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

I Stand With Trolls

braythwayt.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 155 posts

Re: I Stand With Trolls

#141

Post by Raven_Trickster »

Jaundiced wrote: post #115
ChuckMcM wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is an interesting interpretation of what I wrote. I certainly agree that it is your prerogative to act in the way that aligns your actions with your interpretations.

I think it's a completely fair interpretation of what you wrote. The guy is a bigot. He worked to ensure that a class of people had fewer rights than other classes of people. If that doesn't make you a bigot, I don't know what does. I'm disappointed that you wasted our time with that completely ridiculous argument. That said, thanks for letting me know that if I ever take a morally abhorrent position on something, yo…

To derail this a little:

There's every chance that donating $8,000 to a cause was not about Gay Anything, and he was supporting a cause of someone he wanted to butter up / chat with / get into the table with.

Trust me: the "tipping culture" goes way beyond DC & lobbyists.

Corruption: for when donating to a cause to get favor gets a LGBT response. Shitty PR, and probably deserves it for currying favor with but really not that uncommon.

Boo! Politics is dirty; reeeeal dirty.

Re: I Stand With Trolls

#142

Post by yew »

eropple wrote: post #140
yew wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

why, yes, I went there You are, alas, making entirely unfounded assumptions about my personal beliefs. The third sentence of my previous post is the only thing I've said in this thread about that . Elsewise I'm just talking general psychology.

Your personal beliefs are irrelevant. You're asserting that we--people who are, you know, not gay-haters--are infringing on them . We are not.

And by them you mean?

I haven't asserted that you're infringing on anyone in more than a general sense, by the way. Though 'nuh-uh' wouldn't be a particularly convincing response if I had. And I'm not even talking about 'everyone who doesn't hate gays'. Nor am I excluding people who do hate gay people from my criticism. Given that I already believe that you're right and they're wrong (about gay rights, anyway), your posts don't seem to be going anywhere.

Edit: For future reference, "X is right" and "I believe that X is right" convey exactly equivalent information unless you're talking about psychology, which I am and you don't appear to me to be. Saying it really loudly doesn't change the epistemology. Am I misunderstanding you?

Re: I Stand With Trolls

#143

Post by zacharyvoase »

ChuckMcM wrote: post #61
zacharyvoase wrote: post #10

Just an anecdote, which I know is not the singular form of 'data', but still: I respect Mozilla as a company, but have no desire to work there (despite there being a lot of technology fit) because the CTO, Brendan Eich, made a donation of $1,000 to support Prop 8—a 2008 California ballot measure which banned gay marriage. Sure, I understood that his views were not those of his employer. But that doesn't make it easie…

Just as a heads up, there were a non-zero number of people who "supported" Prop 8 for a very different reason. This group of people reasoned that the only way to get equal protection under the law for gay and straight people was to have this law pass , have it be contested, and have the Supreme Court toss it out. Here is the thing, you can't go to the Supreme Court with some random request to rule on a principle they…

It’s really easy to call issues like gay marriage ‘disagreement’ when you're a heterosexual. When it’s something which actually affects you, less so. When people or organisations support CISPA/SOPA/PIPA, for example…

Re: I Stand With Trolls

#144

Post by subsection1h »

newnewnew wrote: post #63
ben0x539 wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> he will spend the money promoting causes I hate > you're never going to get people who don't disagree on some divisive issue I'm not sure you appreciate how deeply these issues affect the people they're about. It's not just talking points for everybody.

Roughly 25% of my generation has been killed by abortion, yet I still manage to work with many ardent pro-choice people. You have to develop thick skin. I blame the meme-space that we live in for ideas that I find abhorrent, not the individuals that believe them.

    Roughly 25% of my generation has been killed by abortion
As I understand it, the majority of pregnancies result in abortions:

http://www.emcom.ca/health/abortion.shtml

Re: I Stand With Trolls

#145

Post by yuhong »

michaelochurch wrote: post #18

Troll (mostly white-hat, these days) here. Had a gray-hat trolling habit as a teenager and in early 20s. Now I try to direct any hypergraphic tendencies to worthier causes. Denouncing idiocy is charity work that I do. However, I've "trolled for good" quite a bit and have really suffered for it, as the world unfortunately knows. The guys at the game company didn't deserve to be fired. They were engineers having a (som…

AFAIK Anonymous threatened a DDoS attack against SendGrid.

Re: I Stand With Trolls

#146

Post by yuhong »

h2s wrote: post #30

People use each other's employers to beat each other into submission. When that PyCon 2013 shitstorm went down, the Righteous Male Anger crew were very vocal about their plans to end all their business relationships with SendGrid in retaliation for Adria Richard's actions. It was a calculated move intended to get her fired for what she did. Presumably the dude who got canned for his remarks earlier in that sorry saga…

AFAIK Anonymous tried to threaten SendGrid with a DDoS.

Re: I Stand With Trolls

#147

Post by mkopinsky »

Raven_Trickster wrote: post #141
Jaundiced wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it's a completely fair interpretation of what you wrote. The guy is a bigot. He worked to ensure that a class of people had fewer rights than other classes of people. If that doesn't make you a bigot, I don't know what does. I'm disappointed that you wasted our time with that completely ridiculous argument. That said, thanks for letting me know that if I ever take a morally abhorrent position on something, yo…

To derail this a little: There's every chance that donating $8,000 to a cause was not about Gay Anything, and he was supporting a cause of someone he wanted to butter up / chat with / get into the table with. Trust me: the "tipping culture" goes way beyond DC & lobbyists. Corruption: for when donating to a cause to get favor gets a LGBT response. Shitty PR, and probably deserves it for currying favor with but really…

If so, he's corrupt instead of bigoted. Doesn't (materially) change whether someone would want to work with the guy.

Re: I Stand With Trolls

#148

Post by RHSeeger »

pilgrim689 wrote: post #118
RHSeeger wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Beliefs don't ruin lives, actions do.

Sure... and what caused the action? Was it not the belief? So should I have said "beliefs indirectly ruin lives"? Actually, does the action even directly ruin lives, or is it the way you react to an action that will ruin your life or not? Bah. It's just a nitpick, isn't it?

My apologies, I shouldn't have been so brief. Where I was going with my comment is that I don't take issue with other people's beliefs. What I take issue with is how they treat others. They may treat people badly because of their beliefs or because they're jerks... just as someone that is a biggot may still treat people well (ie "you're lesser than me, but all people deserve response").

Re: I Stand With Trolls

#149

Post by qu4z-2 »

lawnchair_larry wrote: post #87
pnathan wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

+1. > I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it -- Attributed to Voltaire. IMO, that perspective is one of the keystones of our culture, and not to be thrown away lightly.

You should understand that does not apply here. That quote doesn't extend to defending intolerance, because it is wholly incompatible with it. This isn't surprising, but context is often lost with that quote. Think about it for a second, how can you advocate that you would defend one's freedom to limit one's freedom?

As sibling comments said, I advocate that I'd defend one's freedom to advocate limiting one's freedom.

Re: I Stand With Trolls

#150

Post by eropple »

yew wrote: post #142
eropple wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your personal beliefs are irrelevant. You're asserting that we--people who are, you know, not gay-haters--are infringing on them . We are not.

And by them you mean? I haven't asserted that you're infringing on anyone in more than a general sense, by the way. Though 'nuh-uh' wouldn't be a particularly convincing response if I had. And I'm not even talking about 'everyone who doesn't hate gays'. Nor am I excluding people who do hate gay people from my criticism. Given that I already believe that you're right and they're wrong (about gay rights , anyway), your…

Yeah, I do think you are misunderstanding me. Your post says, "If you decide that, just this once, it isn't really imposing your beliefs on others", which is itself an invalid characterization of everything in the thread up to that point. My point is that precisely no-one on the side of the person to whom you were replying is doing that. There is no advocacy of the imposition of belief being performed. There is advocacy for the implementation of policy, but that is not the same thing; nobody's beliefs are even being questioned.

(Claims that the government being permissive on something is an infringement upon those who do not wish to perform that act do not follow logically. Not saying that's what you'd say next, but it's a common enough next step in this conversation so I figured I'd touch on it just-in-case.)

Post reply on HN