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 -
OpenAI announces leadership transition
I posted this in Twitter and someone speculated that it's because Altman paused subscriptions on Tuesday, but that would alone seem like a pretty inconsequential reason for this sort of a major move.
Please don't post bare links with minimal commentary.
I know there are lots of times when there is breaking news and we want to see what other motters think about it. But please resist the temptation to just link dump a story. Think about what you want to discuss then post it.
Nope, we aren't a breaking news website, there is no urgency. Take your time and write something that starts the discussion.
If you can't think of anything to discuss about a major event then maybe it's not worth discussing.
I really don't get why the link alone isn't enough to start the discussion.
A link is enough to start a discussion. I am not saying it isn't enough. I am saying you need to start the discussion, not just post a link.
There is a difference.
A chicken, pig, and a bag of wheat are enough for breakfast. But if you went to diner and that is what they gave you, then you'd be rightly upset.
Raw ingredients don't make a complete
breakfastpost.The reason we ask for more is simple: a discussion requires multiple participants. To make a top level post you need to demonstrate that there will be at least one participant in the discussion. The top level poster needs to be that guaranteed discussed.
I disagree because if the link is on something sufficiently interesting, it's guaranteed that someone will have something to say about it. When it is about something not so noteworthy, then it makes sense to require some commentary.
And who determines if something is sufficiently interesting? I certainly don't think this story would pass that threshold. The culture war implications are unclear, and mostly people just posted speculation. Prior to my mod post I'd say no one really had anything interesting to say about the link. After I posted I think greyenlightenment had a semi interesting post.
The mods do.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link