ELLIOTTCABLE changed the topic of #elliottcable to: #ELLIOTTCABLE — “do something cool, shove it into throats, everyone thinks it's crap, then it's all amazing.” “everything else is just details.”
<cuttle>
<3 beethoven's 7th
<purr>
Let it be known that cuttle hearts beethoven's 7th.
yorick has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
<whitequark>
cuttle: (bandaid on nipples) nono you didn't get me
<whitequark>
I'm not talking about the marathon thing
<whitequark>
I was talking about the fetish thing
<whitequark>
I mean... why?.. it's so oddly specific
<whitequark>
not that there isn't many oddly specific fetishes, but they usually can be rationalized, and I have no idea how to do it in this case
Sgeo has joined #elliottcable
<purr>
<drparse> gqbrielle: a warning is when the parser gets passive-aggressive on you, an error is when it gets aggressive at you, a parse error is when it punches you in the fucking face
<whitequark>
we need more gqbrielle here
<whitequark>
someone page her
<alexgordon>
I think she still hates elliott
<whitequark>
so?
<whitequark>
it's more fun that way
<cuttle>
whitequark: oh I had not heard about the fetish...
<cuttle>
.-.
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
whitequark: you've never met gqbrielle.
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
-clouds
<purr>
ELLIOTTCABLE: is stuck up in the clouds; hilight 'em if you want 'em.
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
whitequark: what'm I fucking wrong about?
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
epiglottal bees.
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
alexgordon: ew, milk with tea? what the fuck? is that some chai bullshit, 'cause ew.
ELLIOTTCABLE is now known as epiglottal_bees
<whitequark>
epiglottal_bees: I never met her, and?
<epiglottal_bees>
just sayin'. how can you say we need more of her, if you don't know who she is?
<epiglottal_bees>
anyway, she real-life died.
<alexgordon>
epiglottal_bees: it's our national drink
<epiglottal_bees>
like, her body is alive, but she doesn't have a phone, and doesn't want one.
<epiglottal_bees>
she treats phone-stuff the way I treat IRC: she has a Google Voice account I forced upon her years ago, and she checked it for text-messages about once a month.
<epiglottal_bees>
and idly, *sometimes*, can be arsed to respond to them.
<epiglottal_bees>
she's literally the most disconnected person I've ever met, who is *not* a street-bum.
<epiglottal_bees>
It's like the old adage about trees in the forest:
<epiglottal_bees>
“If someone can't receive text messages … do they really exist at all?”
<whitequark>
epiglottal_bees: "It's like the old adage about trees in the forest: “If someone can't receive text messages … do they really exist at all?”" wat.
<epiglottal_bees>
was the most embarrassing thing.
<epiglottal_bees>
that was like the third time that happened, too.
<epiglottal_bees>
kept meeting people, treating them as complete strangers for a while, with them getting more and more distressed, until they finally slapped me upside the head and explained that I knew them on the Internet.
<epiglottal_bees>
alexgordon: they are? I totes didn't know. Didn't get an invite. Probably 'cause half of that circle of friends have me blocked.
<epiglottal_bees>
it'd cause too much drama if I were invited.
<alexgordon>
epiglottal_bees: they're engaged, no wedding yet :P
<cuttle>
guys i got a halloween gift package from my family
<alexgordon>
but yes I'm not sure you nor I will be invited
<cuttle>
with an owl mug in it
<cuttle>
and a big ol bowl
<cuttle>
and a big ol spoon
<epiglottal_bees>
dude.
<epiglottal_bees>
I opened like, seventeen packages from my mother
<epiglottal_bees>
three years' worth
<epiglottal_bees>
by court order
<epiglottal_bees>
it was horribly hilarious.
<alexgordon>
wait
<epiglottal_bees>
christmas, birthday, random inexplicable ones,
* alexgordon
rewinds
<alexgordon>
you opened packages, from your mother, BY COURT ORDER?!
<epiglottal_bees>
maybe I'll upload some of the photos I took for chellio
<alexgordon>
since when do courts order people to open packages
<alexgordon>
epiglottal_bees: you are the strangest person I know
<epiglottal_bees>
alexgordon: how's that
<epiglottal_bees>
well, look who's addressing somebody as epiglottal bees
<alexgordon>
I don't know, you are just... extremely unconventional
<alexgordon>
in every possible way
<alexgordon>
you know what you are?
<alexgordon>
you are Larry Ellison
<alexgordon>
billionaire ninja
<cuttle>
epiglottal_bees: wait why hilarious
<cuttle>
sounds kind of sad
<alexgordon>
dark humour
<epiglottal_bees>
oh, I hate my mother
<epiglottal_bees>
it was sad in an I-have-no-family way
<epiglottal_bees>
('cept my dad, but, whatever)
<cuttle>
:(
<epiglottal_bees>
but hilarious in a jesus-christ-my-bio-mom-is-BATSHIT.
<cuttle>
not saying you don't have a good reason, but why do you hate her?
<epiglottal_bees>
in the way that all certifiably mentally disadvantaged people are hilarious. you know, their disadvantagedness.
<epiglottal_bees>
I guess I have to admit that I don't hate her. I just have no interest in her. She's an extremely stupid, extremely valueless person; she tries *so hard* to be manipulative, and it's *so satisfying* to watch her fail flat on her face.
<cuttle>
idk i've just been feeling a bit sentimental lately about parents since moving out
brr has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds]
<cuttle>
NANOWRIMO
<cuttle>
is in 2 days
<epiglottal_bees>
what the fuck is the point of nanowrimo
<epiglottal_bees>
I just don't like things I can't do. )'=
<epiglottal_bees>
I'm such a bitter, bitter person.
<joelteon>
nanowrimo
<joelteon>
oh is tomorrow halloween
<whitequark>
epiglottal_bees: try it
<epiglottal_bees>
why would I *want* to waste a month trying to (badly) write something that no one will ever read?
<epiglottal_bees>
frankly, people always tell me I'm an excellent writer, and *I* still don't want to do it. I can't fathom how truly terrible writers subject themselves to it. <.<
<whitequark>
probably because you're excellent *because* you can reflect on it
<whitequark>
and terrible writers either don't realize or don't care
<whitequark>
that was a rhetorical question right?
<whitequark>
and why waste a month... idk, it's fun.
<whitequark>
I would probably try to do something but my ways with english are shitty.
<whitequark>
like, I see that while conversing in IRC.
<epiglottal_bees>
we need a national programming-language designing month.
<cuttle>
epiglottal_bees: you could seriously do some cool william gibson/neal stephenson-style insightful shit
<epiglottal_bees>
much more in line with the purported purpose of this channel.
<cuttle>
like I honestly want to read a novel written by you
<cuttle>
whitequark: "you're excellent because you can reflect on it"
<cuttle>
watch that video
<whitequark>
cuttle: it's a well-known cognitive phenomenon. can't remember how it's called.
<epiglottal_bees>
cuttle, whitequark: explain. I don't understand the sentence, frankly.
<cuttle>
epiglottal_bees: you have good taste first
<cuttle>
taste is a prerequisite for talent and is probably a large portion of talent in things like writing
<epiglottal_bees>
ah, in the sense of that livetype thing, yeah
<epiglottal_bees>
speaking of good tast
<epiglottal_bees>
taste
<epiglottal_bees>
if you can handle a little bit of feminist/herminist preaching-to,
<epiglottal_bees>
please go get melissa to give you a draft of her work. It's excellent.
<epiglottal_bees>
Like, it's the best writing I've ever seen out of a friend of mine, and I've reviewed a *lot* of friends'-work.
<epiglottal_bees>
so happy with it. I'd genuinely go buy other books from the same author, if I came across this in the iBooks store, or something.
<whitequark>
dunning-kruger.
<whitequark>
herminist? wat?
* epiglottal_bees
laughs
<epiglottal_bees>
slur I just pulled out of my ass, for people pushing for sexual-identification rights.
<epiglottal_bees>
i.e. in the sense of “feminist”
<alexgordon>
<+epiglottal_bees> I guess I have to admit that I don't hate her. I just have no interest in her. She's an extremely stupid, extremely valueless person; she tries *so hard* to be manipulative, and it's *so satisfying* to watch her fail flat on her face.
<cuttle>
epiglottal_bees: oh i was going to buy her novel actualy
<cuttle>
seemed good
<alexgordon>
dude that's what parents are like!
<alexgordon>
doesn't mean you have to hate them
<epiglottal_bees>
i.e. a huge and horrible insult because nobody who could possibly be described by that name could ever be beneficial to the existence of the human race.
<epiglottal_bees>
‘feminist’ (n) — all of that.
<cuttle>
._.
* whitequark
can't stand melissa
<whitequark>
in all honesty she's probably a good person but oh hell all the preaching
<epiglottal_bees>
OKAY JESUS CHELLIO SAYS HI
<epiglottal_bees>
she keeps telling me to say hi for her
<epiglottal_bees>
and I was like, no, get on, and say hi
<whitequark>
hi chellio
<epiglottal_bees>
whitequark: which preaching?
<epiglottal_bees>
whitequark: sec-related, or sexual-identity-rights preaching
<whitequark>
epiglottal_bees: sec-related is ok
<cuttle>
hi chellio
<epiglottal_bees>
ah, okay
<cuttle>
i honestly consider myself a feminist
<whitequark>
so, yeah, civil rights one
<cuttle>
so
<epiglottal_bees>
I follow a *lot* of loud, tedious feminists.
<epiglottal_bees>
A lot of it is …
<epiglottal_bees>
hm.
<epiglottal_bees>
wow.
<whitequark>
you see, it gets so hard mainly because it's a topic on which you can never be objective
<whitequark>
no matter how hard you try
<whitequark>
not even close.
<epiglottal_bees>
My point of view on this is …
<epiglottal_bees>
very, very, very hard to convey.
<epiglottal_bees>
I've never discussed it in IRC, yet
<epiglottal_bees>
or even, in the mildly inferior real-life
<whitequark>
there's really not a lot of topics on which you can be objective in the true-ish, philosophical sense.
<epiglottal_bees>
the most I've done in terms of conveying my POV on these issues, is little snatches of commentary on Twitter.
<epiglottal_bees>
so, er.
<cuttle>
epiglottal_bees: tell me things that are beautiful in the same way as the allegretto of beethoven's 7th
<whitequark>
even some of hard science aren't! but these civil rights ones are the wurst.
<whitequark>
you basically have several groups all essentially fighting for power, justifying it with different means
<whitequark>
some of them more horrible than others, regardless of their purported cause
<whitequark>
and... that's it
<cuttle>
well i would say that some are justified in fighting for power since currently they have significantly less than other groups
<cuttle>
it's not just one group wanting to subdue all the others
<whitequark>
meh, there isn't a law that power should be just equally distributed by gods
<cuttle>
it's one group wanting to stop being subdued
<whitequark>
well
<whitequark>
what puts things in perspective is how they get treated
<whitequark>
I mean, I don't think I will ever understand the mentality of a person (or a crowd) which with all seriousness sends a death threat
<whitequark>
and nobody should ever be subjected to that.
<epiglottal_bees>
nononono.
sharkbot has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
sharkbot has joined #elliottcable
<whitequark>
and I can see how one kind of crazy behavior leads to another
<epiglottal_bees>
this conversation is mildly dangerous, verging on the extremely dangerous.
<epiglottal_bees>
so I'm withholding the right, right now, to drop the ophammer at any point, if I think it's going too far.
<whitequark>
I'm actually done
<epiglottal_bees>
you're individually completely welcome to decry me for doing so simply to support my own point of view, if you wish. *shrug*
<purr>
¯\(º_o)/¯
<epiglottal_bees>
so.
<epiglottal_bees>
“meh, there isn't a law that power should be just equally distributed by gods”
<epiglottal_bees>
disagree greatly.
<epiglottal_bees>
there *is* a law, a deep law of nature. One built into every human being.
<epiglottal_bees>
It's called “empathy.”
<cuttle>
epiglottal_bees: i'm glad you agree with what i was about to say
<whitequark>
so why are we building hierarchies for as long as we exist?
<epiglottal_bees>
all inbalance in power, is (A. psychotic maniacs) + (B. unaffected people who are afraid) >= (C. some group A is targeting) + (D. unaffected people who are courageous)
<epiglottal_bees>
I, thoroughly, fall into category (A), so I like to believe I have a unique viewpoint on this entire situation,
<epiglottal_bees>
This concept of ‘privilege’ so thoroughly being trotted-out (hell, trotted *over*) right now in the liberal-media, in our social circles as devs (mostly wrt. women in tech, and less often sexual-orientation),
<epiglottal_bees>
is, IMO, just saying “Guys, B is bigger than it's ever been. It's getting out of hand.”
<whitequark>
elaborate? I don't get you.
<epiglottal_bees>
our society as a whole is *unusually* full of (B) right now. Or at least, the parts of society where this is being discussed.
<epiglottal_bees>
well, do you understand my (rather uninnovative and banal) equation? That's obvious stuff, no?
<whitequark>
well, it abstractly makes sense, but I don't quite see how you map it to tech.
<whitequark>
oh, nevermind.
<whitequark>
sure.
<epiglottal_bees>
Take ‘influence’ is a zero-sum game. If some group of people wants more influence, we'll call them (A), they must *reduce* the influence of another group, we'll call it (C).
<epiglottal_bees>
The set of people in neither A nor C, can be further divided into those who notice-and-oppose, (D), and those who either don't notice, or don't oppose, (B).
<epiglottal_bees>
the ‘force’ (call it the derivative of influence, I suppose, the ‘acceleration’ of influence) generated by C + D counterweights, to some extent, the growth observed in A.
<epiglottal_bees>
oh. sorry.
brr has joined #elliottcable
<epiglottal_bees>
didn't see your middle messages.
* epiglottal_bees
breathes
<epiglottal_bees>
okay. backing up.
<epiglottal_bees>
man, it's really novel to be arguing a *new* topic, one I haven't re-argued and re-argued, improved my vector on a thousandfold, years
<epiglottal_bees>
over years*
<joelteon>
i think i'm getting a cold
<epiglottal_bees>
somehow, got started trying to talk about everything at once. my own mistake. lemme focus on the point originally brought up:
<epiglottal_bees>
Melissa, and those like her, preaching.
<epiglottal_bees>
It's *so* *tedious*.
<whitequark>
for whom?
<epiglottal_bees>
God, so many of my feminist ‘friends’ would tear me apart for admitting that truth. It hurts. (Not very good ‘friends’ then, I suppose, are they?)
<whitequark>
(I mean, it feels good to have an echo chamber which cares about your cause. Hell, it feels good to have one person. In my case that's a set of things about languages. The reason I quit twitter, in fact.)
<whitequark>
(actually, now that I mention it, I almost totally gave up on talking. but, your thoughts are more interesting, so continue.)
<epiglottal_bees>
Nonetheless, I do state it as truth: everything about these peoples' arguments, whether it be about how innocent conference organizers should be actively courting and preferentially treating women-speakers … or how each and every interaction, anywhere, should/must begin with the people negotiating which pronouns the other parties wish to have used for them
<epiglottal_bees>
… or something-something-something rape jokes … is *exhausting* to those of us who aren't affected.
<epiglottal_bees>
And more than exhausting, it's goddamned annoying.
<cuttle>
problems with what you're saying so far:
<cuttle>
- definition of influence. There's more than one kind. Influence in terms of being able to get heard, get a job, get paid a fair wage, etc., is not zero-sum at all. A does lose influence in the sense of the ability to oppress a marginalized group, but not in the first sense.
<cuttle>
- A and B can't always be separated. Sometimes there's no conscious, deliberate A at all, and A, B, and D are all contributing in inadvertent ways, while only D is working to prevent doing that.
<cuttle>
but yeah keep talking
<epiglottal_bees>
*That* is the *exactly* the reason, why I actively follow the loud, radical-feminist types, right now.
<epiglottal_bees>
I reached a point a while back, where I realized I was starting to tire of *my friends*. True moderates, who are nonetheless surpressed in one of these ways.
<epiglottal_bees>
I *have* a female friend who's been raped in the workplace. I *have* a transsexual friend seeking integration into her engineering community. I *have* an extremely poor (well, previously), physiologically disadvantaged friend who is trying to meet standards set by those with extreme privilege by comparison.
<epiglottal_bees>
And sometimes, I hear those same arguments, parroted constantly by the radicals, out of such friends' mouths. And sometimes, more than once, I tired of those friends entirely, for that reason.
<epiglottal_bees>
So.
<epiglottal_bees>
These radicals, are *most* important, in my rather humble and unauthorized opinion, as a sort of vaccination:
<epiglottal_bees>
some boy, wanted to be a girl, for reasons of their own; went through immense opposition to do so, and somehow found the strength to survive it strong and intact … and, as these things usually go, overreacted with an *overdose* of that strength, in a very public way. Now, that girl, goes around, yelling at *everybody*, about how they should behave in
<epiglottal_bees>
regard to boys with long hair who wear bras sometimes, or biological girls who identify to prospective employers as males and try to use the male restrooms …
<epiglottal_bees>
and annoys the fuck out of us, telling *us* how to live *our* lives because of *her* problems.
<epiglottal_bees>
but.
<epiglottal_bees>
because of that girl, and her problems, and her subsequent strength, and her annoyances,
<epiglottal_bees>
sometime later, some other, less-unbelievably-strong boy will come along, and maybe find people who don't laugh him out of an IRC channel for asking them to address him as ‘her’ from then on out.
<cuttle>
epiglottal_bees: right, radical voices shift the overton window
<epiglottal_bees>
some biological girl will *not* be thrown out of the interview room before he has a chance to show his actual mete, simply because his form isn't as accepted by the society outside our development rooms, yet; and he may actually receive a well-paying job, and live a more fulfilled life, because of that.
<whitequark>
yeah I fully agree with this
<epiglottal_bees>
so *our* minimal-reasonable-effort job here, is not to *accept* these loudmouths, or lie to ourselves about how much we agree with them (I could not more despise white-knights ಠ_ಠ),
<cuttle>
radical voices are the heroes we need, but not the ones we deserve
<whitequark>
there's "I'm annoyed but they're right" annoyed, and there's "what the fuck is this bullshit" annoyed
<whitequark>
donglegate.
<epiglottal_bees>
but rather to allow them to exist in our periphera.
<epiglottal_bees>
and adjust our perception of ‘normal’ *just enough*, with their annoying background-noise, to accept the rest who come along.
<whitequark>
and you will never actually know whether it's bullshit or you drew the line too far / not far enough.
<whitequark>
epiglottal_bees: (minimal reasonable effort) I think what you just described is what naturally happens.
<epiglottal_bees>
yah.
<epiglottal_bees>
that's the only reason social change is ever enacted.
<whitequark>
not consciously. happens solely due to their existence, and perhaps something in the society which doesn't allow someone to just shut them up.
<epiglottal_bees>
but my point here boils down to this:
<epiglottal_bees>
don't unfollow @Shanley just 'cause she's so goddamn annoying.
<epiglottal_bees>
keep following @Shanley, so you don't find quildreen quite so weird.
<epiglottal_bees>
yesyesyesyes whitequark
<whitequark>
or just don't talk with people. makes life waaaay easier. :]
<epiglottal_bees>
but that thing-which-allows-someone-to-shut-them-up *exists* in a way that it never has before
<epiglottal_bees>
unfollow / block has never existed, in real life.
<whitequark>
it totally did.
<whitequark>
excommunication was actively used since... humans existed.
<epiglottal_bees>
you get somebody making enough noise that he shows up in the newspapers, there was no way to *completely filter* that nutter out of your daily news-reading, without completely disconnecting yourself from the world.
<whitequark>
exile, etc
<epiglottal_bees>
you have some religious freak shouting from a street-corner, there was no way to get him out of your mind-periphery without never-leaving-your-house.
<epiglottal_bees>
yes, but that's obviously wrong. free speech is something we all believe in here, I hope.
<epiglottal_bees>
but I'm pointing out that freedom of unfollowing *is* anti-free-speech, in a way.
<epiglottal_bees>
not in a way that I know a sane way to solve, or anything.
<whitequark>
uhh
<epiglottal_bees>
but sometimes … I think we need to limit this power each and every one of us has *against* free speech, this ability to erase people, and viewpoints, *entirely* from our lives.
<whitequark>
so what you say boils down to "if you never come out of your house, you're violating someone else's free speech"
<whitequark>
which is an obvious fallacy.
<whitequark>
so, disagree.
<epiglottal_bees>
hm
<whitequark>
say, if I stopped using Twitter entirely to not see feminist stuff
<epiglottal_bees>
I'd say you've boiled what you *think* my point is, down into a simple and obviously fallacious sentence, so that you can easily disprove it.
<whitequark>
would that be the same as blocking?
<epiglottal_bees>
I'm not too good with the fallacies, but I'm pretty sure that's ‘straw man?’
<whitequark>
it is
<whitequark>
well, what you describe is.
<epiglottal_bees>
nonono
<epiglottal_bees>
allow me to adjust your response, okay? that reasonable?
* whitequark
sighs
<epiglottal_bees>
the biggest problem in your sentence is the phrase “free speech.”
<whitequark>
yes was about to say that
<epiglottal_bees>
free speech is, in fact, a *subset* of the actual right that we should be finding a way to protect, IMO. It's one-and-the-same set, in the Old World. They're synonymous, ‘free speech,’ and what I'm discussing. But that's no longer the case.
<whitequark>
think about newspapers: there's censorship, it always was and always will be. there's self-censorship. there's just politically aligned newspapers.
<epiglottal_bees>
Hold on. I'm getting there. One step at a time?
<whitequark>
my point, overall, is: if you want to live in a bubble, you always could.
<epiglottal_bees>
Allowing somebody to *broadcast*, in the virtual world, is no longer the same as forcing others to *field* that broadcast.
<epiglottal_bees>
The *actual value* of free speech, in the past, in the terms of developing societies, was in that it implicitly forced the majority to *field* the opinions of the minority.
<whitequark>
hmm.
<whitequark>
I see,
<whitequark>
*.
<epiglottal_bees>
The minority could march on the town hall. The minority could fill up the back of your bus to work. The minority could shout its insanities about the Oncoming Return of Hell from the street-corners.
<epiglottal_bees>
That was the *true* value of free speech.
<epiglottal_bees>
basically, reducing the barrier-of-entry from group (B) in my flawed, short-lived formula (thanks, micah), to becoming members of group (D).
<whitequark>
yesyes, I got your point. that's a completely new view on free speech to me.
<epiglottal_bees>
(A) and (C) are *so small* that they're absolutely *inconsequential* next to (B) and (D) …
* epiglottal_bees
nods
<epiglottal_bees>
okay.
<epiglottal_bees>
so, your next comment, re: bubbles
<epiglottal_bees>
let me return to my analogy for a moment, I'm extremely comfortable with analogies for some reason. Perhaps it's because I'm a terrible logician, but I'm correspondingly good with stories and words.
<epiglottal_bees>
street-corners and homes. foreign/antithetical viewpoints and your ‘compfort zone,’ bubble.
<epiglottal_bees>
you could always, yes, live in a bubble. You could take a different route from home to the sewing-shop where you worked, and *never* hear what that crazy homeless preacher-nut had to say. But that would *affect* you, usually at least mildly negatively, if not majorly negatively.
<whitequark>
also, that would require conscious effort.
<whitequark>
which strengthens your point actually.
<epiglottal_bees>
Similarly, if you *really really really* don't like what the Republicans have to say about immigration, then you could, of course, remove yourself from Republican circles, and circulate instead in Libertarian ones. But, again, that would affect you majorly, in other ways. It's a *big decision*, and there's a *lot* of action-wieght required of you to
<epiglottal_bees>
undertake it.
<epiglottal_bees>
but with Tweetbot's mute, I can immediately, with zero effort, hear nothing that anybody Apple-fan has to say about technology, on the day of release of Apple's newest product … while continuing to hear everything else that *doesn't* oppose my anti-Apple viewpoint.
<epiglottal_bees>
In fact, I wouldn't even hear *my friends*, the ones I trust and might actually believe if they went “Wow, Fapple's latest iPad actually looks … kinda neat …”.
<epiglottal_bees>
If I block @Shanley, I don't hear her arguments; in fact, I transparently, and with zero effort, don't even see it when my moderate-minded friend retweets one of her more particularly un-venemous, reasoned arguments.
<epiglottal_bees>
The empowerment of the individual to filter their own world more efficiently, is *disabling* minority as a whole.
<epiglottal_bees>
And, to some very slight degree, as the people being *given* this immense ability to cripple ‘free speech’ … as those individuals so empowered … it's our responsibility to temper our application of that power.
<epiglottal_bees>
To, maybe, sometimes let those who annoy us, vaccinate us against harmful and foreign worldviews.
<epiglottal_bees>
To *not* unfollow That One Dude who keeps tweeting about God's Love, in between his suppositions on ES6's progress.
<epiglottal_bees>
To *not* block the offensive feminist who my friends keep retweeting.
<whitequark>
seriously man, I'm tellin ya
<whitequark>
just don't talk with people at all.
<epiglottal_bees>
To *not* mute the American-holiday bullshit filling my stream on a random Thursday of no import in my home country.
<epiglottal_bees>
cuttle, whitequark: forgive the rhetoric. rebuttals or opinions of any sort?
<whitequark>
seriously though: what you're saying is that people should act responsibly and don't try to chicken out of feeling empathy outside of their comfort zone
<whitequark>
which is nice, but
<whitequark>
it's akin to saying "people should be nice to each other, the world would be a wonderful place then"
<epiglottal_bees>
well, not quite
<whitequark>
it's, perhaps, an insightful observation, but that's about it.
<whitequark>
better say like this:
<whitequark>
it's not wrong, but it doesn't really help.
<epiglottal_bees>
I suppose what I'm *saying* is that we need to find a new concept, akin to ‘free speech,’ with all the *real* benefits thereof, but in a pull-filtered society instead of a push-filtered one.
<whitequark>
I *know* it already when I'm unfollowing my friend because I'm tired of something which is an integral part of her existence
<whitequark>
it's just that I'm doing it anyway.
<epiglottal_bees>
But my *argument*, which is separate, to all of you, is … please stop blocking me. ;)
<whitequark>
ah.
<whitequark>
I never followed you in the first place. ;)
* epiglottal_bees
laughs
<epiglottal_bees>
sorry, chellio was watching, and had just summarized my conversation thusly (“You're just saying all this, 'cause people block you a lot”)
<epiglottal_bees>
so I had to interject with that.
<epiglottal_bees>
This is an oooooooooooold viewpoint of mine, though. Very personal from long, long before the New New New Feminist movement we're seeing now.
<epiglottal_bees>
Long story short, I've *always* hated the existing of blocking.
<epiglottal_bees>
I once said, when I was very young, that I'd rather have someone stab me in the chest—*kill* me—than block me.
<epiglottal_bees>
And to a surprisingly complete extent, that's still true.
<epiglottal_bees>
I really, honestly believe there is no insult greater, or hurt more intense, than finding out you've been blocked, ignored, or whatever mechanism a platform may offer.
<epiglottal_bees>
Imagine the equivalent in real-life:
<epiglottal_bees>
Not stopping an argument you dislike with someone to change the subject …
<epiglottal_bees>
Not walking away, because you can't handle the stress, anymore …
<epiglottal_bees>
Not ignoring them and going LA LA LA LA I CAN'T HEAR YOU LA LA LA LA …
<epiglottal_bees>
Not throwing them away as a friend, and never contacting them again …
<epiglottal_bees>
Not even killing them, and disallowing them from ever desiring to speak to you again.
<epiglottal_bees>
Instead, you're *leaving them alive*, to *desire* to speak to you, to *desire* to continue the conversation, while preventing them from ever fulfilling that desire. Preventing them from attempting to change, or improve, their situation.
<epiglottal_bees>
Even a convicted death-row criminal can still ask his jailor, as his last request, to send a message to the woman who'd estranged him. She has no obligation to respond, he even has no obligation to carry that message … but he knows there's a *chance* the message will go through. There's a *chance* of reconciliation, or continuation of communication.
<epiglottal_bees>
There's nothing worse than blocking somebody. Nothing.
<epiglottal_bees>
</extreme, unpopular worldview>
<whitequark>
honest question: what about blocking trolls?
<epiglottal_bees>
The same applies.
<whitequark>
I can relate to your extreme, unpopular worldview, too well for it to become scary.
<epiglottal_bees>
If you had a stalker in real life, which is what a troll amounts to (the internet-age evolution of the stalker mindset, not the internet-enabled old-school stalker, which is a different thing),
cloudhead has quit [Ping timeout: 248 seconds]
<epiglottal_bees>
you could get court orders, move away, blah blah blah. But nothing is *absolute*. It's only a *mostly*.
<epiglottal_bees>
There should be no absolute blocking.
<epiglottal_bees>
No protocol-level, or system-level blocking.
<epiglottal_bees>
Client-level blocking, I suppose. A ‘spam’ folder, or what-have-you, is completely reasonable.
<whitequark>
I'd say that internet-enabled trolls benefit from scale way more than their victims.
* epiglottal_bees
nods
<epiglottal_bees>
it's a tricky situation, a tricky question.
<whitequark>
even with blocking!
<epiglottal_bees>
But that's a slippery-slope thing:
<epiglottal_bees>
“but but but but trolls!!!” is not excuse for quite literally *ripping the modern-day equivalent of a tongue out of somebody's mouth*, and then walking away.
<whitequark>
no, that would be banning.
<epiglottal_bees>
There's nothing more rude or offensive, *including* whatever that person did to you to make you think they deserved it.
<epiglottal_bees>
woaaaaah HUGE distinction there, and a whole conversation in itself:
<epiglottal_bees>
why I don't believe the distinction between ‘free speech’ and individual's-filtering, as discussed above, is a real distinction …
<whitequark>
and I would sorta agree that an actual permaban (say by real-life ID or something), *is* exactly what you say it is.
<whitequark>
but not twitter-blocking.
<epiglottal_bees>
why I don't think the distinction between banning, and blocking, is a real distinction
<epiglottal_bees>
all intricately linked.
<whitequark>
it's linked, yet distinct
<epiglottal_bees>
it's not the same in *some situations*.
<epiglottal_bees>
If I have Susan's e-mail address, IM handle, website, IRC handles, Twitter handle …
<epiglottal_bees>
yeah, sure, blocking on one service isn't a big deal.
<epiglottal_bees>
but if it's somebody I *literally have only ever heard of on Twitter*, somebody for whom it is completely inappropriate (if not impossible!) to go hunting down their personal contact info to open alternative threads of communication? then it's no different.
<epiglottal_bees>
but. I want to talk about blocking/banning, or free-speech/individual-filtering.
<epiglottal_bees>
both amount to the same thing: filtering of worldview on A) the push, or B) the pull.
<whitequark>
idk. blocking would be an equivalent of not going to that weird corner with that weird religious guy.
<whitequark>
I can't see how that is unreasonable.
<epiglottal_bees>
As has been made clear above, I, entirely personally and without exterior support or rigorous basis, equate the crime of pervasive-filtering, with murder.
<epiglottal_bees>
If not above.
<epiglottal_bees>
hold on, phone?
<whitequark>
ok
<whitequark>
I mean, you blocked me on twitter, I go to the other corner: register a new account.
<whitequark>
if I decide to avoid that corner as well, or fuck, just move to a different city, that's my right.
<epiglottal_bees>
back
<epiglottal_bees>
thaaaat was weir
<epiglottal_bees>
uhhh
<epiglottal_bees>
chellio wants my attentttiooonmnnnawfkeg
<epiglottal_bees>
yeah, will have to be back there
<whitequark>
yeah, screw you and your happy life too^W^W^W^W^W^W^W^W sure, tomorrow
* whitequark
is somewhat annoyed on completely irrelevant topics, nevermind him
* epiglottal_bees
nods
<epiglottal_bees>
idk happy.
<whitequark>
well
<whitequark>
being able to talk to someone close to you without slipping to horrible drama like every two weeks for several years.
<whitequark>
why the fuck did I say that
<epiglottal_bees>
errrr, idk, that basically describes my relationship.
<epiglottal_bees>
I recently kinda-sorta asked her to move in with me.
<epiglottal_bees>
it was weird, it wasn't intentional, she brought it up for other reasons, and it just slipped out
<epiglottal_bees>
and she *rightfully* turned me down, citing our relationship being to continuously ‘rocky’ to justify that
<epiglottal_bees>
and the horribly, hurtful part is that she's *right*. We're never together-and-okay for more than, idk, three weeks at a time. before I try and dump her again.
<epiglottal_bees>
or vice versa.
<epiglottal_bees>
anyway. bbl, to enjoy the cookies that just came out of the oven, and one of the far-between Good Times with her … in my new home. (=
epiglottal_bees is now known as ELLIOTTCABLE
<whitequark>
now I feel bad for you too. :/
ELLIOTTCABLE is now known as NICK_IS_SHOUTING
NICK_IS_SHOUTING is now known as ELLIOTTCABLE
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
On one parting note, I just discovered this:
niggler has quit [Quit: Computer has gone to sleep.]
<purr>
<prophile> I wish nigger was more socially acceptable because it's a great onomatopoeia for the sound of a helicopter. niggerniggerniggerniggerniggerniggernigger
<joelteon>
man i don't hear it
<joelteon>
sounds more like "whockawhockawhockawhocka"
niggler has joined #elliottcable
niggler has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
niggler has joined #elliottcable
KillerX has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
KillerX has joined #elliottcable
<prophile>
it's more the sound of an automatic weapon