Hacker News Reader

Comment by refulgentis | Hacker News Reader

This is a rather classic example of a comment that loads up premises with in-group language and conception, and thus if you engage with it, you only get positive results from the in-group, and the in-group can characterize dissent as simply ignoring "facts"

I believe the level of discourse on HN consistently avoids these over the last decade+ I've been here - one way to do that without falling into the trap of making you feel Othered is to encourage slow and steady argumentation - ex. characterizing this summers protests as "the black ""community"" totally flipping out and canonizing rapists and drug addicts" is loaded language, and worse for avoiding ingroup/outgroup dynamics, factually wrong at it's face: we know there were non-black "community" (what do the air quotes mean?) members that also protested.

View on HN

I'll go ahead and skip addressing the weird meta-analysis, aside from recognizing it - and calling it weird. As far as taking exception with the language used to describe the rioting, well that is just more of the same - the desperation to control language has gone from mildly annoying to simply pitiful. It also makes the task of accurately describing the participants and their activities impossible, which you foreshadow...

> ...what do the air quotes mean?

Consider not only the stupidity of cramming so many people into a single label suffixed by the word "community", but the utility that such an exercise would offer - and to who's benefit. Do you feel a sense of community with the rest of the people who share some arbitrary set of qualities with you? The right handed, brown eyed, bowl cut community?

I wish you well, fellow traveller: it sounds like you read a lot of things into my comment I didn't say, and they made you angry and caused you to lash out a little.

I'll point out the things you're mentioning were not only not said by me, and in fact, were things other people chastised me for not saying.

The weird meta-analysis may cut against your instincts, but you're going to have to deal with it at some point. It's weird to you because I _don't_ engage with the complex LARP you're living in. I simply noted that the comment was wrong at its face

BLM also does not "canonize rapists and drug addicts", as if the movement had a pope. Saying that someone unjustly suffered violence at the hands of police isn't near that level. I flagged the comment, but also appreciate your thoughtful response on discourse.

I agree, the only way I've found to avoid reinforcing a bubble is not to talk about the bubble, but rather, highlight that everyone can see the bubble - there's not a silent majority cheering you who perceives you outside a bubble, just people smiling politely and moving on, and other people genuinely worried for you.

> I believe the level of discourse on HN consistently avoids these over the last decade+

Oh that's fucking rich. You know damn well that HN consistently avoids one particular in-group and consistently dog-whistles in favor of the other in-group.

I wish you well, fellow traveler - one key breakthrough for me was prioritizing hearing people, not telling them what they think, upon advice from a good friend in a charged moment.

It really scares people when A) they find out you can mind read and B) you know _exactly_ how they're planning on manipulating society and C) you know the intricate details of their plan to say one thing but believe another, thus creating an unfair situation for you, a freethinker who knows They are up to something, and wants to save other innocents from Their trap.

Easy things to say on HN, in friendly territory. Looks like you have the moral high ground!

You can find me on Gab!

Reply on news.ycombinator.com