cjet79
Anarcho Capitalist on moral grounds
Libertarian Minarchist on economic grounds
User ID: 124

I don't feel that community regulation is equivalent to government regulation.
On the basis of distance from you, or the ability to send you to prison, or something else?
I think you can't have neither, and at worst you'll have both. And they do have many different characteristics.
Your post talks about disliking having your friends chosen for you by your parents and goes on to discuss the government, so I assumed you saw them both as being somewhat similar.
I made the comparison mostly to give some sense to people of how it feels. I picked the most relatable experience I could think of. Not the most similar comparison.
Could you add more detail? Or point to a post where you’ve discussed this?
Detail on what specifically?
Can you conceive a scenario where unrestricted immigration could lead to severe problems?
Yes, I can also conceive and witness problems caused by unregulated relationships. Does it change my position? Not really an inch on either issue.
There is little discourse that strikes me as stupider and less informed by these sorts of takes on "locker room culture" and male spaces.
A little too antagonistic. This isn't a locker room, we have norms of politeness here. You can defend locker room norms, but calling the attacks on them "stupid" is not really in line with what we expect.
The first criticism was not criticism of the motte or discussion. It was a criticism that someone would get disappointed that someone preempted their post.
They are still shitting on quality posters. I'd rather keep the quality posters happy rather than this user.
With respect to your second point, scope (like quality) is orthogonal to length. What I think we want is insight; not length.
And the top level post provided no insight either. Shared a link story, asked some basic questions, and basically said "discuss". Had it done so, or attempted to do so I might not have banned.
I don't think my minimum level standard for a top level post is very high. People seem to come out of the woodwork every time this comes up acting like I'm asking them to write a novel. I'm not. Just start the discussion, put some level of thinking and effort into your post. If it looks like you tried and fell short I'll probably only provide a warning. The original poster did not try at all. And there is a group of users that constantly want to resurrect the bare links thread, so they post what they think is just past the line on acceptable. Sometimes I am going to drop bans for this. Play stupid games, win stupid prizes.
@jkf If you find @Gdanning annoying you should either not engage, or engage in a non-antagonistic manner.
Gdanning made the antagonistic comment about Canadians, but otherwise backed off and only addressed points about the argument.
@jkf you were antagonistic multiple times in a row, despite no escalation from gdanning. Consider this a warning.
This comment got enough reports that I feel it is important to respond to it with my moderator hat on.
This is certainly an unpopular opinion around here, but we don't moderate on unpopular opinions. I partly wish people would stop reporting things just because they are unpopular opinions. This clogs the mod queue for other uses.
At most I'd just say that you could elaborate on something like this:
Oh being cis and straight is absolutely affirmed by schools every minute of every day.
Which is a claim that might get accepted uncritically in some circles, but not around here.
I'm trying to read all of the responses of people that wrote things on here. That leaves me little time to go read someone else's writing on another website.
I don't believe color blindness has ever been a major problem.
America is one of the least dense countries in the world. It is a net exporter of food. The US is about three times larger than India in size.
"The country has limited space" is only true in the trite and meaningless sense that it is not actually infinite. But it is certainly not running out of space or even getting all that tight.
The lifeboat metaphor is the ultimate "their is a fixed pie of resources" perspective. And if I believed that "fixed pie" story to be true I'd agree on immigration restrictions. But it's objectively not true and I'd have to lobotomize all the parts of my brain that know anything about economics to believe it.
Yeah this never seemed like anything other than trolling on Musk's part. I didn't read the original tweets where he showed off his gaming level, but it seemed obviously ridiculous. Of course he is not one of the best players in a world at a game that takes dozens or hundreds of hours of play to reach that level.
This doesn't happen. Bans are almost always approved by more than one moderator. We always let each other know when we have carried out a ban and for what reasons.
Amadan in particular is diligent about recusing himself when he thinks there might even be a hint of bias.
He is still the most active mod on the team. I'd consider him a pillar of the community and essential to keeping this place running.
You on the other hand are on the opposite end of the spectrum. You've been on thin ice for about the entire 8 months that you have had this account active. 7 warnings, 3 tempbans, and no quality posts.
Your pattern of behavior follows many such permabans in the past. You are a dick to everyone to start. Then as your warnings and bans increase you mostly just direct the trolling towards the mods in particular, so it starts looking like any punishment of you is just retalliation for your "speaking truth to power".
I'd rather not go through the whole rigamarole where we pretend you are going to in some way reform. But we have the process in place so these accusations can be seen as false every time they inevitably get trotted out by every bad faith actor we have on this forum.
If I see you making more unfounded accusations against a moderator like this, then I'll be in favor of a permaban, regardless of how it "looks" because at some point its just not worth dealing with this crap again and again.
Its news you find interesting. But if others find it boring or distracting then a conversation about it doesn't add to their enjoyment of the site. For example I am interested in tech news but very uninterested in foreign policy. The whole war in Gaza is less interesting to me than Amazon's return to office policy. If this thread was 10 times bigger with the same quality writing but all about foreign policy then it would be no better for me.
We don't have unlimited people producing unlimited content like X does. Every time I read your complaints that seems to be a built in assumption, that the lack of top level content holds people back from the total amount they post. I just don't see it personally. I'm limited in how much quality content I can write. Probably only a few good comments a day.
I would love to have more people here posting more quality content. If we as mods got overwhelmed with moderating we would add more moderators as we've done in the past. An unlimited amount of low quality content is useless.
I don't buy your point that it is a conflict of interest. As a user I also hate low quality content, because it's crap that I have to filter through to get to the good stuff. X and Facebook and YouTube are all unusable to me. Too much crap, not enough gold. And I'm only a user on those websites, not a moderator.
I just don't believe that cyclists are such huge divas that they will take a slightly worse experience for a significant improvement in personal safety. If they feel that way why do any of them wear helmets? That is also a comfort vs safety tradeoff, and everyone has seemingly been fine with that mandated tradeoff. Why not this one?
I wrote this up thread
In general I suggest three things for a decent start at a top level post:
- Context. What are you talking about. Helpful to have links or quotes, but not always necessary. "There have been a slew of campus protests about the Israel war lately. They were the worst at [this university] (link to news story)."
- Interpretation and analysis. Add some of your own interpretation and analysis to these events. "The protests seem to have been treated a bit differently from other protests in recent memory, like the BLM. Police have been called up to break up some of the protests. Donors have threatened to remove funding from universities. Etc"
- Opinion. "The protests seem pointless. Israel has not changed its policies at all."
There is a definite problem where people skip step 2. And part 3 sounds like "The protestors seem evil, it would be nice if they were shot." Yes that sort of post will get you dinged for boo outgroup.
Antagonistic. You have been warned 3 times before:
- https://www.themotte.org/post/565/culture-war-roundup-for-the-week/116811?context=8#context
- https://www.themotte.org/post/601/culture-war-roundup-for-the-week/122701?context=8#context
- https://www.themotte.org/post/715/culture-war-roundup-for-the-week/150250?context=8#context
5 day ban.
I believe most people share a value for wealth and money. Or at least it is a fungible thing that can be converted into other values. That is why the stock market works and publicly traded companies exist. Until DEI crap came along most of them have been legally obligated to pursue money and profit as a singular value, because that is one thing everyone can agree on.
Certain values matter way more than others. I think there are only some minimum values of non-interference that I need to live around others, and everything beyond that is just icing on the cake.
It would be nice to have a 3-tier citizenship that looked something like:
- Full citizen.
- Full resident.
- Foreigner trying to become citizen.
None of the stories here imply violence as a solution. It was messing me up. It was ineffective on my brother. And the solution to the parent's friend kid was ultimately separation. The spanking merely brought about that separation, its unclear if the spanking would have worked long term.
But yes, I agree some people need violence to stay in line. Nothing else will really work. They have short time horizons, low to no empathy, or some form of psychopathy. And there are even some people where I think even extreme violence will not work.
What's your plan?
Me? I'm not that smart. I like the work of David and Pattri Friedman on these types of problems. I also think the impulse to structure societies into some perfect form is a statist impulse, and something I try to avoid. I don't know if there is a perfect solution. I do feel pretty certain that the current solution is not very good for a multitude of reasons. And those reasons are my entire belief set and political experience for the last two decades, so not a short list or something I've not thought about a lot. It just feels too long to go into here.
This comment was an antagonistic and low effort reply. Warning you not to do this.
Nowadays, Trump could probably murder someone on live TV and a majority of the Republican voters would say he didn't do it. That's basically what the election loss denialism came down to. Why let evidence get in the way of vibes and dunking on the outgroup!
This is a bit too boo-outgroup.
You didn't answer the question.
...
BTW one of the most consistently annoying aspects of conversations with you
This is antagonistic and a bit low effort. Do less of this please.
What if I am trying to assess groups?
Groups are composed of individuals. And it is very unclear what signals you are supposed to take from a racially non-homogenous group. Clothing, disposition, gender, current activity, and age all seem like better stereotyping options.
Am I supposed to treat a group of Asian males hanging out up ahead the same as I would treat a group of black males?
I'd say you shouldn't really bother assessing the race, because a bunch of other characteristics about the group will give you a much better sense. What activity do they seem to be doing? Are they laughing and joking around? Do they seem drunk? Is this an area known to have gangs? Are other people avoiding them? Honestly I tend to avoid any group of drunk young males.
Or, suppose I have successfully taught for years in an all-black school, and have relied heavily on class participation as a pedagogical tool. If I transfer to an all-Asian school, should I not think about changing my pedagogy?
You should always be thinking about your pedagogy. Socio-economic class and general school culture should be learned before you start teaching. Ask other teachers what they do. At no point should you be like "oh they are all of x race, therefore teaching method y will work." If you do that you are probably a terrible teacher.
Or if I am in HR at a school district, and am placing a teacher who tells me his greatest weakness is classroom management, should I not use him for a vacancy at an all-Asian school rather than sending him to an all-black school?
Typically race correlates with things that matter. But it is rarely if ever the actual thing that matters. What if the teacher would be teaching the flunkies, dropouts, and mis-behaving kids at the asian school, and the honors students at the all black school? And what assumptions are you supposed to make if the school has and classroom has a mixed racial makeup like all American schools are mandated to have.
I don't think I'll be litigating any more specific examples. All of your new examples still point to Race being a weak correlate with things that matter. And typically in real world scenarios you have much more access to easier acquire pieces of information, and higher quality sources of information.
This is not the kind of comment you can throw out without evidence. And if you do point it out with evidence, it should be done as lightly as possible in a non-antagonistic way.
You should know better.
What you don't understand is that those 2-3 million did not die in concentration camps, if that many died at all which is highly doubtful. The death toll in the concentration camps is a small fraction of that number. And most who died in the concentration camps did so in final months of the war due to Germany being destroyed on all sides and infrastructure totally collapsing. Many died under the custody of Stalin during and after the war, and never came under German occupation in the first place. The death toll in the concentration camps was a small fraction of that number.
Eh this is why the conversation with you reminds me of other generic conspiracy theorists. It all feels very wishy washy. Like you are doing a cold reading of me, and will push as far as you can in the direction of "nothing bad happened to the jews". Just so we are clear, I still think about 6 million jews died, and that there was a mass extermination effort of some kind. They weren't just killed off as a side effect of being rounded up and put in camps where there was no food and diseases ran rampant.
I just remember seeing that "middle ground" estimate from another conversation someone had with you.
I still think Churchill was uniquely unlikely to mention "gas chambers" because he had a history of controversy around chemical warfare. He was publicly willing to use it against the Germans if they used it first in warfare. And before WWII he was caught in a private conversation advocating that gas attacks be used on 'uncivilized' people. He did publicly talk about the holocaust after the war.
Grok AI does seem to think that there are passages referencing holocaust things:
Growing awareness of a Nazi policy to exterminate Jewish communities and calls it a crime against humanity. That is in volume 4
In volume 5 churchill mentions the unprecedented scale of Nazi massacres. He mentions the liquidation of ghettos, and the use of special camps for mass killings.
Maybe the AI is halucinating. I still believe it more than you. Get me a digital copy of the book that I can ctrl-f and we can settle it for sure.
Meh then I suppose I help my community chase out a fraud.
More options
Context Copy link