Oh, believe me, I shit the bed on this.
I was still all ornery from the last time here; I let that get into my blood, and overreacted. I've only recently attained any internet prominence, and this was my first time experiencing hate. Despite all the mental preparations... I reacted poorly.
I prefer to own my failures, however; I fucked up three weeks ago. Anyone can see that.
As I said to another commenter - I suspect that I am better as a beacon for rationality, pointing new pilgrims to his place, than I am a member of the community.
I was too much of an asshole; here it is in comment form.
I'm taking a 24 hour break, thom. I was over worked up, and I let it spill into this comment thread, overreacting to what people said.
I've probably acted like a jerk. not completely devoid of purpose, but a jerk nonetheless. I'd like to apologize for all of that. I had no call to be so rude to all of you.
Gah. I suppose I should repost this to the top.
Thank you for your apology. While you weren't rude to me, since I didn't get in on any of this, I had been pretty heavily downvoting you for your hostility. I was planning on looking through the thread in more detail to make sure I hadn't missed anything I thought should be downvoted, but I'm going to refrain from doing that now, and I've removed some downvotes I had made.
Delete: hopefully nobody saw that.
I'm taking a 24 hour break, thom. I was over worked up, and I let it spill into this comment thread, overreacting to what people said.
I've probably acted like a jerk. not completely devoid of purpose, but a jerk nonetheless. I'd like to apologize for all of that. I had no call to be so rude to all of youl
Gah. I suppose I should repost this to the top.
I have no interest in addressing your video. That is not my purpose here. I saw you making what looked like a mistake, and felt the need to point it out. I also pointed out confusing parts of your comment in hope that you could resolve the confusion.
I have no interest in insulting you or making fun of you, nor have I done so. I also have no interest in "getting laid", and I'd prefer you keep your opinions regarding my private life to yourself.
And nobody's been here longer than me.
GLaDOS, you are the first girl-computer to give me a bRoner.
The mind truly is the sexy organ, even for a playa like myself.
This sort of comment reinforces negative stereotypes pretty badly. There's a perception that people who self-identify as "race realists" are often simply smart versions of "bros" and have generally sexist attitudes. How much of that is due to halo effects and tribal allegiance issues isn't clear. But this sort of comment really doesn't help matters.
I may have to trust you to post the videos full of Truth
Capi...
I was incredibly polite on the last debate; I still got downvoted.
I've just glanced at your whole list of comments. Unless I missed a page or something, I'm not seeing you get significantly downvoted in any systematic way in past discussions.
Either way, whether you were treated rightly or wrongly in the past, right now you're just being absolutely horrible and trollish, and your current behaviour would easily cause you to deserve to get banned, not just downvoted.
Note that the argument on my video isn't the video itself - it's whether the video is appropriate or not.
It's generally considered acceptable here to comment on style and presentation, and posters generally appreciate the feedback. It's... weird, to put it lightly, that you are responding to neutral-toned feedback with hostility.
This place likes to pretend that it's counter-norm, but it parrots the university line at the drop of a hat.
I'm not sure what you mean by "counter-norm", or why this place would like to pretend it is that.
...Perfec
From what I gather (as I said in the video, I am NOT a social scientist) it's based upon victims surveys; not racist cops inflating the stats, but victims reporting who committed the crime.
And given that the majority of crim is intrAracial, this is pretty definitive.
FringeElements breaks down the data rather well in "make the world flat." He does make a couple of errors, and I'm sure you could criticize him for hours... or you could check out the FBI survey I mentioned.
Check out my comment history I'm an evil "racist" too. I don't get down voted though.
Oh I'm sure the downvotes for the main articles are almost entirely from newbs to the topic who are shocked SHOCKED to see this argument. And people who are thinking "this is true but I can't have this on LW main it looks bad to non-LWers!". And now that its in negative numbers people will dog pile on it (happens to most)... and that isn't so much your fault (though I guarantee you you would have had a better response in discussion).
But in some of the ...
Perhaps I've misjudged you.
The battles over on my channel - if you ignore the white nationalists - are largely about survival of civilization, followed secondarily by the survival of the political state.
But overtop of those the debate is mainly whether we should have a state. I'm not even herding cats - I'm just talking to them.
:blink:
And I was JUST about to say that I've read the transcript of your video and found it mostly factually solid (although making some puzzling assumptions and generalizations) and refreshingly polite! Calm down, good sir. I'm not offended by this discussion and neither should you be.
I certainly never had "contempt" for you; the absolute worst thought I allowed myself was: "Shame that this charismatic man was led somewhat astray by contrarianism and unbridled resentment of modernity."
P.S. I'm quite sure that no LW commenters would be spat on by Orwell, were they so fortunate as to meet him.
I was just giving an extra data point for kilobug's remark; going off the number of upvotes I think there's a significant chunk of people who prefer video to text.
(and sheesh, if you want to talk about politically incorrect topics you're going to be a bit more thick-skinned, here you're snapping back at a preference of media as if it was a criticism)
Being blunt is not the same thing as being hostile, especially not if it's in response to a question.
You asked whether a description would be enough to make the post valuable to people on this site. katydee thought that it would not make it reasonable for him, and explained why. You are of course under no obligation to cater to his wishes in particular if you deem them unreasonable, just like he is under no obligation to check out your video if he doesn't consider it a worthwhile use of his time. But although he could have been a little less blunt, he never attacked you directly and merely explained his own feelings on the subject.
I appreciate the clarification. :) My bad - I'm surprised to hear that that is a problem, but that is life, eh?
I rewrote the description. What do you think? I don't want you to go to all the effort of doing a transcript; I suspect it might take longer than the video itself (with all the false starts, etc). But I will not say no to it, either. Do you think it's still necessary?
That is decent of you, sir.
Nonetheless, I do not believe that this is the place for me. I support and admire your mission of raising the Rationality Waterline, but I am a man who belongs in the trenches. Best I can do is use your Dark Side teachings, and send the occasional padwan in your direction to learn the Vicious Arts.
Grant me your prayers as I fight against the insufferable Good within the world.