General > General Technical Chat
Dilbert loses newspapers, publishers, distributor, and possibly its website
james_s:
Fair enough, I don't want to piss off Dave or anyone else really, I actually hate politics and would be happy to not encounter them at all but it is getting harder and harder and people are more polarized than ever. Growing up my dad was a republican and my mom a democrat and I don't remember that ever being an issue, they didn't see eye to eye on some things but I can't remember there ever being an argument about it, used to be people were allowed to have different opinions and it just wasn't a big deal. I try to be accepting of everyone, I have friends from many walks of life with many different political views from what would probably be called far right to far left. One of my best friends is gay, one of my good friends for many years is trans, I have friends and colleagues of various races and cultures, sometimes I agree, sometimes I partially agree, sometimes I disagree, ultimately it doesn't really matter. I have found some common ground with all of these people and we get along, they all have some redeeming characteristic, usually a common interest. I wish more people could rediscover the ability to agree to disagree. A person my see the world differently than I do, and being on the autistic spectrum it seems *most* people see the world differently than I do. It doesn't make them a monster and I don't hate them. My biggest issue with this "cancel culture" or whatever you want to call it is that I resent being pressured to hate somebody because of the opinions they hold. Someone could be a brutal dictator and if they have some common ground, like a shared interest in one of my hobbies I would be happy to discuss that with them, their other characteristics and views are just not that important to me. I don't care what a person does on their own time or in their own home, and I certainly know that nobody ever has had their mind changed by force. If you want to change a person's views or educate them, finding common ground and forming some kind of bond is far more effective than shunning, lecturing or attacking them. My fellow citizens of differing views and political affiliations are not my enemy and not something to be destroyed.
EEVblog:
--- Quote from: tooki on March 18, 2023, 02:00:26 pm ---Of course. I should have mentioned that my intent in my post above wasn’t to argue the politics, nor Dave’s right to run the forum how he sees fit, but to try and explain why the politics draw people back in, and why the topic may be more inherently political than he realizes.
--- End quote ---
I understand full well how political it is, that's why I'm trying to stop it as best I can.
--- Quote ---The problem I see here on eevblog is that the conservative usages (mostly in the context of outrage) are bandied about as if they were neutral terms, but they’re not — and thus political debates begin.
--- End quote ---
The political debates are inevitable, guaranteed in fact regardless of what is said or how it's said.
This is why for this thread to continue to be useful we have to try and stay away from politics (and social debates) as much as possible.
EEVblog:
--- Quote from: tooki on March 18, 2023, 01:36:33 pm ---The fact that Dilbert has/had large popularity among nerds does not, IMHO, justify a special exemption to the no-politics rule, given that the entire premise is inherently political.
--- End quote ---
Ok, fine, how about no cancel culture either then?
How about every post from now on that's not directly about Adams/Dibert gets deleted, would that suit you?
Of course "cancel culture" involves "politics". But you can talk about "cancel culture" without dragging too much "politics" into it.
For example, people could talk about their personal experiences and how it's impacted them, their friends and collegues, their workplace, their career etc.
"Politics" really starts to get out of hand when people start to debate it and then extended the scope into broader areas of politics and society. Like I had to tell people to stop talking about Putin, I mean WTF, why did anyone even need to bring up him? Why?
That's the kind of thing I'm talking about when I try and tell people stop the "politics".
Heck, the politics would be appropriate discussion if it directly involved Adams and Dilbert.
It would actually be more useful to have a "no debating" rule on this thread, that would inherently lead to less "politics".
EEVblog:
--- Quote from: PlainName on March 18, 2023, 09:35:42 am ---
--- Quote from: EEVblog on March 18, 2023, 01:07:03 am ---
--- Quote from: vk6zgo on March 18, 2023, 12:36:16 am ---Mr Addams is either a victim or he is not, & we have had plenty of posts on both sides, but if we try somehow analysing the cause/s of his situation, the problem is it is difficult to stick to that topic when is it blends seamlessly into so many related ones.
--- End quote ---
No need to analyse any of this, if you actually listen to him (which most people have not), he states repeatedly that he is not a victim, he's not complaining about what happened to him, and yes what he said was racists and that's the entire point of it. After the dust has settled it's clearly a political cancellation from the left. No one on the right/conserative side of politics has cancelled him, no black people have cancelled him, it was ultimately a political takedown because he has influence in politics. He knowingly offered up an opportunity to the political left to cancel him and they took it. They would have been dumb not to. That's politics.
--- End quote ---
Well, I seem to have missed something important with this. Suppose I walk into a bank with a shotgun, tell them I am going to rob the place and the security guard shoots me (almost) dead. I then laugh in his face and tell him "Ha! I knew you would do that but I am not really a robber and pretended to be so only so you would shoot me. The laugh is on you!"
That's the kind of thing that comes across here: he isn't actually racist but made out he was just so the anti-racist crowd would have a go at him, which they did. And he thinks he scored something over them? Hmmm.
--- End quote ---
What he wanted to achieve was, in his own words, to reframe the conversation. His focus in the last few years has been these "reframes", so much so that his new book is eniterly about reframes.
The new book now won't be publish end of year as his publisher has dropped him. It'll still come out, but he's not sure in what form or how.
He seems to have succeeded to, many people are now talking about race in a different frame, and he's being invoted on many shows to talk about it.
m k:
Level headed current issues and hot topics are pretty simple, just don't take it personally, stop name calling and don't dig strawman name callings from others.
If I say that minorities are much more racist toward majorities than the opposite and El Salvador has built a 40k prison for gang members, then what.
Only rational way to continue is to ask more info.
All other ways are more or less irrational, the text has no more info than it has.
I could also have used "can be" instead of "are" and change the whole thing.
"Are you" and "do you really think" are two different things.
"How the hell you can think that" is still the latter.
For the last "Q" I may have answered something like "quite easily, see, I can do it even with my eyes closed."
Don't go with it and there are no ammo.
Yes, easy for me to say.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version