Author Topic: Sealioning  (Read 10596 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Redamare

  • Deleted
  • Stopped Going Outside
  • *
  • Posts: 4206
Re: Sealioning
« Reply #420 on: October 10, 2018, 09:15:34 AM »
Seriously, you've got to lose the italics. They're not serving a literary function beyond making your comments come across as condescending, smug and immature.

I would say something snarky to throw this back at you, but the fact is, my opinion of how this quote makes you sound is no more definitive than your opinion of how my use of formatting tools makes me sound.
"redamare has kicked this thread's ass" -champagnej

Certainty is the enemy of wisdom.

--RED-uh-MAR-ay--

Offline SkeptiQueer

  • Too Much Spare Time
  • ********
  • Posts: 7568
  • DEEZ NUTZ
Re: Sealioning
« Reply #421 on: October 10, 2018, 10:55:18 AM »
I think my record of participation on this forum over the years deserves better than your uncharitable, well-poisoning opening sentence, thank you very much.

And what about the rest of her paragraph?

That's rather my point or hadn't you noticed? After that first sentence, what can I say that won't "prove" her right?

I don't know. What can you say? Does the explanation not make sense? Do you disagree that the one thing is encompassed by the other as defined? Was your question not answered?

I'm having a much harder time understanding what good faiht reply would prove the first sentence any more than continuing to be object to it.

It's a perfectly coherent distinction. There's nothing conceptually wrong with it on that score.

But I'd be lying if I said that I'm sold that it's a useful one, particularly to the point of overcoming my problems with it.

Following people around and invading their spaces for the sake of a conversation? Who does that? And if it does happen, that's harassment. Anything else that might be going on pales in comparison to that fact.

And isn't the whole point of JAQing off that it's at least somewhat ostensibly polite?

I want to reiterate: I'm not saying the comic wasn't making a good point. But the comic was written before the comic had been written, if you take my meaning. As I said earlier, it wasn't an attempt to coin a term. (BTW, I don't need or want to hear what he thinks about the word taking on a life of it's own. Expecting an artist not to be excited about that sort of influence would be asking too much, even if he would otherwise tend to agree with me, which I neither assume nor discount.)

The fact is our discourse absolutely does not need another word to help us assume the worst about each other's motives. We should call out harassment. We should point out when people are asking questions they've already been given answers to. We should point out when people are using a facade of good manners to camouflage bullying.

I know these behaviors are real. Believe it or not, I deal with all of them from Trumpsters, TERFs, antifeminists, free market fundamentalists, and all other manner of right wingers all the time.

I don't know what you people think, but (other than preferring Social Democracy over straight Socialism), I am every bit as Liberal as you could possibly want me to be.

This is not about that. This is about the fact that we're all human beings at the end of the day. We absolutely don't need another tool to help us forget that.

You're not as liberal as any of "us" want because there's not an "us" that wants. In the middle of your tirade about dehumanizing people, you've done the very thing you're speaking against. Same thing you did when using "Trumpsters."

Secondly, the existence of the word describes a behavior. It exists. The word describes it. Using the word to describe behavior doesn't make people forget that others are human. What makes people forget the human element can be any number of things, and the existence and use of the word has no bearing on whether or not someone remembers the human.

If you want to make a point about dehumanizing labels, make that point coherently. Don't use dehumanizing labels or ascribe motivations to nebulous "they" while doing so. Maybe be outright about that from the front, because right now it looks a bit like you just retreated to that when nothing else stuck.
HIISSSSSSSS

Offline Gigabyte

  • Off to a Start
  • *
  • Posts: 43
  • If you believe ...
Re: Sealioning
« Reply #422 on: October 10, 2018, 05:32:15 PM »
I want to reiterate: I'm not saying the comic wasn't making a good point.

After a lot of thought, and reading a lot more of those comics (some of which are really really funny), I think if it was to make a point, it fails.  Completely.  Unless you already know what vague traits the sea lion is supposed to represent (which is still not clear), and learning it is supposed to be about a "behavior", which is also not made clear, it fails as some sort of social/internet commentary.

It's still funny however.

The conversations in this thread are also funny. Especially since it seems like a few people are deliberately acting like the sea lion or something. (If it's not deliberate, it's even funnier)

But as the kids say, it's all good.  I've learned more than a few things by reading it.
I don't understand some things

Offline Redamare

  • Deleted
  • Stopped Going Outside
  • *
  • Posts: 4206
Re: Sealioning
« Reply #423 on: October 10, 2018, 07:57:10 PM »
I think my record of participation on this forum over the years deserves better than your uncharitable, well-poisoning opening sentence, thank you very much.

And what about the rest of her paragraph?

That's rather my point or hadn't you noticed? After that first sentence, what can I say that won't "prove" her right?

I don't know. What can you say? Does the explanation not make sense? Do you disagree that the one thing is encompassed by the other as defined? Was your question not answered?

I'm having a much harder time understanding what good faiht reply would prove the first sentence any more than continuing to be object to it.

It's a perfectly coherent distinction. There's nothing conceptually wrong with it on that score.

But I'd be lying if I said that I'm sold that it's a useful one, particularly to the point of overcoming my problems with it.

Following people around and invading their spaces for the sake of a conversation? Who does that? And if it does happen, that's harassment. Anything else that might be going on pales in comparison to that fact.

And isn't the whole point of JAQing off that it's at least somewhat ostensibly polite?

I want to reiterate: I'm not saying the comic wasn't making a good point. But the comic was written before the comic had been written, if you take my meaning. As I said earlier, it wasn't an attempt to coin a term. (BTW, I don't need or want to hear what he thinks about the word taking on a life of it's own. Expecting an artist not to be excited about that sort of influence would be asking too much, even if he would otherwise tend to agree with me, which I neither assume nor discount.)

The fact is our discourse absolutely does not need another word to help us assume the worst about each other's motives. We should call out harassment. We should point out when people are asking questions they've already been given answers to. We should point out when people are using a facade of good manners to camouflage bullying.

I know these behaviors are real. Believe it or not, I deal with all of them from Trumpsters, TERFs, antifeminists, free market fundamentalists, and all other manner of right wingers all the time.

I don't know what you people think, but (other than preferring Social Democracy over straight Socialism), I am every bit as Liberal as you could possibly want me to be.

This is not about that. This is about the fact that we're all human beings at the end of the day. We absolutely don't need another tool to help us forget that.

You're not as liberal as any of "us" want because there's not an "us" that wants. In the middle of your tirade about dehumanizing people, you've done the very thing you're speaking against. Same thing you did when using "Trumpsters."

Secondly, the existence of the word describes a behavior. It exists. The word describes it. Using the word to describe behavior doesn't make people forget that others are human. What makes people forget the human element can be any number of things, and the existence and use of the word has no bearing on whether or not someone remembers the human.

If you want to make a point about dehumanizing labels, make that point coherently. Don't use dehumanizing labels or ascribe motivations to nebulous "they" while doing so. Maybe be outright about that from the front, because right now it looks a bit like you just retreated to that when nothing else stuck.

It's tempting to defend my character, but this topic is already just barely worth the effort without allowing myself to get distracted. Can we dispense with the editorializing about my motives and alleged hypocrisy? This is just a list of ad hominem.

And let me be clear, since that term is often misused: I'm not talking about insulting me. I'm saying that everything you said in response to me is an excuse not to engage instead of a refutation.

The closest you came to making a relevant point was:

Quote
Secondly, the existence of the word describes a behavior. It exists. The word describes it.

Well, you're clearly not listening to what I've been saying.

Imagine a friend calls you up, very excited, to explain that he's just invented am amazing new tool. When you show up, he proudly unveils... a lid from a tin can with crude teeth cut into the rim attached to a drill. (Yes, I lifted this idea off one of those awful click bait "life hack" videos that started showing up once people ran out of decent ones.)

Now, when you point out that the circular saw already exists, and has safety features and blades that are optimized for the job, will you be impressed when he replies that, if you hold his invention to a (soft enough) surface long enough, it will in fact cut things? Do you have to show that his "invention" has literally zero utility to make the point that it's not likely to make the world a better place?
"redamare has kicked this thread's ass" -champagnej

Certainty is the enemy of wisdom.

--RED-uh-MAR-ay--

Offline SkeptiQueer

  • Too Much Spare Time
  • ********
  • Posts: 7568
  • DEEZ NUTZ
Re: Sealioning
« Reply #424 on: October 10, 2018, 11:23:01 PM »
I think my record of participation on this forum over the years deserves better than your uncharitable, well-poisoning opening sentence, thank you very much.

And what about the rest of her paragraph?

That's rather my point or hadn't you noticed? After that first sentence, what can I say that won't "prove" her right?

I don't know. What can you say? Does the explanation not make sense? Do you disagree that the one thing is encompassed by the other as defined? Was your question not answered?

I'm having a much harder time understanding what good faiht reply would prove the first sentence any more than continuing to be object to it.

It's a perfectly coherent distinction. There's nothing conceptually wrong with it on that score.

But I'd be lying if I said that I'm sold that it's a useful one, particularly to the point of overcoming my problems with it.

Following people around and invading their spaces for the sake of a conversation? Who does that? And if it does happen, that's harassment. Anything else that might be going on pales in comparison to that fact.

And isn't the whole point of JAQing off that it's at least somewhat ostensibly polite?

I want to reiterate: I'm not saying the comic wasn't making a good point. But the comic was written before the comic had been written, if you take my meaning. As I said earlier, it wasn't an attempt to coin a term. (BTW, I don't need or want to hear what he thinks about the word taking on a life of it's own. Expecting an artist not to be excited about that sort of influence would be asking too much, even if he would otherwise tend to agree with me, which I neither assume nor discount.)

The fact is our discourse absolutely does not need another word to help us assume the worst about each other's motives. We should call out harassment. We should point out when people are asking questions they've already been given answers to. We should point out when people are using a facade of good manners to camouflage bullying.

I know these behaviors are real. Believe it or not, I deal with all of them from Trumpsters, TERFs, antifeminists, free market fundamentalists, and all other manner of right wingers all the time.

I don't know what you people think, but (other than preferring Social Democracy over straight Socialism), I am every bit as Liberal as you could possibly want me to be.

This is not about that. This is about the fact that we're all human beings at the end of the day. We absolutely don't need another tool to help us forget that.

You're not as liberal as any of "us" want because there's not an "us" that wants. In the middle of your tirade about dehumanizing people, you've done the very thing you're speaking against. Same thing you did when using "Trumpsters."

Secondly, the existence of the word describes a behavior. It exists. The word describes it. Using the word to describe behavior doesn't make people forget that others are human. What makes people forget the human element can be any number of things, and the existence and use of the word has no bearing on whether or not someone remembers the human.

If you want to make a point about dehumanizing labels, make that point coherently. Don't use dehumanizing labels or ascribe motivations to nebulous "they" while doing so. Maybe be outright about that from the front, because right now it looks a bit like you just retreated to that when nothing else stuck.

It's tempting to defend my character, but this topic is already just barely worth the effort without allowing myself to get distracted. Can we dispense with the editorializing about my motives and alleged hypocrisy? This is just a list of ad hominem.

And let me be clear, since that term is often misused: I'm not talking about insulting me. I'm saying that everything you said in response to me is an excuse not to engage instead of a refutation.

The closest you came to making a relevant point was:

Quote
Secondly, the existence of the word describes a behavior. It exists. The word describes it.

Well, you're clearly not listening to what I've been saying.

Imagine a friend calls you up, very excited, to explain that he's just invented am amazing new tool. When you show up, he proudly unveils... a lid from a tin can with crude teeth cut into the rim attached to a drill. (Yes, I lifted this idea off one of those awful click bait "life hack" videos that started showing up once people ran out of decent ones.)

Now, when you point out that the circular saw already exists, and has safety features and blades that are optimized for the job, will you be impressed when he replies that, if you hold his invention to a (soft enough) surface long enough, it will in fact cut things? Do you have to show that his "invention" has literally zero utility to make the point that it's not likely to make the world a better place?

If you don't want your character to be discussed then don't bring it up. You're perfectly happy to ascribe motive to others, but don't want people to point that out. Frankly if you stop making it about you, it won't be about you, but you aren't doing that.

Secondly, if you don't think the word has utility, make your case. Don't make it about you, don't accuse other people of just wanting to dehumanize others, make your case about how a similar extant word describes the behavior of sealioning better and more accurately.
HIISSSSSSSS

Offline Redamare

  • Deleted
  • Stopped Going Outside
  • *
  • Posts: 4206
Re: Sealioning
« Reply #425 on: October 10, 2018, 11:50:15 PM »
That's the opposite of what I said.

I'm specifically not arguing that the utility of the word is literally zero. I'm saying--have already said--that its utility is largely redundant and in any case lower than its potential for harm.

I've made my argument, several times, now. Stop pretending that you don't understand it, or that you think I'm changing it, or that whether or not I'm a hypocrite has anything to do with the topic.

Make a rebuttal, or concede. No more games.
"redamare has kicked this thread's ass" -champagnej

Certainty is the enemy of wisdom.

--RED-uh-MAR-ay--

Offline gmalivuk

  • Frequent Poster
  • ******
  • Posts: 2460
Re: Sealioning
« Reply #426 on: October 11, 2018, 07:55:40 AM »
If you think the utility is redundant and causes more harm than good, you're essentially saying it has no utility of its own. And if you don't think the word has utility, make your case. Don't make it about you, don't accuse other people of just wanting to dehumanize others, make your case about how a similar extant word describes the behavior of sealioning better and more accurately.

(If you don't want to continue, fine, but don't try to sidestep the question by claiming SQ said the opposite of you, and then following up with something that quite closely matches his account of your position.)
« Last Edit: October 11, 2018, 07:58:51 AM by gmalivuk »
The world is so exquisite with so much love and moral depth, that there is no reason to deceive ourselves with pretty stories for which there's little good evidence. Far better...is to look death in the eye and to be grateful every day for the brief but magnificent opportunity that life provides.

Offline heyalison

  • Not Enough Spare Time
  • **
  • Posts: 100
Re: Sealioning
« Reply #427 on: October 11, 2018, 08:37:13 AM »
Seriously, you've got to lose the italics. They're not serving a literary function beyond making your comments come across as condescending, smug and immature.

I would say something snarky to throw this back at you, but the fact is, my opinion of how this quote makes you sound is no more definitive than your opinion of how my use of formatting tools makes me sound.

The message you're sending is I don't understand what italics are for. You're obfuscating your meaning with unnatural emphasis and creating a cadence that resembles that of condescending speech. It has nothing to do with me.

Offline Redamare

  • Deleted
  • Stopped Going Outside
  • *
  • Posts: 4206
Re: Sealioning
« Reply #428 on: October 11, 2018, 03:18:08 PM »
If you think the utility is redundant and causes more harm than good, you're essentially saying it has no utility of its own. And if you don't think the word has utility, make your case. Don't make it about you, don't accuse other people of just wanting to dehumanize others, make your case about how a similar extant word describes the behavior of sealioning better and more accurately.

(If you don't want to continue, fine, but don't try to sidestep the question by claiming SQ said the opposite of you, and then following up with something that quite closely matches his account of your position.)

Nope, sorry. Two people being dishonest in the same way at the same time don't magically combine into something legitimate. I very carefully and explicitly laid out the word is redundant; several times, in fact. Just because you or he managed to avoid it before doesn't mean it didn't happen. Not playing your game anymore.

Seriously, you've got to lose the italics. They're not serving a literary function beyond making your comments come across as condescending, smug and immature.

I would say something snarky to throw this back at you, but the fact is, my opinion of how this quote makes you sound is no more definitive than your opinion of how my use of formatting tools makes me sound.

The message you're sending is I don't understand what italics are for. You're obfuscating your meaning with unnatural emphasis and creating a cadence that resembles that of condescending speech. It has nothing to do with me.

Fuck off.
"redamare has kicked this thread's ass" -champagnej

Certainty is the enemy of wisdom.

--RED-uh-MAR-ay--

Offline heyalison

  • Not Enough Spare Time
  • **
  • Posts: 100
Re: Sealioning
« Reply #429 on: October 11, 2018, 03:23:17 PM »
You know what, screw it. Not getting dragged into the secret internet rage life of some dude.
« Last Edit: October 11, 2018, 03:36:36 PM by heyalison »

Offline Gigabyte

  • Off to a Start
  • *
  • Posts: 43
  • If you believe ...
Re: Sealioning
« Reply #430 on: October 11, 2018, 04:49:32 PM »
never mind

« Last Edit: October 11, 2018, 04:54:14 PM by Gigabyte »
I don't understand some things

Offline heyalison

  • Not Enough Spare Time
  • **
  • Posts: 100
Re: Sealioning
« Reply #431 on: October 11, 2018, 04:58:10 PM »
Forget it.
« Last Edit: October 12, 2018, 08:20:42 AM by heyalison »

Offline Redamare

  • Deleted
  • Stopped Going Outside
  • *
  • Posts: 4206
Re: Sealioning
« Reply #432 on: October 11, 2018, 06:14:05 PM »
I don't necessarily agree with your assessment of the use of italics.

But even if somebody convinced me some day that you're right, (which isn't something I consider all that far-fetched, to be fair),  you're being pretty myopic with your social justice, there. I don't go around trying to make people carry my shit, so to speak, but since you wanted to have that kind of party, it may interest you to know that I'm on the Autism spectrum. Furthermore, while this particular issue isn't one people complain to me about, I'm no stranger to being told that how I communicate makes me seem conspicuously odd, in one way or another.

I won't presume to defend an opinion as to whether or not a neurotypical swearing at a disabled person for not talking like they like people to talk is as bad as someone who identifies as male using slanty letters with someone who identifies as female.
"redamare has kicked this thread's ass" -champagnej

Certainty is the enemy of wisdom.

--RED-uh-MAR-ay--

Offline SkeptiQueer

  • Too Much Spare Time
  • ********
  • Posts: 7568
  • DEEZ NUTZ
Re: Sealioning
« Reply #433 on: October 11, 2018, 07:05:55 PM »
When Redamare doesn't agree with someone else's assessment, it's because there's legitimate disagreement. When other people disagree with Redamare's assessment, it's "two people being dishonest."

Funny how that works.
HIISSSSSSSS

Offline Redamare

  • Deleted
  • Stopped Going Outside
  • *
  • Posts: 4206
Re: Sealioning
« Reply #434 on: October 11, 2018, 07:17:45 PM »
There's literally no difference between those two things. And be fair: I've made you just as angry with things I said when entering a conversation for the first time as things I've said as a response-to-a-response.

And I'd ask everyone to again notice that, instead of discussing the topic, we're talking about how much of an asshole I am.
"redamare has kicked this thread's ass" -champagnej

Certainty is the enemy of wisdom.

--RED-uh-MAR-ay--

 

personate-rain