Hacker News Reader

Comment by sillysaurus3 | Hacker News Reader

Actually, I'm trying to have a nuanced conversation on a sensitive topic with an open mind.

I get the feeling this is one of the things that no one wants to discuss, or at least it's a bad idea to try to discuss it.

Note how violent and immediate the reaction was, right when I tried to point to a segment of people who are the most likely to be in the target segment of the original article. I don't feel like martyring myself, so I won't push it further. But suffice to say, it does not seem like we as a society are ready to have hard conversations about why people turn to drugs.

View on HN

Just to be clear for those coming to this after the fact: the reaction was not violent and immediate. Your comment was not nuanced. And it was very much not sensitive.

You attempted to claim that such overdoses are in part due to Reddit (and society in general) ostracizing neo-nazis and members of hateful groups. Not only is this just wrong, it implies that many affected by the crisis are members of such groups, which they are not (as someone who has a family member addicted to opioids I'm very annoyed by your comparison).

You just wanted to talk about your Neo-Nazi subreddits getting taken away and people called you out on it. Frankly, a Neo-nazi should be an outcast. A racist, sexist, etc should be excluded. And if they don't like that, then they should stop being a Nazi before turning to drugs.

I claimed no such thing.

My point was solely "A certain subreddit got banned. Those people seem to have very few options, and maybe they were using it as a support group. They might turn to drugs now."

The reaction violent and immediate: within 5 minutes of posting the comment, you're now trying to imply some very strange things about me. You're even going so far as to "clarify" things for readers by posting something I did not say.

I'd like to end this conversation, because HN is optimized for good conversation and this isn't heading anywhere productive. Agreed?

I have a family member affected by a similar crisis, though thankfully not quite as intense. I'm sorry that the comparison annoyed you, but I was just searching for answers.

That is not a violent reaction.

"We need to kick you out of the country" is a violent reaction.

"What are you talking about this is dumb" is not a violent reaction.

You shared your ideas, they obviously weren't taken as good ideas by the group here, and people told you so.

No one called for violence against you, no one called you names (as far as I can tell), just no one agreed with you, and maybe a liiiiittle discourteously.

That's not violence, that's discussion.

It was violent in the sense of a chemical reaction. It also violently curtailed any chance of intellectual conversation. For that, I regret saying anything.

I'm not upset about mere disagreement. I'm upset that I was searching openly and honestly for an answer to this crisis that affects all of us, and in exchange I was labeled a neonazi sympathizer. On HN of all places.

The conversation shouldn't be about me and my ideas. That's selfish and counterproductive to HN's aims. The goal is to gratify intellectual curiosity, and the subthread I started here is the opposite of that.

HN isn't a place for ideological battle. The fact that two members of the community decided to immediately call out my bullshit suggests that HN wasn't the appropriate venue for this conversation.

I think your own post curtailed any chance of intellectual conversation, and you're taking it out on other posters.

And you've posted you figured it would go like this.

Take the hint you are giving yourself: best re-consider what it is you're about to post, given your past experiences.

> I have a family member affected by a similar crisis, though thankfully not quite as intense. I'm sorry that the comparison annoyed you, but I was just searching for answers.

Sorry to read about your family situation. That said...

There is an entire field dedicated to this. In the spirit of DRY, let's not spin our wheels with hackneyed theories, thinking we'll do better than the individuals that dedicate their lives to rigorously testing hypothesis and formulating therapies.

Why did you delete your comment? I'm compelled to hold you in a negative light just based on principle that you don't stand behind your own words.

It may be worth examining that tendency. I elected to take the Kolmogorov option: https://www.scottaaronson.com/blog/?p=3376

The question of whether or not your arguments have merit won’t even get entered upon, nor will the authority ever be able to repeat back your arguments in a form you’d recognize—for even repeating the arguments correctly could invite accusations of secretly agreeing with them. Instead, the sole subject of interest will be you: who you think you are, what your motivations were to utter something so divisive and hateful.

Suffice to say, it wasn't too smart to even broach the topic. It derailed the conversation, for one. For two, it didn't lead anywhere productive.

Personally, I appreciate your efforts at discussing sensitive topics. I encourage you to keep doing so, as honestly but sensitively as you can. While the "Kolmogorov option" might maximize your personal outcome, this doesn't mean it's best for the group to encourage you to take it. You probably already read the recent discussion by another Scott A? https://slatestarcodex.com/2017/10/23/kolmogorov-complicity-...

Reply on news.ycombinator.com