If nazzis and I agree 1+1 makes 2 that doesn’t mean we’re all Nazzis.
Now, we’re going to count many examples you used to illustrate your point:
I counted one, and this was it right here:
If nazzis and I agree 1+1 makes 2 that doesn’t mean we’re all Nazzis.
Using a single example to make a point of comparison is dumb. Because one could just as easily say that I breathe air, and similarly, so do hamsters, therefore- I must be a hamster.
Demonstrably, this is untrue. And it’s a dumb argument to make. And it’s not the argument I made. I simply said that calling upon a similarity
shared with Nazis isn’t going to make the point one would probably wish to make.
(And the plural of Nazi is “Nazis.” Don’t be afraid to spell their name correctly. It’s not for the purpose of showing respect to them, it’s showing respect to the person that has to read what you’re saying)
You’re really hung up on the debate bro argumentation
NO IM NOT!
and seem to be intentionally missing the point everyone is trying to convey to you.
Which is?
Get over yourself man.
Done!
No one is giving you a hand job for your superior intellectual acumen.
Well now that’s fucking disappointing. I thought for sure there’d be some kind of reward for having to deal with some random’s little White Knight complex. I mean, you barged in here to the defense when you weren’t even called upon! Should I have just conceded right there and fed your horse for you?
No man there is no white knight complex. Again, with the weird labels.
However, there is a weird fixation with users on this platform unable to engage with a topic without having to categorize and label whoever they are engaging with.
For instance: Someone pointed out an extremely neutral fact and it went straight to “well you’re a nazi”. It’s kinda sad and ultimately I just question what even is the point of discussing anything on this platform when it will always escalate within 1-2 comments to boxing someone into some kind of ad hominem or label the way you did?
Do you just delete the comments you make that get downvoted? It’s bad for lemmy to disrupt discussion by fragmenting conversations because you don’t “win.”
Yea i deleted the comments because they weren’t constructive and it seemed you wanted to talk about anything except the main thing I (and others) have highlighted for you so what’s the point.
It’s an unusual scenario that I’ve found is very typical of this particular platform and I’m very intrigued by this phenomenon. A really high percentage of conversations here seems very invested in labeling the other rather than addressing the argument presented. It’s particularly felt on Lemmy. It’s probably trivial to you, but it’s so frequent in my experience here that I’m beginning to wonder what about this place drives every conversation into an instant indictment of the other?
For instance, I’m really curious why in this particular case when someone pointed out why downvoting has little to no effect in changing behavioral outcomes your first instinct was to classify that person into the same category as the initial example?
Like, what led you to seek out that indictment in situ right out of the bat? Was it the way they phrased it? Did it remind you of a past story or example?
What aspect of the statement:
“down votes are not compelling”
made you go straight to : "aha! You have commonality with Nazis! "?
What intrigues me, is when people using batshit stupid singular examples like- how ignorant it is to find similarity in two people that correctly use math to illustrate commonality with Nazis, as an argument in defense of someone showing a direct commonality with Nazis-
And then arguing against their own point in another thread.
You really need to keep better track of your arguments. It’ll save you the embarrassment of having to delete your hypocrisy.
You’re obsessed with this singular logical example I provided but you refuse to answer my main question. It’s odd.
I’m going to ask again: what about someone declaring “down votes don’t affect behavioral outcomes” made you go straight to: “wow. You have so much in common with nazis”.
I’ve asked this like three or four times, and each reply you write focuses only on the bad logic about the analogy I provided earlier.
Why won’t you answer my main question? Is it because it makes you seem unhinged? I’m not interested in judging you. I’m just curious why? Why was that the first thing that you thought to write? Why won’t you answer this question? So far you’ve only talked about the analogy I gave and it’s been like three or four replies. I’m really curious.
deleted by creator
Okay, let me try and help. You said this:
Now, we’re going to count many examples you used to illustrate your point:
I counted one, and this was it right here:
Using a single example to make a point of comparison is dumb. Because one could just as easily say that I breathe air, and similarly, so do hamsters, therefore- I must be a hamster.
Demonstrably, this is untrue. And it’s a dumb argument to make. And it’s not the argument I made. I simply said that calling upon a similarity shared with Nazis isn’t going to make the point one would probably wish to make.
(And the plural of Nazi is “Nazis.” Don’t be afraid to spell their name correctly. It’s not for the purpose of showing respect to them, it’s showing respect to the person that has to read what you’re saying)
deleted by creator
NO IM NOT!
Which is?
Done!
Well now that’s fucking disappointing. I thought for sure there’d be some kind of reward for having to deal with some random’s little White Knight complex. I mean, you barged in here to the defense when you weren’t even called upon! Should I have just conceded right there and fed your horse for you?
Debate bro indeed.
No man there is no white knight complex. Again, with the weird labels.
However, there is a weird fixation with users on this platform unable to engage with a topic without having to categorize and label whoever they are engaging with.
For instance: Someone pointed out an extremely neutral fact and it went straight to “well you’re a nazi”. It’s kinda sad and ultimately I just question what even is the point of discussing anything on this platform when it will always escalate within 1-2 comments to boxing someone into some kind of ad hominem or label the way you did?
Do you just delete the comments you make that get downvoted? It’s bad for lemmy to disrupt discussion by fragmenting conversations because you don’t “win.”
Either own what you say, or don’t say it.
Yea i deleted the comments because they weren’t constructive and it seemed you wanted to talk about anything except the main thing I (and others) have highlighted for you so what’s the point.
It’s an unusual scenario that I’ve found is very typical of this particular platform and I’m very intrigued by this phenomenon. A really high percentage of conversations here seems very invested in labeling the other rather than addressing the argument presented. It’s particularly felt on Lemmy. It’s probably trivial to you, but it’s so frequent in my experience here that I’m beginning to wonder what about this place drives every conversation into an instant indictment of the other?
For instance, I’m really curious why in this particular case when someone pointed out why downvoting has little to no effect in changing behavioral outcomes your first instinct was to classify that person into the same category as the initial example?
Like, what led you to seek out that indictment in situ right out of the bat? Was it the way they phrased it? Did it remind you of a past story or example?
What aspect of the statement:
“down votes are not compelling”
made you go straight to : "aha! You have commonality with Nazis! "?
What intrigues me, is when people using batshit stupid singular examples like- how ignorant it is to find similarity in two people that correctly use math to illustrate commonality with Nazis, as an argument in defense of someone showing a direct commonality with Nazis-
And then arguing against their own point in another thread.
You really need to keep better track of your arguments. It’ll save you the embarrassment of having to delete your hypocrisy.
So you don’t have an answer for why you escalated so fast to name calling. It’s just second nature to you. Got it.
You’re obsessed with this singular logical example I provided but you refuse to answer my main question. It’s odd.
I’m going to ask again: what about someone declaring “down votes don’t affect behavioral outcomes” made you go straight to: “wow. You have so much in common with nazis”.
I’ve asked this like three or four times, and each reply you write focuses only on the bad logic about the analogy I provided earlier.
Why won’t you answer my main question? Is it because it makes you seem unhinged? I’m not interested in judging you. I’m just curious why? Why was that the first thing that you thought to write? Why won’t you answer this question? So far you’ve only talked about the analogy I gave and it’s been like three or four replies. I’m really curious.
deleted by creator
Bye!