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

The new silent majority: People who don't tweet

axios.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

651–660 of 784 posts

Re: The new silent majority: People who don't tweet

#651

Post by raxxorrax »

HideousKojima wrote: post #464
madrox wrote: post #273

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My favorite theory comes from an HN comment describing it as the "toaster fucker problem." I'd attempt to re-explain it, but the original comment is great (and easy to search for. Not many mentions of the phrase "toaster fucker" on HN.) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25667362

4channers made a comic of this concept a few years ago, but it was something like "gay dragonkin neonazis" instead of toaster lovers.

Seems someone adjusted the story for a wider audience.

Re: The new silent majority: People who don't tweet

#652

Post by raptorraver »

vorpalhex wrote: post #146
toastercat wrote: post #71

I tried being a Twitter user for a bit last year, mostly because a lot of engineers I admire use it to communicate about interesting topics and also their work. But after a while, I realized even they will pollute my feed with politically divisive topics, whether it be from them retweeting something, or liking a tweet, or even entering into the fray themselves -- Twitter will find a way to get me to see it. For a whi…

One of my pet theories for why social media is such a cesspool is that it exposes us to the whole of someone else. If I play boardgames with Sue, that's enough. We meet, enjoy a beer and play some Catan and go our separate ways. That's a fine relationship. If I follow Sue on social media, now I know her politics, religion, sex life, drug usage, opinions on every little thing.. and frankly, I don't care or want to. I'…

This is point on.

My wife is quite active on social while I'm not part of any social media (HN doesn't count, right?). We both have quite a different options about some political issues than our friends. It's been strange observing how her views about our friends are more negative and polarised than mine. Like, I don't really know or care what they think about politics, or what they think about my views. They are my friends and it's okay we disagree on stuff. When I meet them we seldom discuss about the dividing things, but when we do, we do so in respectful manner.

I think when meeting in person we tend to find similarities with each other. In social media it's the opposite.

Re: The new silent majority: People who don't tweet

#653

Post by hedgewitch »

vorpalhex wrote: post #640
hedgewitch wrote: post #597

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you don't understand that the problem is that detractors have made simply being LGBTQ+ a political issue, you are not qualified to have an opinion here. I'm curious what you think you mean because there is no good answer. I also wouldn't have had to comment at all if people weren't casually asking people to instate don't ask don't tell in social settings.

Remember to interpret someone's arguments in the strongest possible sense. Chastising others is great for moral superiority but it is a poor tool for discussion.

You know, telling people they're acting morally superior when they're confronting the fact that people are calling aspects of their identity controversial and acting like said parts of their identity simply shouldn't be discussed in public is not a good look.

Re: The new silent majority: People who don't tweet

#654

Post by dskwww »

madrox wrote: post #273
vorpalhex wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One of my pet theories for why social media is such a cesspool is that it exposes us to the whole of someone else. If I play boardgames with Sue, that's enough. We meet, enjoy a beer and play some Catan and go our separate ways. That's a fine relationship. If I follow Sue on social media, now I know her politics, religion, sex life, drug usage, opinions on every little thing.. and frankly, I don't care or want to. I'…

My favorite theory comes from an HN comment describing it as the "toaster fucker problem." I'd attempt to re-explain it, but the original comment is great (and easy to search for. Not many mentions of the phrase "toaster fucker" on HN.) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25667362

[flagged]

Re: The new silent majority: People who don't tweet

#655

Post by roenxi »

manmal wrote: post #424
dogleash wrote: post #295

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Navy Seal Copypasta, broken into eight twitter sized parts. Eventually they banned me for this Fucking killjoys. If twitter is moderating for people who can't even figure out not to take that copypasta seriously[1], then they're showing their hand. There's no end state. No goal. There is no cultural equilibrium point that even perfect moderation could ever achieve. Therefore, visible attrition is the end state. Twit…

IMO it’s not unreasonable to ban users who are outliers in terms of complaints from other users.

It isn't workable. If you ban the 2% most complained about users there will still be a 2% most complained about users.

There should be something as close as possible to an objective standard of what is and isn't allowed.

Re: The new silent majority: People who don't tweet

#656

Post by raxxorrax »

deanCommie wrote: post #425
madrox wrote: post #273

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My favorite theory comes from an HN comment describing it as the "toaster fucker problem." I'd attempt to re-explain it, but the original comment is great (and easy to search for. Not many mentions of the phrase "toaster fucker" on HN.) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25667362

It's a funny analogy, but there is a spectrum, no? Surely you could acknowledge that there is a spectrum somewhere between Black, Gay, Trans, and Toaster Fucker? It's extremely easy to dismiss all of these as equally irrelevant. In fact many do (not saying you are) - "I don't care if you are black, white or purple. I treat everyone equally". "I don't care if you're straight, gay, or curvy - what you do in the bedroom…

I completely disagree with this on basically all these points. Implicit bias only has shaky theoretical foundations and you don't have to be ashamed of being biased in the first place. Of course you have bias for friends and family. Principles and laws keep you from nepotism. But emotional ties are almost completely irrelevant here. The mafia isn't a real family.

These position are as non-judgemental as it gets. Gay marriage is a separate issue but many support it because of such positions.

Dominant society in liberal democracies impose almost no values on anything related to that and it is even part of the curriculum to educate people on different sexuality. But I think that problem is solved since a few generations. In many countries at least. Saying such positions would be judgemental is actually moving backwards again.

Re: The new silent majority: People who don't tweet

#657

Post by raxxorrax »

beaconstudios wrote: post #538
nobody9999 wrote: post #529

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>These attitudes SEEM like they are non-judgemental and egalitarian, but they tend to miss all the implicit ways in which the dominant society does NOT treat people equally in these circumstances. So, what would you have us do? I treat each individual as an individual and interact with them based on their individual actions, not based on any immutable characteristics. I fully support inclusion, diversity, honesty and…

You're taking a very individualist stance on the issue - nobody reasonable thinks you should literally give your money to oppressed people to assuage privilege guilt. Hell, you shouldn't feel guilt at all for privilege; it's just something you're meant to be aware of when looking at things outside your frame of reference. All anybody wants is for you to support the movement for their rights in whatever ways you feel…

There is a huge difference of who asks. The answer to if I support BLM is different and can even contradict itself if the family of George Floyd asks or some corporate media that runs a populist ad campaign. I still believe people were scammed out of their money, that their good nature was taken advantage of.

Black girl programmers should not be black girl programmers, they should be programmers. And they most certainly won't face discrimination because of that. I do think that treating people differently will breed animosity and it does not solve any problem.

Re: The new silent majority: People who don't tweet

#658

Post by monkeydust »

madrox wrote: post #273
vorpalhex wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One of my pet theories for why social media is such a cesspool is that it exposes us to the whole of someone else. If I play boardgames with Sue, that's enough. We meet, enjoy a beer and play some Catan and go our separate ways. That's a fine relationship. If I follow Sue on social media, now I know her politics, religion, sex life, drug usage, opinions on every little thing.. and frankly, I don't care or want to. I'…

My favorite theory comes from an HN comment describing it as the "toaster fucker problem." I'd attempt to re-explain it, but the original comment is great (and easy to search for. Not many mentions of the phrase "toaster fucker" on HN.) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25667362

This is why I love HN. Brilliant theory and one I want to circulate but might... no will... need to replace 'toaster fucker' with something more PC to avoid a call from the HR robots.

Re: The new silent majority: People who don't tweet

#659

Post by raxxorrax »

hedgewitch wrote: post #597
mechanical_bear wrote: post #596

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You constructed a straw man out of his comments very effectively. I didn’t gather that he meant you can’t mention your life, significant other, etc. I read it as maybe don’t discuss the political aspects of LGBT issues, etc

If you don't understand that the problem is that detractors have made simply being LGBTQ+ a political issue, you are not qualified to have an opinion here. I'm curious what you think you mean because there is no good answer. I also wouldn't have had to comment at all if people weren't casually asking people to instate don't ask don't tell in social settings.

Nobody can stop you if you want to be oppressed but that is not in any way representative of LGBT.

Re: The new silent majority: People who don't tweet

#660

Post by iudqnolq »

jameskilton wrote: post #12

"Never pass up a chance to keep your mouth shut" Words my Dad taught me as I was growing up, but only really sank in the last 5 or so years ago.

But you aren't? The belief that posting on HN is qualitatively different from all other social media is truly extraordinary.
Post reply on HN