site banner
naraburns  nihil supernum  2d ago (text post)   1588 thread views

Quality Contributions Report for March 2025

This is the Quality Contributions Roundup. It showcases interesting and well-written comments and posts from the period covered. If you want to get an idea of what this community is about or how we want you to participate, look no further (except the rules maybe--those might be important too).

As a reminder, you can nominate Quality Contributions by hitting the report button and selecting the "Actually A Quality Contribution!" option. Additionally, links to all of the roundups can be found in the wiki of /r/theThread which can be found here. For a list of other great community content, see here.

These are mostly chronologically ordered, but I have in some cases tried to cluster comments by topic so if there is something you are looking for (or trying to avoid), this might be helpful.

Quality Contributions to the Main Motte

@ThisIsSin:

@problem_redditor:

@nomagicpill:

@aqouta:

Contributions for the week of February 24, 2025

@RandomRanger:

@doglatine:

@hydroacetylene:

@GBRK:

Contributions for the week of March 3, 2025

@kky:

@edmund-nelson:

@ABigGuy4U:

@MadMonzer:

@jeroboam:

Contributions for the week of March 10, 2025

@CrispyFriedBarnacles:

@WhiningCoil:

@faceh:

@FtttG:

@07mk:

@gog:

@Titus_1_16:

@DaseindustriesLtd:

@problem_redditor:

Contributions for the week of March 17, 2025

@FCfromSSC:

@Dean:

@ThenElection:

@OliveTapenade:

@SSCReader:

@HereAndGone:

@Fruck:

Contributions for the week of March 24, 2025

@ArjinFerman:

@johnfabian:

@Chrisprattalpharaptr:

@self_made_human:

@UnopenedEnvilope:

@Hoffmeister25:

@OliveTapenade:

Contributions for the week of March 31, 2025

@gattsuru:

@teleoplexy:

5
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

I thought I’d spent a lot of time on the motte this month, but I’d missed quite a few of these, especially at the beginning. Particularly impressed with @GBRK’s post on decoupling the different types of immigration!

@07mk: "I guess that's just a long-winded way of saying that The Boy Who Cried Wolf is, unironically, a pretty decent fable with a pretty decent lesson."

...

Again, as far back as 2016, I recall reading someone, maybe on SlateStarCodex, saying that they're not afraid of Trump, they're afraid of who might come after Trump. Now, I'm somewhat afraid of Trump, but not that much more than any other Republican POTUS, but I'm definitely more afraid of what could rise up from the farther, even more extreme right wing due to much of the left having so completely discredited its ability to criticize such people.

Sounds like the person you remember was riffing off of You Are Still Crying Wolf:

This, I think, is the first level of crying wolf. What if, one day, there is a candidate who hates black people so much that he doesn’t go on a campaign stop to a traditionally black church in Detroit, talk about all of the contributions black people have made to America, promise to fight for black people, and say that his campaign is about opposing racism in all its forms? What if there’s a candidate who does something more like, say, go to a KKK meeting and say that black people are inferior and only whites are real Americans?

We might want to use words like “openly racist” or “openly white supremacist” to describe him. And at that point, nobody will listen, because we wasted “openly white supremacist” on the guy who tweets pictures of himself eating a taco on Cinco de Mayo while saying “I love Hispanics!”

...

Stop crying wolf. God forbid, one day we might have somebody who doesn’t give speeches about how diversity makes this country great and how he wants to fight for minorities, who doesn’t pose holding a rainbow flag and state that he proudly supports transgender people, who doesn’t outperform his party among minority voters, who wasn’t the leader of the Salute to Israel Parade, and who doesn’t offer minorities major cabinet positions. And we won’t be able to call that guy an “openly white supremacist Nazi homophobe”, because we already wasted all those terms this year.

I think there are twin dangers of this.

First is that basically, for want of a better way to put this, cries of “this is literally Hitler” have done more to normalize Hitler than anything done by Nazis in the time since tge Second World War. If a guy looking for fraud in the government and who dreams of mars colonies is fascism, it’s actually not that bad. If the worst of literally Hitler is someone like Trump, who’s Blitzkreig thus far has managed to make whistle stops in Greenland, negotiate with Putin, and rename the Gulf of Mexico, Hitler isn’t that bad. Nobody is frightened of this government, and the left has no cards to play. And so, Hitler isn’t that boogeyman Voldemort that everyone fears. He’s just a conservative.

Secondly, there’s no longer any effective way to alert the public if a fascist actually shows up. After 40 years of everything I don’t like is Hitler, if a guy who actually wants to genocide Muslims shows up, it’s no longer possible to find unused verbiage that will tell them that the Antichrist is here and he wants to kill everyone.

I presume I wasn't the only person to nominate @teleoplexy's post, but I feel it's worth mentioning I did so 10% for the social commentary and 90% for the density of creative "meth-" portmanteaus.

I kept hoping for an "all craftsmethship is of the highest quality", but didn't see one. I was sad.

I'm jealous that I didn't come up with this - it was right there, really.

It's ok, "methgineering" still made my day. Honestly one of the top two words I've heard recently.

Well, don't keep us in suspense.

Oh, the other was "obligationship" - ie when you spend time with someone because you have to, not because you want to. Think stuff like hanging out with your significant other's family.

I like that as a corollary to “situationship.”

I'm flattered! It's also probably the quickest turnaround on AAQC that I've seen. Still up and active in this week's thread.

I got one posted at 9 pm the 31st once. It was teen mental health and parenting, I think.

It's also probably the quickest turnaround on AAQC that I've seen.

Back in the old country (and for a little bit on the Motte sub) the AAQC report was compiled weekly. I think that would actually be better, for a variety of reasons, and I myself did manage to post them twice a month for a while. But they've been strictly monthly for about three years now, and that pace seems to remain achievable in ways that twice a month, or weekly, is not.

Coincidentally, a different user made a post this morning that was similarly strongly nominated, that will definitely be in the next roundup, but the timestamp said "April" so I left it in the hopper.

I like the monthly format a bit better simply because I think the passage of time will help make the case for a post having quality and insight rather than simply being the most popular long post on a popular topic for this week. If done correctly, a quality posts should be insightful and interesting content on their own even after the heat of the moment has moved on.

I believe it racked up 7 or so nominations when I saw it, but not sure, I'm bad at meth.

Whatever the exact numbers, it was clearly a fêted meme.

What is this place?

This website is a place for people who want to move past shady thinking and test their ideas in a court of people who don't all share the same biases. Our goal is to optimize for light, not heat; this is a group effort, and all commentators are asked to do their part.

The weekly Culture War threads host the most controversial topics and are the most visible aspect of The Motte. However, many other topics are appropriate here. We encourage people to post anything related to science, politics, or philosophy; if in doubt, post!

Check out The Vault for an archive of old quality posts. You are encouraged to crosspost these elsewhere.


Why are you called The Motte?

A motte is a stone keep on a raised earthwork common in early medieval fortifications. More pertinently, it's an element in a rhetorical move called a "Motte-and-Bailey", originally identified by philosopher Nicholas Shackel. It describes the tendency in discourse for people to move from a controversial but high value claim to a defensible but less exciting one upon any resistance to the former. He likens this to the medieval fortification, where a desirable land (the bailey) is abandoned when in danger for the more easily defended motte. In Shackel's words, "The Motte represents the defensible but undesired propositions to which one retreats when hard pressed."

On The Motte, always attempt to remain inside your defensible territory, even if you are not being pressed.


New post guidelines

If you're posting something that isn't related to the culture war, we encourage you to post a thread for it. A submission statement is highly appreciated, but isn't necessary for text posts or links to largely-text posts such as blogs or news articles; if we're unsure of the value of your post, we might remove it until you add a submission statement. A submission statement is required for non-text sources (videos, podcasts, images).

Culture war posts go in the culture war thread; all links must either include a submission statement or significant commentary. Bare links without those will be removed.

If in doubt, please post it!


Rules


Recommended Posts And Communities

Recommended Realtime Chats