site banner
naraburns  nihil supernum  2yr ago (text post)   32391 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of October 31, 2022

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.

24
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

I am going to have to ask for actual evidence for this.

I know people this has happened to. (Not me, I don't have an unlimited)

First of all, I have been in plenty of NYC subway stations, and while there are some with doors and rooms off the platforms, there is generally no room for such things in the area in view of the turnstiles.

Yes, that's why they have a camera.

Second, there is no such thing as an unstaffed subway station in NY; although not every entrance is staffed, every station has at least one manned booth.

On paper, anyway. Even if it's actually true, going back out, maybe crossing the avenue and walking a few blocks to check all the other entrances means you're missing the next train at best.

Third, each station has several turnstiles; if one has a glitch, the one next to it won't.

I suspect what happens in these cases is the first broken turnstile activates the 18-minute wait for the pass to be used again, but fails to allow entry. This prevents use of the pass at any turnstile in that station.

Also, since it is ** fare evasion** , not turnstile jumping, which is illegal, I rather doubt that I have committed a crime if I jump the turnstile while in possession of an unlimited metrocard.

First, it's usually a civil ticket rather than a criminal offense. Second, the transit judges (who work for the MTA, naturally) have heard that argument and dismiss it.

I know people this has happened to. (Not me, I don't have an unlimited)

I am sure that there are people who have been accosted by police after jumping a broken turnstile. But that was not your claim; your claim was that the police were running a very specific operation aimed at those people.

I suspect what happens in these cases is the first broken turnstile activates the 18-minute wait for the pass to be used again, but fails to allow entry.

Again, evidence for that? Is that what your friends said? That the turnstile gave the "sorry, you can't reuse this pass yet" message? Or the "please swipe again" message?

First, it's usually a civil ticket rather than a criminal offense. Second, the transit judges (who work for the MTA, naturally) have heard that argument and dismiss it.

  1. That is probably not true; it is probably a criminal infraction. Regardless, that is irrelevant; if I did not violate the law in question, it does not matter whether it is denominated a civil penalty or a criminal infraction

  2. Again, evidence?

Again, evidence for that? Is that what your friends said? That the turnstile gave the "sorry, you can't reuse this pass yet" message? Or the "please swipe again" message?

It's been years, if they mentioned what the turnstile said I don't remember.

That is probably not true; it is probably a criminal infraction. Regardless, that is irrelevant; if I did not violate the law in question, it does not matter whether it is denominated a civil penalty or a criminal infraction[/quote]

Here is the MTA itself telling you it's a civil ticket. They're rather more reliable than a random lawyer's site. I believe it is also possible for the police to write it up as criminal (in which case you'd get a desk appearance ticket instead of a notice of violation), but they usually don't.

Again, evidence?

What, you think I have access to the records of arguments in Transit Adjudication Bureau cases?

It's been years, if they mentioned what the turnstile said I don't remember

OK, so you don't have evidence for your supposition that the gate erroneously recorded an entry without opening the gate.

Here is the MTA itself telling you it's a civil ticket. They're rather more reliable than a random lawyer's site.

Maybe so, but as noted, it is irrelevant. If I did not violate the law in question, it does not matter whether it is denominated a civil penalty or a criminal infraction

What, you think I have access to the records of arguments in Transit Adjudication Bureau cases?

I wouldn't think so. But, if you don't have access to evidence, why did you claim to know how the judges rule?

Honestly, it seems that you are making stuff up, from your initial post onward.

OK, so you don't have evidence for your supposition that the gate erroneously recorded an entry without opening the gate.

It's a conjecture that fits the evidence I do have.

Maybe so, but as noted, it is irrelevant. If I did not violate the law in question, it does not matter whether it is denominated a civil penalty or a criminal infraction

Go to NYC. Buy an unlimited metrocard. Jump the turnstile openly and notoriously with the cops right there. Repeat until you get caught.

Try your legal theory on the Transit Adjudication Bureau, and see how far it gets you. I agree it's correct, I just don't agree that the judges care.

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