Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

On Recent Controversial Events

ebb.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 151 posts

Re: On Recent Controversial Events

#61

Post by herostratus101 »

skybrian wrote: post #45
zaptheimpaler wrote: post #37

> It really doesn't matter what your view about the controversial issue is; a leader who refuses to stop talking loudly about unrelated issues eventually creates an untenable distraction from .... I can understand his position, but this is part of the picture of a core problem in society today. Its NOT that leaders aren't allowed to speak about controversial issues - its that they aren't allowed to advocate ONE side…

This isn't new and it's a consequence of how publicity works. Some views make the news and others don't, depending on how outside the mainstream they are. Public figures are judged by all their attention-getting views. Maybe it doesn't matter too much if nobody knows who you are, but it's why some authors write under pen names. (Back when the U.S. was founded, writing for newspapers using your real name was apparentl…

This argument seems to assume that the media is a fair and impartial arbiter of acceptable opinion, which is a fairly controversial stance.

Re: On Recent Controversial Events

#62

Post by lisp-missionary »

wmf wrote: post #41
breck wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is this a good pattern though? Seems to me like a low standard for our leaders. You should be able to do more than one thing at once.

It's not really about leaders at all but about the public and press who will listen to and amplify anything leaders say even if it's off-topic bullshit.

[flagged]

Re: On Recent Controversial Events

#63

Post by yourbandsucks »

eightysixfour wrote: post #12
yourbandsucks wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But then Kuhn gives the game away within a couple paragraphs, calling RMS's views 'problematic' and expressing disagreement with several of them. If you're gonna go with that line, stay on-message.

I disagree with you, Kuhn expressed that he believes that a leader pushing a controversial message unrelated to an organization’s purpose can become a distraction which has consequences, whether you agree with the leader’s controversial message or not. That is not invalidated by the fact that Kuhn also disagreed with the views RMS has expressed and Kuhn clearly wished to distance himself from those views.

"Give the game away" is too strong, you're right. I don't mean to imply that Kuhn didn't mean what he carefully wrote, he seems like a standup guy doing Free Software.

Re: On Recent Controversial Events

#65

Post by new_realist »

zaptheimpaler wrote: post #37

> It really doesn't matter what your view about the controversial issue is; a leader who refuses to stop talking loudly about unrelated issues eventually creates an untenable distraction from .... I can understand his position, but this is part of the picture of a core problem in society today. Its NOT that leaders aren't allowed to speak about controversial issues - its that they aren't allowed to advocate ONE side…

Society has enforced social norms since as long as society has existed.

Re: On Recent Controversial Events

#68

Post by QualityReboot »

zaptheimpaler wrote: post #37

> It really doesn't matter what your view about the controversial issue is; a leader who refuses to stop talking loudly about unrelated issues eventually creates an untenable distraction from .... I can understand his position, but this is part of the picture of a core problem in society today. Its NOT that leaders aren't allowed to speak about controversial issues - its that they aren't allowed to advocate ONE side…

Society seems to be settling in on global norms due to the rise of social media. The more engaged you are with it, the more you know what's cancelled and what's trending.

> Just pray you don't speak against mob or they'll cancel you.

I think the prudent strategy is to understand what's being cancelled today and make sure you're on the right side of it. It's really pretty easy to do just by reading HN.

Just know that you're always speaking to the mob and you won't get canceled. If you have views that disgust the mob, you're going to end up like RMS.

A lot of people are upset about cancel culture, but if you embrace it, it's pretty easy to exploit. You don't have to do the canceling yourself, but if you understand it, it's like a cheat sheet for being socially "right" on every hot button issue. I can fit in any liberal circle with ease because it's so predictable, and I know how to be edgy if I want. And because there's only two tribes that are pretty much opposite, I can do the same with conservatives.

You can still have all the radical opinions you want, you just can't do public stuff with them under your real identity, if you want to avoid being canceled. Maybe we'll see a resurgence of anonymous early-internet type culture, where people have aliases and keep their views disconnected from their public life. I think that works pretty well, because most activism can be done anonymously. It's not that hard to conform irl and do meaningful things under an alias online.

Re: On Recent Controversial Events

#69

Post by mantap »

herostratus101 wrote: post #60
mantap wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just don't use your real name. You can post any controversial opinion you like on the internet but don't tie it back to your real identity if you don't want real world consequences. The internet is still a massive improvement to freedom of speech.

But it's much less likely that anyone will care what an anonymous alt has to say. And the far left is still doing everything in their power to shut down even anonymous speech they disapprove of.

Let's be honest nobody really cares about your opinions real name or not. The point of posting on the internet is to get something off your chest.

You can also find a like-minded group of individuals on the internet who you can discuss your beliefs with.

Re: On Recent Controversial Events

#70

Post by incompatible »

mantap wrote: post #56
zaptheimpaler wrote: post #37

> It really doesn't matter what your view about the controversial issue is; a leader who refuses to stop talking loudly about unrelated issues eventually creates an untenable distraction from .... I can understand his position, but this is part of the picture of a core problem in society today. Its NOT that leaders aren't allowed to speak about controversial issues - its that they aren't allowed to advocate ONE side…

Just don't use your real name. You can post any controversial opinion you like on the internet but don't tie it back to your real identity if you don't want real world consequences. The internet is still a massive improvement to freedom of speech.

Anonymous speech is always the last refuge of freedom of speech. You can have that anywhere, it doesn't require a "free country".
Post reply on HN