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.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
What does this even mean, "on the spot"? I assume it's something like, immediately at the place of action, i.e., as the drugs themselves are being dealt (or very shortly thereafter).
Surely, abandoning centuries of criminal procedure would mitigate some of the good for society. (I would still think this even if I were in favor of execution as punishment for drug dealing, which I'm not.)
Sure, but how do you do this if it works like this:
Both handles, if you manage to subpoena Telegram, are linked to prepaid phone numbers from an African country.
Making it so anyone that doesn't have this level of informational hygiene can't sell drugs seems good on the margins. There's nothing stopping this approach from being done now, and yet people are still arrested as drug dealers. The higher you set the lower bound on intelligence for drug dealing, the fewer drug dealers you get, especially since higher intelligence gives better alternatives for a career path. They'll need intelligent mules as well, or the police could just keep an eye on locations they've used before.
This particular approach seems vulnerable to scams, as well: just spread your prepaid number as a "drug ordering number", take the money, then direct the buyer to a random location (where there aren't any drugs hidden). When they complain, claim that you put them there and someone must have taken them. Word will probably eventually spread and people will stop using it, but you can just create another one.
Now you need a second communication system to legitimize the numbers, and you have a problem: if the communication is anonymous, it's easy to spread false information leading ultimately to scam numbers. If it's not anonymous, initial information about numbers can potentially be traced back and used to identify drug dealers.
Actually, what's stopping assorted street junkies from just identifying the drug distributors, following them to the dropoff, and taking their doses before the customer does? There's a limit to how much force the anonymous dealers can exert, because if they're regularly sending thugs to beat up thieves, now the thugs are on police radar and can be traced back. Maybe some sort of thug-for-hire service where they just get an anonymous telegram text with a picture of who to beat up, but there's still nothing stopping the police from arresting them.
That's avoided by asking your using friends which contacts are trustworthy.
That's true, but the mules are usually random people that need a quick buck. They pick their own locations and send the info to another TG contact. This helps with randomization.
Yes, some people do this (or at least used to do this). Not street junkies, but hobbyist users who don't follow the mules (since they are random people), but think like them and check out promising dead drop locations.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link