An interview with the man who keeps uploading my feet to WikiFeet • Hacker News Board

Re: An interview with the man who keeps uploading my feet to WikiFeet

#171

Post by o_____________o » Thu, Apr 08, 2021, 1:28 PM UTC

vvvvgood633 wrote: post #143

jdsalaro wrote: post #18

I went in thinking "meh, let's check" and was surprised and quite amused about the "wholesomeness" of what could have been a very strange encounter. He seemed respectful and she seemed unbothered by the whole ordeal. Interesting, not my cup of tea, but definitely interesting. Something else that caught my attention was how early he believes his interest for feet developed, as early as six and nine years of age. I won…

It’s pretty strange, I can remember liking feet in preschool and kindergarten. I have no idea why, though. Lately it’s gotten to be more of an “in theory” than “in practice” thing for me as I’ve come to learn about fungus and micro biome, etc. Eg https://au.news.yahoo.com/man-contracts-lung-infection-smell...

> I have no idea why, though.

Check out the "The Penfield homunculus" and note that in the brain's sensory map, where we process foot sensations is very close to genitalia.

Re: An interview with the man who keeps uploading my feet to WikiFeet

#172

Post by yosito » Thu, Apr 08, 2021, 1:29 PM UTC

vagrantJin wrote: post #147

yosito wrote: post #33

TIL there's a wiki website for foot fetishists. I believe everyone has a right to their own fetishes. Nothing wrong with being into feet. But the thing that really puts me off about this interview and the WikiFeet website is the lack of consent. Uploading photos of someone without their consent is wrong. The fact that the purpose is to satisfy a fetish adds an extra layer of creepy. Regardless of how the interviewer…

> But the thing that really puts me off about this interview and the WikiFeet website is the lack of consent. A bit of a harsh, knee-jeek reaction to something entirely meaningless. Topped with a vague proposition of privacy in a public forum. It's just feet. Unless someone knows you, your "privacy" isn't likely to be in peril from a site filled with feet.

It's not about the feet. It's about the lack of consent. It troubles me that you don't see a problem with that.

Re: An interview with the man who keeps uploading my feet to WikiFeet

#173

Post by BTCOG » Thu, Apr 08, 2021, 1:29 PM UTC

yosito wrote: post #33

TIL there's a wiki website for foot fetishists. I believe everyone has a right to their own fetishes. Nothing wrong with being into feet. But the thing that really puts me off about this interview and the WikiFeet website is the lack of consent. Uploading photos of someone without their consent is wrong. The fact that the purpose is to satisfy a fetish adds an extra layer of creepy. Regardless of how the interviewer…

While I'd agree that if he were sneaking into women's houses, snapping "candid" photos with no permission it would be one thing, but why do people entirely miss that this woman was posting all these pictures of her own feet on the internet? If anything, all this showcases in my opinion is how people share WAY too much personal info and then something like this can make them think twice about doing so.

Re: An interview with the man who keeps uploading my feet to WikiFeet

#174

Post by xyst » Thu, Apr 08, 2021, 1:30 PM UTC

Some people like boobs, others like ass, and a subsection of people just love feet.

I guess if you really think about it, adoring any body part is a “fetish”. It’s just socially acceptable to like tits or ass, and society has deemed adoration of feet as undesirable.

Re: An interview with the man who keeps uploading my feet to WikiFeet

#175

Post by Quarrelsome » Thu, Apr 08, 2021, 1:30 PM UTC

batch12 wrote: post #170

Quarrelsome wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No. I am stating that this attitude of "downvote when disagreeing" could lead to structural discrimination against minorities. That is exactly what I'm saying, nothing more, nothing less.

Impressive leap of logic to deem downvoting racist. This seems to be the final argument nowadays when all else fails. As a side note, I have often wished folks could see their downvote count or at least an upvote to downvote ratio. In the past I wondered if I was quicker to downvote, when I had the ability, than upvote.

> Impressive leap of logic to deem downvoting racist. This seems to be the final argument nowadays when all else fails.

I think that's cold for you to wilfuly misinterpret my point so. Fine, we'll apply it to the gold standard. In news.y for the 1800s someone recommending moving away from the gold standard would get downvoted to hell by those that "disagree". Their comment would grey and vanish to most.

By encouraging downvoting disagreements you encourage large consensus to shut out contradictory voices by downvoting them, regardless of the voracity of their arguments. This means that all voices are significantly constrained by the habits of the present as opposed to attempts at deriving truths that are correct regardless of the age.

IMO downvoting for disagreement is entitled behaviour because its greedily taking an extra vote. You get an upvote for agreement, to upvote AND downvote is two votes. Why should some people get two votes?

Re: An interview with the man who keeps uploading my feet to WikiFeet

#176

Post by pbhjpbhj » Thu, Apr 08, 2021, 1:31 PM UTC

simias wrote: post #137

monsieurbanana wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On this website, downvotes for disagreement are allowed. Take a deep breath, downvotes don't hurt.

Downvoting for disagreement is toxic to discourse and how echo chambers like Reddit are born. It may be tolerated but it shouldn't be encouraged IMO.

I agree, but fwiw pg (the HN founder) encouraged downvoting for disagreement.

I railed against it to, but as pg endorses it I think we're stuck with it.

The best sort of voting I've seen is multi-dimensional Slashdot-style voting where users can individually model there own comment visibility metrics.

Re: An interview with the man who keeps uploading my feet to WikiFeet

#177

Post by watwut » Thu, Apr 08, 2021, 1:33 PM UTC

pwdisswordfish0 wrote: post #104

mattmanser wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not something they created. You're not really contributing, it's more akin to showing off your stamp collection, but with sexual undertones that make many feel uncomfortable.

Wikipedia contributions are also not something you “created”. In fact, you’re discouraged from adding information you have not taken from somewhere else. Archival, compilation, curation, categorization, making information legible and accessible and persistent is still work. See also archive.org. Whether the specific topic makes some people uncomfortable is beside the point. The question was “why do you try to help a…

Wikipedia contributions are very much created. You are not supposed to copy paste from elsewhere. You are writing own text.

Re: An interview with the man who keeps uploading my feet to WikiFeet

#178

Post by pbhjpbhj » Thu, Apr 08, 2021, 1:38 PM UTC

drakonka wrote: post #158

quotemstr wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> That's a huge loss of generality. I don't think so. The author's core discomfort (to which I'm sympathetic) seems to not be about the image hosting, but about people enjoying pictures of her feet in a way that makes her uncomfortable. I don't think that wikiFeet moving to a hyperlink model would alleviate the author's discomfort with wikiFeet existing, so we need to talk about that core discomfort, not about the sp…

Of course it would alleviate discomfort - it would allow the author to retain full control of their image. They could, with a couple of taps, delete the image and prevent its propagation on a fetish website.

Or, up until recently, block based on referrer; or block based on IP address (eg limit it to one ISP that all their family use).

Re: An interview with the man who keeps uploading my feet to WikiFeet

#179

Post by gruez » Thu, Apr 08, 2021, 1:40 PM UTC

watwut wrote: post #177

pwdisswordfish0 wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wikipedia contributions are also not something you “created”. In fact, you’re discouraged from adding information you have not taken from somewhere else. Archival, compilation, curation, categorization, making information legible and accessible and persistent is still work. See also archive.org. Whether the specific topic makes some people uncomfortable is beside the point. The question was “why do you try to help a…

Wikipedia contributions are very much created. You are not supposed to copy paste from elsewhere. You are writing own text.

I think he's referring to this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:No_original_research

You can't copy paste, but you're also not supposed to come up with stuff yourself.

Re: An interview with the man who keeps uploading my feet to WikiFeet

#180

Post by ndespres » Thu, Apr 08, 2021, 1:42 PM UTC

xyst wrote: post #174

Some people like boobs, others like ass, and a subsection of people just love feet. I guess if you really think about it, adoring any body part is a “fetish”. It’s just socially acceptable to like tits or ass, and society has deemed adoration of feet as undesirable.

Adoring the reproductive parts of our bodies seems like a normal biological response though being so fascinated by them that you would be a a contributor to WikiButt or whatever would also be strange to me.

To fetishize the foot is something different.