site banner
PaperclipPerfector  6mo ago (text post)   24828 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of May 6, 2024

This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.

Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.

We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:

  • Shaming.

  • Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.

  • Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.

  • Recruiting for a cause.

  • Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.

In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:

  • Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.

  • Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.

  • Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.

  • Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.

On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.

6
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

You are straightforwardly wrong.

The votes seem to agree with me, and the mod team discord defense force doesn't. That should tell you something.

Could there be a bigger "consensus building" attack than this? Jesus dude, they should ban you just for this. The mods are not even corruptible, I tried about a month ago when I was stuck at home with a knee injury.

It's written in the rules that the mods will try to respect user sentiment, so user opinion of moderation is actually useful information. Also, consensus-building is most harmful against other users; in the case of mods, it is easily offset by mod powers. The point of the rule is to prevent users from suppressing views they disagree with, and he has no power to suppress mod actions.

It would be pretty cool if people stopped trying to fight the refs and just accepted that we're trying to maintain a system that actively does not want to exist, especially given that that forks with variant moderation have in fact been tried and have not gone well. Unfortunately that is never, ever going to happen.

The bribe attempt was in fact pretty funny, though.

Hey there is always money on the table. Zorba basically said a million to start. That is far beyond what I can pay for a little leeway. I know people that can, but they would just laugh at my parochial interests.

To elaborate, you are straightforwardly wrong that either @Amadan or any of the other mods pick people we dislike and twist the rules to go after them, and you are also wrong that @Amadan is the worst mod on the site.

You are coming in with an adversarial mindset, and allowing that mindset to color every interaction you have. There's no actual need to do that, and it's hard to see the benefit even if we're lying and you're right about everything. We are actually committed to fostering communication across the tribal divide. We are actually trying to implement the rules in good faith and with the explicit goal of keeping this forum performing its intended mission. You've gotten modded by @Amadan because I've been trying to engage with you directly, and we have a policy of not modding conversations we're involved in. Some of your comments are quite good, and some of them are pretty bad, and the distinctions between the two are not subtle. I am hoping at some point you can entertain the idea that we aren't trying to game you, simmer down a bit, and just lean into the productive discussions that I think you are entirely capable of. I want this to happen because I think your perspective and receipts-heavy approach are valuable, and I want to see more of it, but that isn't going to happen if you don't actually see value in calm, rational discussion with people who disagree with you.

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