You can read my comments at the time, I don’t think I considered Nonlinear as cruel or abusive. I guess that I might describe the worst of their behaviour like that, maybe, but people behave within broad ranges.
Ah perhaps I misunderstood you then—it sounds like this quote was specifically your own takeaway from reading Ben’s original article, rather than a characterization of the article itself. It’s possible that I’m seeing your position a bit better now—previously I thought you largely agreed with Ben’s article, but on another reread of your comment it seems that you generally hold significantly more moderate view on Nonlinear. (Although your other comment implies that you do believe “Ben’s account holds up”, so I remain confused.)
Well I guess I can only talk about my takeaways from Ben’s article. Like who gets to say what Ben’s article really means? I think probably you should see my reading as pretty different to the median reading. I think I can justify that but if I had realised how differently you all read the article I would have said sooner.
Just read your comment again and there were a few things that I felt strong disagreement toward. One was you saying that
This feels like a pretty big euphemism for Ben’s piece, which paints Nonlinear as cruel and abusive.
You can read my comments at the time, I don’t think I considered Nonlinear as cruel or abusive. I guess that I might describe the worst of their behaviour like that, maybe, but people behave within broad ranges.
Ah perhaps I misunderstood you then—it sounds like this quote was specifically your own takeaway from reading Ben’s original article, rather than a characterization of the article itself. It’s possible that I’m seeing your position a bit better now—previously I thought you largely agreed with Ben’s article, but on another reread of your comment it seems that you generally hold significantly more moderate view on Nonlinear. (Although your other comment implies that you do believe “Ben’s account holds up”, so I remain confused.)
Well I guess I can only talk about my takeaways from Ben’s article. Like who gets to say what Ben’s article really means? I think probably you should see my reading as pretty different to the median reading. I think I can justify that but if I had realised how differently you all read the article I would have said sooner.