stuff that keeps my attention that long.
3. Derailing a discussion into a critique of debating techniques
4. Posting links that are incredibly biased ie 'here are the stats on gun crime in the US' courtesy of the NRA's website or 9/11conspiracy.com or globalwarmingskeptics.com.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:I agree. And sorry, DT, gotta say that that applies to your original post here. It's just a lot of rules you're laying down for an un-moderated site. And methinks you went against on of your own recommendations in writing it... You've listed lots of stuff that reasonable posters *get*. I do wish that the others would figure it out, but they aren't going to magically learn etiquette just because you said so. According to your own post, that's a lot of time you wasted writing all that, huh?
Originally posted by Magonsdaughter:
2. Posts that are incredibly wordy - if I have to scroll down a couple of pages, I generally give up. Most people don't write stuff that keeps my attention that long.
OK, I don't actually think so, because I don't agree with that particular rule. If you enjoyed writing that post, than it's good use of your time. Doesn't matter for shit whether I or anyone else got changed by it, or even liked it. This is the internet, not the UN. Do what you like, and if it's not a good thing to do, there will be the consequences of a sort. If you don't care about the consequences, then continue doing what you like.
Wulf can post nothing but videos. Consequence: most posters think he can't put two words together. Obviously, he doesn't care.
Kane can do nothing but insult. Consequence: most posters think he's a troll. Obviously, he doesn't care.
Rappy can opine without reference, or pick and choose the best of OReilly and Beck. Consequence: most posters think he's blinded by bias. Obviously, he doesn't care either.
DreamTrove can write loooong posts about how he thinks people should behave. Consequence: can't say much about other posters, but to me it's wishful thinking. And a bit, well... kind of Lord of the Internet. But hey, do you have to care what I think? Of course not.
On the plus side, kudos and bonus points for XKCD. Best online comic about science geekdom ever!
Shoot. I guess png images don't display here? Oh well. I'm too lazy to convert them.
-----------------------------------------------
hmm-burble-blah, blah-blah-blah, take a left
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by dreamtrove:
Rap
Good point, esp. #2. This is what I was saying I wasn't saying. I'm in 24 hour work mode, currently taking a break because inventory is making my neck hurt.
Thanks, DT.
" I do not love the bright sword for its sharpness, nor the arrow for its swiftness, nor the warrior for his glory. I love only that which they defend. "
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
i also see some 'why can't we all get along' pleas on this site, and while I agree that this is a better forum without insults, trolling and spamming - sometimes posters are going to post stuff that one or other finds offensive and there is going to be some heat in the posts that follow it.
Trying to find common ground isn't the only means of sorting stuff out - [close your eyes here DT - nazi reference following] but if I join a debate with a nazi who thinks that all jews should be exterminated, and we try to find common ground, we might end up agreeing that not all of them should be exterminated, as long as all of them get sent away to the north coast of Alaska, where they can lead impoverished lives in isolation (anyone read The Yiddish Policeman's Union). Sometimes opinions are so extreme that they don't deserve the debate, only the 'your views are offensive to me in every possible way' kind of comment.
I feel like that about a lot of the far right rhetoric in the US and elsewhere, that it deeply offends me, I disagree on almost every fundamental value and I don't want to find common ground, because that will lead me to lurching to the right and embracing a set of values which in every way goes against who I am.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Magonsdaughter:
Some of my dislikes of internet discussions
1. Posting links to videos as an argument
2. Posts that are incredibly wordy - if I have to scroll down a couple of pages, I generally give up. Most people don't write stuff that keeps my attention that long.
3. Derailing a discussion into a critique of debating techniques
4. Posting links that are incredibly biased ie 'here are the stats on gun crime in the US' courtesy of the NRA's website or 9/11conspiracy.com or globalwarmingskeptics.com.
Magon, your points are good ones. Let me merge them with ones just posted:
1. This falls under "don't be evil" ie, don't waste other people's time. Forcing someone to watch a video or read a link without briefly summarizing the content is either trying to win by default or having everyone waste their collective time while you take the easy way out.
2. is a variation of 1, except that poster has invested time, just not enough. They should summarize what they've written. I'm guilty of the gigapost myself sometimes.
3. Is called threadjacking. A lot of good discussions come from threadjacks, but they should instantly launch into new threads. When I write my own software I'm going to design the it to do this automatically.
4. Geezer just posted something very similar, this should definitely be a rule, but I don't want such a rule to favor mainstream content over independent, and it needs some sort of framework. Maybe it's already been well framed by someone with an existing netiquette rule if anyone knows one.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Magonsdaughter:
i also see some 'why can't we all get along' pleas on this site, and while I agree that this is a better forum without insults, trolling and spamming - sometimes posters are going to post stuff that one or other finds offensive and there is going to be some heat in the posts that follow it.
Trying to find common ground isn't the only means of sorting stuff out - [close your eyes here DT - nazi reference following] but if I join a debate with a nazi who thinks that all jews should be exterminated, and we try to find common ground, we might end up agreeing that not all of them should be exterminated, as long as all of them get sent away to the north coast of Alaska, where they can lead impoverished lives in isolation (anyone read The Yiddish Policeman's Union).
Sometimes opinions are so extreme that they don't deserve the debate, only the 'your views are offensive to me in every possible way' kind of comment.
In my eyes, ( not being Jewish, even a little) , you're no better than a NAZI for your views
Quote:
I feel like that about a lot of the far right rhetoric in the US and elsewhere, that it deeply offends me, I disagree on almost every fundamental value and I don't want to find common ground, because that will lead me to lurching to the right and embracing a set of values which in every way goes against who I am.
You wanna know what offends me ?
Creationist. Young Earth mother fuckers who refuse to accept reality.
Racists. Inbred cock suckers who think that skin color or being bred on a certain part of the planet somehow grants them some sort of divine favor over all humanity.
History tells me that the Chinese, Mongols or Egyptians are the most advanced of any of us.
However, today ?
I'll favor the IDEAS of man's right to live in a free world as being superior to all others.
It's not skin color. It's not height. It's not which god / gods one prays to. It's none of that.
" I do not love the bright sword for its sharpness, nor the arrow for its swiftness, nor the warrior for his glory. I love only that which they defend. "
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Mal
Other people seem interested in the topic, just to answer your points here:
1) I'm laying down no rules at all.
2) Not interested in my thread? Give it a miss. This is for discussion of the topic of netiquette. Netiquette is not a set of rules, it's self help, for people who want to be heard. I have no objection to people who post like Kaneman or PN, it's just an ineffective way of being heard.
3) Let me retrace to a specific conversation on this forum about and involving PN: He misses his audience an alarming % of the time. He said his strategy is to fire a lot, and Mike said "That's no kind of marksmanship." All valid points. PN can continue his tactics, but I suspect he would be more successful if he applied some communication tactics of netiquette.
4) But the aren't rules. Feel free to ignore them. Just expect to be ignored. Not because people will disrespect you for ignoring the rules, just because the rules are designed by the collective wisdom of the web on "How to be heard" and have been added to the netiquette playbook of common knowledge over the years.
5) And to revisit 4. I specifically avoided a link to a netiquette website which would lay down "rules" corrupted with their own rules, even though I found some pretty good sites on the topic, because I thought that this *is* common knowledge, and people here should be allowed to collectively have input.
But again, no one is forcing you to follow this, this is about tactics that are successful and nice.
6) Think if this were a discussion on politics, it wouldn't be a list of positions, but a set of tactics that win elections. Would everyone have to follow them? No, you could ignore as many as you wanted, but if the people collectively over decades have decided that not following them loses elections, then sobeit. It's worth noting that PN and Kaneman basically have elected intentionally to not follow any rules of netiquette because they really have no interest in winning friends or influencing people.
7) This is not about how I think people should behave. The topic of netiquette came up, some people had never heard of it, others had and had ideas about it and wanted to discuss them, and little minidiscussions on things like godwin's law were springing up in threads, and those were threadjacks, so the *topic* deserved its own thread.
8) the reason the opening post is so *long* is that that I wanted to cover what we already knew, so we could skip forward to discussing new ideas, rather than rehashing old ones. I made only one suggestion above that was my own, the others I assumed 80-90% of the board already knew. And not the car girl, that was a joke.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Magon
it's more about effective communication than it is about who is right or wrong. As I've posted before, my father's family was killed in the holocaust, yet ironically, I've had many arguments with Nazis. It took me years to be able to do this, and those years were largely a change in me, rather than a change in them.
Now I might begin such a topic with a Nazi by conceding a point. It goes something like this:
Quote:
Me: Yes, you're right, some of our leaders have done manipulative things that have hurt people. OTOH, so have leaders of other groups, am I not right?
Nazi: Okay, you have a point. But Jews are the most destructive influence in the US, maybe the world! If we got rid of them, we'd be free?
Me: All jews? Or particular jews.
Nazi: A fair number.
Me: The majority? Or just a small powerful elite.
Nazi: A small powerful elite.
Me: So, if we removed this small powerful elite, can we be sure that this vacuum would not be filled by someone else?
Nazi: No. But we have to try. It's hard to do worse.
Me: But possible. So, what attracts you to Nazi Germany? Isn't that sort of a losing brand name?
Nazi: Maybe. But I just am. It's an idealistic society.
Me: Up to a point.
Nazi: Well, it's misunderstood.
Me: (conceding a point again) Okay, I'll give you 1934-1937, there was some idealism, and some accomplishments, but surely 1938-1945 ended in disaster.
Nazi: Sure. But it didn't have to be this way.
Me: Yes, it never does. But often it is. Look at Lenin and the Soviet Union, in the early years. Then look how it turned out under Stalin.
Nazi: Why do you compare us to the Soviets?
Me: Not comparing you, just saying the regimes didn't end up the way they intended. Like Mao. Something went wrong. But everyone farms past failures, looking for good ideas. The VW was a good idea, and a good car. But if Toyota is drawing on that idea in creating the Prius, which I think maybe they are, they're not sticking a swastika on the side, or a rising sun.
Nazi: Of course not.
Me: But Toyota is a family business, they're big start was as an industrial power for the Empire of the Rising Sun, like Porsche's Volkswagen they're probably pretty proud of that. Why not commemorate that?
Nazi: Because it would be a stupid business move.
Me: So you concede that it's a losing brand name then. So why are you attracted to it.
Nazi: Hmm. Haven't you ever longed for something that was romantic or idealist? Rather than follow the in the drudgery of a mechanical society?
Me: (For the moment skipping the obvious fact that Nazi Germany was a mechanical drudge society) Yes, sure, I used to be a socialist. I have a Soviet flag in my room. I don't believe that any more, but I used to be pretty into it.
Nazi: Yes, like the USSR (curious reversal) It's the pageantry. It's colorful and beautiful like the ideas, it's the imagery, it's a shame that it ended so badly.
Me: Yes, it's a shame. Shame for the USSR too. So, why did it go badly? Did the Jewish peasantry shoot it down?
Nazi. No, they couldn't.
Me: No, of course not, but that's who died in the holocaust.
Nazi: It's a lie. Not nearly that many Jews died.
Me: Okay, sure, I have no idea how many jews died or didn't, but neither do you, but back to this idea of why Nazi Germany failed.
Nazi: Because Hitler went insane and invaded Russia.
Me: Okay, I'll concede that. It was a major factor.
Nazi: But the ideals themselves weren't bad.
Me: Okay, but even if I concede that, what would happen if you exterminated the Jews today? How would the US respond? Or Britain?
Nazi: I see your point.
Me: And let's say you were successful, would this make you friends in the world? or enemies?
Nazi: Some of each maybe
Me: And would your really get these elders of Zion you think are behind the conspiracy, or would they slip away and redefine themselves as something else?
Nazi: They'd probably slip away those shapeshifting lizardmen.
Me: So perhaps there's a better solution?
Nazi: I guess there has to be.NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME