That sounds believable. My post has already been down-voted. Why? Who knows.
I downvoted you for the troll speak—that is, the billigerent defiance of the negative perception of your own behavior and the generalization of the defiance of karma to all cases, not just a specific disagreement.
...the billigerent defiance of the negative perception of your own behavior...
What? Where is that, exactly? The behavior isn’t negative, but the perception of it is, therefore I’m unjustified in being quite disgusted by it? It still seems to be a popularity contest that consists in an arbitrary ascription that generates nothing useful in an “art of rationality” setting.
And suggesting that someone is a troll is by far the most bathetic exercise of non-rational discourse. But, go ahead, down-vote this, too, if you feel better by it.
The behavior isn’t negative, but the perception of it is, therefore I’m unjustified in being quite disgusted by it?
I express disgust with specific instances of voting. I downvote generalised defiance and “I’m going to leave” bluster. It’s not a big deal—I just prefer that people don’t make comments like that and so I downvote them.
And suggesting that someone is a troll is by far the most bathetic exercise of non-rational discourse. But, go ahead, down-vote this, too, if you feel better by it.
The specific comment contained trollspeak—you are not a troll.
I express disgust with specific instances of voting.
Okay, I see your point. But the way the voting system is set up, it generalizes across one’s presence on the website, hence “karma”.
To be clear, I wasn’t being “defiant”. I asked a very specific question, expecting specific input, not a down-vote and being told (in a “put up or shut up” fashion) that I am just wrong. Well, LW is looking less inviting as a place for truly “rational discourse”. But I digress.
“I’m going to leave” bluster.
I thought it was clear that if the question was answered in the affirmative (with clear reasoning), then it would be reasonable for someone to leave such a forum. I stand by that, too, because it would be a waste of my time to put thought into posts and to have them down-voted out of existence. It is wise for a community (if that’s what it is) to consider its own nature from a meta-stand point. Is LW a treasure trove of instances of “fooling oneself”? A case study leads to many others.
I downvoted you for the troll speak—that is, the billigerent defiance of the negative perception of your own behavior and the generalization of the defiance of karma to all cases, not just a specific disagreement.
I never generalized. I asked a question. Read the post again, if you care to.
What? Where is that, exactly? The behavior isn’t negative, but the perception of it is, therefore I’m unjustified in being quite disgusted by it? It still seems to be a popularity contest that consists in an arbitrary ascription that generates nothing useful in an “art of rationality” setting.
And suggesting that someone is a troll is by far the most bathetic exercise of non-rational discourse. But, go ahead, down-vote this, too, if you feel better by it.
I express disgust with specific instances of voting. I downvote generalised defiance and “I’m going to leave” bluster. It’s not a big deal—I just prefer that people don’t make comments like that and so I downvote them.
The specific comment contained trollspeak—you are not a troll.
Okay, I see your point. But the way the voting system is set up, it generalizes across one’s presence on the website, hence “karma”.
To be clear, I wasn’t being “defiant”. I asked a very specific question, expecting specific input, not a down-vote and being told (in a “put up or shut up” fashion) that I am just wrong. Well, LW is looking less inviting as a place for truly “rational discourse”. But I digress.
I thought it was clear that if the question was answered in the affirmative (with clear reasoning), then it would be reasonable for someone to leave such a forum. I stand by that, too, because it would be a waste of my time to put thought into posts and to have them down-voted out of existence. It is wise for a community (if that’s what it is) to consider its own nature from a meta-stand point. Is LW a treasure trove of instances of “fooling oneself”? A case study leads to many others.