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

I would like closure, but I'll take honesty

freddiedeboer.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 211 posts

Re: I would like closure, but I'll take honesty

#171

Post by newaccount74 »

tptacek wrote: post #127
newaccount74 wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If someone suffers from a psychotic episode, and you accuse him of something he does during that psychotic episode without mentioning anything about the fact that he was suffering from a psychotic episode, then that is unambiguously a lie by omission. People who suffer from psychosis do not behave in a reasonable manner. A psychosis is a medical emergency. It's like complaining that someone caused a traffic accident…

No, it's not unambiguously a lie by omission. You're just restating deBoer's premise. I don't agree with him; he doesn't get to set these terms. He's entitled to try to persuade people in a different direction; he's not entitled to call people who state basic facts about his past conduct "liars".

In my opinion people are absolutely entitled to call other people who state basic facts about their past while knowingly omitting relevant context a liar.

Re: I would like closure, but I'll take honesty

#172

Post by beebmam »

jck wrote: post #169
beebmam wrote: post #27

Certainly I'd like to think there's a special place in hell for those who accuse innocent people of sexual abuse; there's not much worse that one can be accused of. Mental illness or not, there's no excuse for these kinds of false accusations. It's certainly understandable given Freddie's condition. But us understanding why it happened doesn't ethically justify their actions, and it also doesn't relieve the perpetrat…

Full disclosure: I don't know who this guy is and hadn't heard of him before today. > Get a job, like most of the rest of us, and stop being a public figure. That's what I'd like This seems a bit harsh. Are you saying that anyone who has done something wrong should be permanently shunned and no longer deserves a voice in society? Should he also fully isolate himself and stop having friends and just not say anything e…

I'm saying if someone commits a violent act that ruins someone's life, like murdering someone or accusing someone of rape, that perpetrator should voluntarily choose to not publish thinkpieces, yes. And if that person doesn't voluntarily choose to not publish their words, people should shun that person.

Re: I would like closure, but I'll take honesty

#173

Post by gopher_space »

trgn wrote: post #80
weeblewobble wrote: post #37

For context, here's Freddie's contemporaneous apology, which he has not only deleted from his website but from the Wayback Machine as well (sorry for the weird site, only copy I could find): https://www.falserapetimeline.org/false-rape-5950.pdf Some excerpts: "Crucially, despite my mental state at the time, I knew when I sent those tweets that they were untrue. I am responsible for having made those false allegations…

I love deBoers writing when it's about _something_, but the navel-gazing gets old really quick. Yikes! If he truly feels sorry, he just needs to move on. He seems to understand what he did was foul. Well then, move forward, be a good man to all the new people in your life. Instead, he craves absolution (and, reading between the lines, acceptance). No human being can be cajoled into extending that. It's truly foolish…

Can you hit me up with your favorite examples? I'm just hearing about the guy now and the first article of his that I found was kind of a pseudosciencey wall-o-text that I won't be finishing.

Re: I would like closure, but I'll take honesty

#174

Post by alchemst »

actually_a_dog wrote: post #158
lubujackson wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The author should know that this attitude does absolutely nothing for anyone. Throwing blame back on other people for not understanding your hardships is self-serving and a fundamentally dismissive attitude. Mental issues do not absolve actions. You feel that you are not fully responsible for your actions and that is actually fine - but as a person who caused harm you should own your ACTIONS, full stop. "I fucked up.…

> I have asked that people consider that I deserve neither total condemnation nor total exoneration. This seems to be an admission of responsibility to me.

It seems about the weakest one possible, in that it allows accepting either only tiny amounts of responsibility, or almost total responsibility.

Re: I would like closure, but I'll take honesty

#175

Post by alchemst »

dkarl wrote: post #131

People still have a problem relating to others with severe mental illness (and addiction, for that matter.) The script they expect is, "I have learned that what I did wrong, I'm a better person now, and I'm ready to be trusted again." That's what they expect, what they demand. But this guy can't say "I learned" or "Here's my case for why I am ready to be trusted again." Not honestly. In my past (thankfully not recent…

Yes, but then isn't it clear that he isn't to be trusted (or how much he is to be trusted), and that's really what most people care about, they don't care why.

I think that's part of why the mental health acceptance movement is quite tricky, and not super-successful.

Re: I would like closure, but I'll take honesty

#176

Post by alchemst »

newbie789 wrote: post #156
ineptech wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I didn't admonish you, I explained why you were getting downvoted and flagged. And you told me I was racist. What more is there to say?

That’s fascinating because I didn’t ask why I’m getting downvoted, thanks for the uh, friendly unrequested… help with… internet points? It’s fascinating that you cannot actually respond to my original post at all, yet are compelled to post nonetheless. I admire your sense of civic duty, because it’s definitely not some silly nonsense meant to avoid discussing the subject matter that I’ve brought up in order to carry…

Why not just ask him when he stopped beating his wife, and be done with it?

Re: I would like closure, but I'll take honesty

#177

Post by throwaway0a5e »

actually_a_dog wrote: post #157
podgaj wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We have two be careful (I have Schiozoaffective Bipolar Disorder) when going on to social media. I cannot use Facebook at all. For some reason it is always a huge trigger for me. On Twitter I go back and forth. Even Hacker News frustrates me when they keep telling me I am "posting too fast". Most times nothing is too fast for me. :) But in total, I would say some social media platforms are worse than others. I long f…

Your account has been rate limited. At some point, you did something wrong, and noone in administration could even be bothered to warn or tell you about it. That cryptic error message is what gets shown to you instead of anything descriptive. The only way to get it lifted is to email them and pinky promise never again to do the thing they didn't tell you you did in the first place. See this thread: https://news.ycomb…

"did something wrong" seems to have a strong correlation to the ability to make hard to refute arguments for opinions that are very solidly in the "outgroup wrongthink" category on HN. The people who can only make weak arguments for the wrong sides of issues get thier accounts shadowbanned or banned for flamebait.

I have no desire to converse with certain ideological groups on certain sides of certain issues but to silence (in relative terms) the ones arguing their side effectively endangers the community's ability to think critically.

Re: I would like closure, but I'll take honesty

#178

Post by podgaj »

actually_a_dog wrote: post #157
podgaj wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We have two be careful (I have Schiozoaffective Bipolar Disorder) when going on to social media. I cannot use Facebook at all. For some reason it is always a huge trigger for me. On Twitter I go back and forth. Even Hacker News frustrates me when they keep telling me I am "posting too fast". Most times nothing is too fast for me. :) But in total, I would say some social media platforms are worse than others. I long f…

Your account has been rate limited. At some point, you did something wrong, and noone in administration could even be bothered to warn or tell you about it. That cryptic error message is what gets shown to you instead of anything descriptive. The only way to get it lifted is to email them and pinky promise never again to do the thing they didn't tell you you did in the first place. See this thread: https://news.ycomb…

Could it be that I use a VPN frequently?

Re: I would like closure, but I'll take honesty

#180

Post by scythe »

tptacek wrote: post #65
scythe wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A lie is intentional. Regardless of the falsehood, it is not a lie if you believe it when you say it. But it is certainly misleading to make these claims about deBoer's actions without context. If this is intentional, then it is intentionally misleading. I wonder if there's a word for that.

Whatever it is, we should all be able to agree that it's not "unambiguous".

Are you agreeing or disagreeing that someone who knowingly omits the context in this situation is being intentionally misleading?

>we should all be able to agree

If we were all able to agree, this conversation wouldn't be here.

Post reply on HN