So u/ditmeisje, you have a cited comparison of number of posts per incident to show us that reddit did indeed care more about the Chicago torture to show us, right? I would love to see your research data.
I was honestly going to ignore this not because I don't care, but because I've addressed this issue several times in other comments of mine, but I guess it's better to just lay everything out with the free time I have now.
The third and fourth highest rated posts of all time on /r/news relate to the Chicago incident.
Regarding my first link, the third highest, it sits at 89.7k in karma (is that what's used to refer to the rating on the side?) with 14 'other discussions' links. Nearly 22k comments.
Regarding the fourth highest, it sits at 84.3k, a staggering 43 other discussions just referencing the news article link alone, with 35k comments.
I actually stopped scrolling at page 6 on the highest-rated/all-time posts on /r/news trying to find literally anything referencing the Charleston shooting or Dylann Roof's trial/sentencing. Nothing came up, so I had to look for it in the search bar. That alone should tell you something.
It seems the highest-rated post regarding Roof that I could find sits at 32k. So less than half of both articles about the Chicago incident on Reddit, and with only 4.4k comments.
I'd give it some time before using numbers of individual posts regarding both topics, just because the Charleston shooting is obviously older and the case has been high-profile and on-going.
Looking back on it, I think it was a little tasteless to immediately jump on the coverage of the Chicago incident with it being a fresh wound. But the feelings of that don't trump the reality that, demonstrably, Reddit did care about the Chicago incident more in terms of discussion and visibility. If you can show me even a shred of evidence to the contrary, I'd be happy to see it.
I mean, what other metric is there? Those indicate visibility, and not only was karma my only measure, it was also 'other discussion' posts (which indicate the same article being reposted to other subreddits, and total number of comments.
Sure, I just think it's funny that you took the time to call me out for evidence, and now that I've presented you with it, you're suddenly apathetic. I'm open to evidence on your end, completely so, but now that raw numbers are in your face, it's a nonissue.
"I'm sorry, but the law says if your mother was a Jew, so are you. I'm going to need you to... Yes, it's terrible, but I'm going to need you to come with me to the police station, the law must be enforced. I'm so sorry. What? Not enforce the law? What do you think I am, some sort of anarchist?" -- You, presumably, 1940
By one hand you are right, but by the other hand you got upvoted in CB2, which means your opinions are discarded on whatever topics for the next 10 years.
So you're pretty near the end. When you're getting robbed, raped, or even threatened with violence in your retarded anarchist land, who will protect you if not the law?
"Your honour, I was just following orders. The law I was enforcing was legally passed by a legal government! You can't convict me, what I did was legal!" -- You, 1946
So your argument is that because once a law was unfair and should have been fought, no law ever is acceptable. I feel like you just threw the baby, his mother, father and twelve of his cousins out with the bath water.
So who gets to decide what laws to enforce? You? I don't remember the election where we chose a retard named "SCHRODINGERS_UTERUS" to decide on the laws we should enforce.
"So who gets to decide what laws to enforce? You? I don't remember the election where we chose a guy named 'Hans Scholl' to decide on whether we should send the Jews to the camps." -- someone similarly morally handicapped as you, 1943
Congratulations man! Your unprecedented use of Godwin's Law has officially overthrown millennia of legal philosophy and social contract theory! Socrates and Hobbes are weeping in their graves! How does it feel to be the greatest philosopher in human history?
You do realize that Socrates did in fact not argue for any social contract theory? Socrates would not actually agree with you in your inane liberal amoralism. Hell, not even Hobbes himself would be on your side.
You really should stick to being condescending on topics you actually know anything about, it's much less likely you'll embarrass yourself.
Socrates didn't argue for social contract theory but if you read the trials of Socrates, he discusses the justice of following the law at length. Of course he had more of a point than "lolnaziz" as did Hobbes, so it's not surprising you lack that understanding.
So your argument is that because once a reference to Nazis was unfair and should have been reject, no reference to Nazis ever is acceptable. I feel like you just threw the Himmler, Goebbels, Adolf and twelve of his SS officers out with the bath water.
I think that his original reference to Nazi Germany was fine, I was more criticizing the fact that everytime anyone tried to argue with him he just kept using Nazis and going "lol i win". The problem with Godwin's Law isn't that Nazi's are never applicable, it's that people act like invoking the Nazis is a wincon.
No, that's definitely a point to use, though I would point out that the vast majority of soldiers who actually carried out the war crimes weren't punished, instead the people who ordered them were. I wasn't arguing with the guy's point, I was mocking his stupid and pompous "debating" style.
46 comments
n/a SnapshillBot 2017-01-16
MRW
Snapshots:
I am a bot. (Info / Contact)
n/a lifesbrink 2017-01-16
So u/ditmeisje, you have a cited comparison of number of posts per incident to show us that reddit did indeed care more about the Chicago torture to show us, right? I would love to see your research data.
n/a Sloppysloppyjoe 2017-01-16
u/ditmeisje (2017). My Personal Feelings. USA. /u/ditmeisje Personal Feelings LLC
n/a ditmeisje 2017-01-16
Totally.
n/a ditmeisje 2017-01-16
I was honestly going to ignore this not because I don't care, but because I've addressed this issue several times in other comments of mine, but I guess it's better to just lay everything out with the free time I have now.
The third and fourth highest rated posts of all time on /r/news relate to the Chicago incident.
Regarding my first link, the third highest, it sits at 89.7k in karma (is that what's used to refer to the rating on the side?) with 14 'other discussions' links. Nearly 22k comments.
Regarding the fourth highest, it sits at 84.3k, a staggering 43 other discussions just referencing the news article link alone, with 35k comments.
I actually stopped scrolling at page 6 on the highest-rated/all-time posts on /r/news trying to find literally anything referencing the Charleston shooting or Dylann Roof's trial/sentencing. Nothing came up, so I had to look for it in the search bar. That alone should tell you something.
It seems the highest-rated post regarding Roof that I could find sits at 32k. So less than half of both articles about the Chicago incident on Reddit, and with only 4.4k comments.
The actual live-update thread when the shooting first broke out sits at 9k in karma, 8k comments, and 5 'other discussions'. So almost 30 less than one of the tabs on the Chicago incident.
I'd give it some time before using numbers of individual posts regarding both topics, just because the Charleston shooting is obviously older and the case has been high-profile and on-going.
Looking back on it, I think it was a little tasteless to immediately jump on the coverage of the Chicago incident with it being a fresh wound. But the feelings of that don't trump the reality that, demonstrably, Reddit did care about the Chicago incident more in terms of discussion and visibility. If you can show me even a shred of evidence to the contrary, I'd be happy to see it.
n/a lifesbrink 2017-01-16
Your evidence is the karma of posts? Hahahahaahhaahahhshahaahshsha....I mean, hm, ok!
n/a ditmeisje 2017-01-16
I mean, what other metric is there? Those indicate visibility, and not only was karma my only measure, it was also 'other discussion' posts (which indicate the same article being reposted to other subreddits, and total number of comments.
Good response, though, I'm swayed.
n/a lifesbrink 2017-01-16
Eh. I'm apathetic, enjoy your conspiracy theories!
n/a ditmeisje 2017-01-16
Sure, I just think it's funny that you took the time to call me out for evidence, and now that I've presented you with it, you're suddenly apathetic. I'm open to evidence on your end, completely so, but now that raw numbers are in your face, it's a nonissue.
n/a lifesbrink 2017-01-16
Welcome to /drama, where if you think any of us really care or are serious, well, we all make mistakes!
n/a ditmeisje 2017-01-16
Yeah, I guess it is really easy to have that shield to avoid correcting yourself when you're demonstrably wrong. Have a nice night.
n/a IAMGODDESSOFCATSAMA 2017-01-16
Liberals: This country only cares about black on white crime! Why is there no outrage about white on black crime???
Conservatives: This country only cares about white on black crime! Why is there no outrage about black on white crime???
One of them is right. You sperglords are free to figure out which. To kick things off: I think the liberals are right.
n/a DuckHuntHotDog 2017-01-16
calling me liberal for having that position
REEEEEEEEE
n/a MechaShitlord 2017-01-16
This country doesn't care about crime unless it effects them directly except when platforms for (((advertising))) can drum up outrage.
n/a snowkarl 2017-01-16
Zimmerman
n/a Chicup 2017-01-16
"White Hispanic"
n/a WithoutAComma 2017-01-16
All I know is that I'm clearly the most oppressed.
n/a OnlyRacistOnReddit 2017-01-16
Just because you don't have a comma? Get real! I'm clearly the most oppressed.
n/a wwyzzerdd 2017-01-16
Related, but funny.
n/a fourcrew 2017-01-16
I don't get it, where's the drama? I just see circle-whining.
n/a DistortedLines 2017-01-16
Agenda posting is what keeps this sub alive, pls go
n/a SpookyMood 2017-01-16
Drama?
wew
n/a DistortedLines 2017-01-16
/u/SCHROEDINGERS_UTERUS On a cale from 1 to anarchists, how retarded are you?
n/a SpookyMood 2017-01-16
Not that he is wrong, but murderers do deserve to go to jail and rehabilitate. Cop killers are murderers regardless of anarchist fellings.
n/a SCHROEDINGERS_UTERUS 2017-01-16
"I'm sorry, but the law says if your mother was a Jew, so are you. I'm going to need you to... Yes, it's terrible, but I'm going to need you to come with me to the police station, the law must be enforced. I'm so sorry. What? Not enforce the law? What do you think I am, some sort of anarchist?" -- You, presumably, 1940
n/a SpookyMood 2017-01-16
By one hand you are right, but by the other hand you got upvoted in CB2, which means your opinions are discarded on whatever topics for the next 10 years.
n/a DistortedLines 2017-01-16
So you're pretty near the end. When you're getting robbed, raped, or even threatened with violence in your retarded anarchist land, who will protect you if not the law?
n/a SCHROEDINGERS_UTERUS 2017-01-16
"Your honour, I was just following orders. The law I was enforcing was legally passed by a legal government! You can't convict me, what I did was legal!" -- You, 1946
n/a DistortedLines 2017-01-16
Autism speaks, but i aint listening no mo
n/a SCHROEDINGERS_UTERUS 2017-01-16
Also you, 1946.
n/a DistortedLines 2017-01-16
No u
n/a FreeIceCreen 2017-01-16
So your argument is that because once a law was unfair and should have been fought, no law ever is acceptable. I feel like you just threw the baby, his mother, father and twelve of his cousins out with the bath water.
n/a SCHROEDINGERS_UTERUS 2017-01-16
>The law is obviously not always a good thing to enforce.
>The law must never be enforced.
Basically synonymous sentences.
n/a FreeIceCreen 2017-01-16
So who gets to decide what laws to enforce? You? I don't remember the election where we chose a retard named "SCHRODINGERS_UTERUS" to decide on the laws we should enforce.
n/a SCHROEDINGERS_UTERUS 2017-01-16
"So who gets to decide what laws to enforce? You? I don't remember the election where we chose a guy named 'Hans Scholl' to decide on whether we should send the Jews to the camps." -- someone similarly morally handicapped as you, 1943
n/a FreeIceCreen 2017-01-16
Congratulations man! Your unprecedented use of Godwin's Law has officially overthrown millennia of legal philosophy and social contract theory! Socrates and Hobbes are weeping in their graves! How does it feel to be the greatest philosopher in human history?
n/a SCHROEDINGERS_UTERUS 2017-01-16
You do realize that Socrates did in fact not argue for any social contract theory? Socrates would not actually agree with you in your inane liberal amoralism. Hell, not even Hobbes himself would be on your side.
You really should stick to being condescending on topics you actually know anything about, it's much less likely you'll embarrass yourself.
n/a FreeIceCreen 2017-01-16
Socrates didn't argue for social contract theory but if you read the trials of Socrates, he discusses the justice of following the law at length. Of course he had more of a point than "lolnaziz" as did Hobbes, so it's not surprising you lack that understanding.
n/a Shitgenstein 2017-01-16
So your argument is that because once a reference to Nazis was unfair and should have been reject, no reference to Nazis ever is acceptable. I feel like you just threw the Himmler, Goebbels, Adolf and twelve of his SS officers out with the bath water.
n/a FreeIceCreen 2017-01-16
I think that his original reference to Nazi Germany was fine, I was more criticizing the fact that everytime anyone tried to argue with him he just kept using Nazis and going "lol i win". The problem with Godwin's Law isn't that Nazi's are never applicable, it's that people act like invoking the Nazis is a wincon.
n/a Shitgenstein 2017-01-16
Do you think that Nazis war crimes justified by "just following orders" is irrelevant to assertions that we should always follow the law?
n/a FreeIceCreen 2017-01-16
No, that's definitely a point to use, though I would point out that the vast majority of soldiers who actually carried out the war crimes weren't punished, instead the people who ordered them were. I wasn't arguing with the guy's point, I was mocking his stupid and pompous "debating" style.
n/a xmlns 2017-01-16
how is it a stupid debating style if it wins the debate?
n/a TotesMessenger 2017-01-16
I'm a bot, bleep, bloop. Someone has linked to this thread from another place on reddit:
If you follow any of the above links, please respect the rules of reddit and don't vote in the other threads. (Info / Contact)
n/a BannedFromImzy 2017-01-16
/u/deleigh are you speaking about /r/circlebroke2?
n/a ____________13 2017-01-16
Ah yes, another chapter in the chronicles of "white people have an in-group bias just like everybody, the fucking disgusting racists".
n/a FuckURedditor 2017-01-16
Easy explanation: you're retarded.
n/a theherps 2017-01-16
/u/AnAntichrist, any idea when your mom is gonna give you back your Xbox?
n/a AnAntichrist 2017-01-16
I got it back last Tuesday