The emoji use is general is weird. It's like the flair thing from office space, like everyone tries hard to be quirky or something idk.
Privilege is bad grammar
231–240 of 292 posts
Re: Privilege is bad grammar
#232Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I wear ratty old clothes with holes in them, and nobody will dare to question it because I'm the important one here I live in a wealthy town. It’s less sinister than explicit counter signaling. More that I’ll wear comfortable clothes until they wear out because I have better things to do with my time than shop, and I don’t need to use dress anymore to get the access I want and need.
"Signaling" is just the information that your visible choices send to those around you, including strangers. That's why it's called "signaling" -- your choices are broadcasting an information signal about you to others. To not signal, you must make choices that carry little or no information in the context in which they exist. If you make choices in a context in which they are abnormal (e.g., dressing very casually i…
> "Signaling" is just the information that your visible choices send to those around you, including strangers. That's why it's called "signaling" -- your choices are broadcasting an information signal about you to others.
Where the theory falls flat re- signaling to strangers is that there are people that do dress very differently, use different cars, sometimes shave, sometimes not, on different days of the week.
And it's also very well known that many people simply do not pay attention to others. They mind their own business and that's it.
When I'm driving a random car and I'm dressed casually and not shaven, what signal am I sending to the strangers I'll see once during the day and who are anyway only minding their own business?
And the next day when I put on fancy shoes, an expensive watch, and I take out one of my Porsche and then go out and cross path with strangers, what signal am I sending? I'll only ever see them during that other day. Strangers who, also, only mind their own business.
The funny thing is: just like I don't give a flying fuck about other people, other people don't give a flying fuck about me.
But anyway how can I be signaling one thing to strangers on monday and another thing tuesday to other strangers?
Where it gets better: some days my wife prepares the clothes she wants me to wear (maybe because people shall come to the house later on or whatever), some days she doesn't and I just change underwear after my shower and put the same jeans I had the day before. Then I go to the garage: we both have several car keys. Maybe she decided to take my Porsche, maybe not.
So basically: I don't always pick the clothes I wear and my wife loves to sometimes take my Porsche.
What am I "signaling" to strangers? Not only I'm not totally in control of my outfit and my car but also simply don't care.
"Grug hungry. Grug grabs money or credit card. Grub puts whatever clothes on. Grug goes to whatever car is in the garage. Grub drives to groceries store to buy atoms to stay alive".
That's literally me.
Now maybe people in this thread meant to say: "signaling in the workplace towards people you see every day at work" but that's way different than "signaling to strangers".
To put it simply: I think a lot of people in this thread are way overestimating the level of caring other people exhibit.
I guarantee you that on the caring continuum most people by very far are on the "I couldn't care less" extreme.
There is such a thing as people who simply don't give a fuck and nobody is signaling anything to people who aren't even paying attention to you.
Grug goes to the groceries store to buy atoms to survive, not to look at other people's clothes/watch/car.
Signaling to people who aren't strangers: OK, that one I can buy. But to strangers I call horse load of shit because many people can "signal" two entire different things on two different days of the week. The only signal people see is the same as what people see reading tea leaves.
Re: Privilege is bad grammar
#233Just a random comment but: what a delightful blog. Even though I disagree on the virtues of cats (they really aren't all monsters. Ours is only occasionally evil).
Re: Privilege is bad grammar
#234Earlier quoted context omitted.
People react differently towards me depending on how I dress. It's quite noticeable. The sensible thing to do is take advantage of it.
And the best way to take advantage may be by unmasking the people that are incompetent enough to not assess others competence by looking at their work, and instead just look at their clothes. But well, it's context sensitive.
You can't control others, you can only control your response to them. How people perceive you is a comprehensive and isn't always based in logic. You can use this to your advantage and take control of your own narrative or not. But you'll be worse off for it if you don't.
I think you'll be pleasantly surprised about what kinds of things people look favorably on.
Re: Privilege is bad grammar
#235Re: Privilege is bad grammar
#236Re: Privilege is bad grammar
#237What does it have to do with privilege? This person's need for grammar seems to be self-imposed. I don't see where anyone judged him for bad grammar while a privileged person was given a get-out-of-jail-free card for the grammar police.
Re: Privilege is bad grammar
#238Earlier quoted context omitted.
Positive (tryhard) signaling: having a well designed email footer with all your contact info Neutral signaling: no footer at all -1 signaling: sent from my iPhone -2 signaling: sent from my Samsung AI Family Hub 4-Door Flex Fridge
I think "Sent from my iPhone" is now less of a status symbol than it is an excuse for short replies / bad grammar.
Status symbol?
I just assumed that was from people who aren't technologically literate enough to remove the default signature. It never occurred to me it might be intentional.
Re: Privilege is bad grammar
#239Earlier quoted context omitted.
I meant for flights (edited accordingly). In both cases I think "don't be a dick" probably would go most of the way
You'll get treated better by the staff if you dress better.
I'm less concerned with the behavior of the staff than the behavior of the other passengers
Re: Privilege is bad grammar
#240Earlier quoted context omitted.
On the positive side of this, research papers by competent people read very clearly with readable sentences, while those who are afraid that their content doesn't quite cut it, litter it with jargon, long complicated sentences, hoping that by making things hard, they will look smart. But to expand on the spelling topic, good spelling and grammar is now free with AI tools. It no longer signals being educated. Informal…
Have you actually read a research paper, ever? They are FILLED with jargon (that just as easily could be an ordinary English word instead) ... and giant paragraphs made up of ten sentences all combined into one with semi-colons ... and with all sorts of other butchering of the English language. Scientific research papers follow their own grammar, which is specific to the research community ... and that grammar is atr…
Most papers are badly written. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sturgeon%27s_law