A4ET8a8uTh0_v2

Thank you. I did need a good chuckle to start the day right.

^^;

Part of me knew a comment like this would show up. The trend itself is greater than Dilbert and not new, but it has certainly become more pronounced. What is interesting that while 'Dilbert empire' fell in the process for not accepting white inferiority, full blown resistance marketing market is taking ( or maybe has taken already ) shape fueled largely by highly polarized populace.

I am not looking forward to it, because it requires keeping abreast of currents I do not care for or even understand.

<<I posted

You posted a blog of some organization unhappy about the cuts. Not exactly a gold standard for unbiased opinions. YOu want to convince me? Do your own calculations. Show me your work. Show that you can think critically. Am I not seeing that now.

<< You jumped in with mumblings of some unspecified number of lost jobs and vague claims about said job losers demise and then one mean online comment to you.

So ... you can understand my perspective, but choose to minimize it. I guess its ok. At least you are honest about effectively saying 'anyone who complains about it is a loser'. I will admit that it does not sound like the best way to win hearts and minds, but what do I know.

I would like to say that you have achieved nothing by not convincing me, but you did manage to do something remarkable. You actually motivated me to vote for a republican this election cycle. I suppose I am no longer center.

Note that you have not answered the question, which suggests you did not even do such a unremarkable thing as Adams.. Surely, you must feel shame for such a low expression of your potential.

<< Those you would label "woke" are famously supporters of universal health care.

Here is a problem of sorts. Some of us happen to live in the real world. Our lives do not exactly depend on some imaginary future state we advocate for. As such, a threat to alter my habitat now is of bigger import as opposed to some potential future benefit. Can you understand that perspective?

And that is before I remember that 'your' ( quotation very much intended, because we both know it is not yours; you may not even know why you aligned with it ) side would not exactly be above, say, denying said universal healthcare to republicans..

<< No, wht you are doing is supporting an administration killing ~1,000,000 people << On the one hand ~1,000,000 deaths and on the other hand some people lost their jobs and you got a mean comment online?

Eh.. hyperbole will not get you far here. May I refer to you site FAQ? I can't tell if I am wasting my time with you or not.

What exactly did you contribute to the experiment that is humanity?

Sure. People only lost their jobs and what not ( which in US means.. well, slow, and without health insurance, likely unpleasant demise ). Totally different. On this very forum, I had someone tell me in a very subtle way that it is a good idea that I stay quiet if I know what is good to me. But pendulum swings. It always does. Only difference is,we are forcing people to live up to the world they have ushered in. I hope you said thank you, because wokeness got you to this very spot.

As meta as this comment is, I can't help but note that parent may simply be engaging in pattern recognition.

Oh, boy. As much as potential there is in this, it could be so massively abused as well. Then again, how would that be any different from current distributed hellscape for human to human relationships?

Agreed. Naturally, we don't always know which event is a one off ( it used to be easier prior to proliferation of internet and then cell phones ). This likely explains some of the overcorrection I see in this area as a result. I am constantly on guard in public and if someone pulls a cell to record me, I am immediately defensive.

I guess what I am saying is that it is harder to assume it is not the type of event where we don't have to 'condition' people.

It is difficult to read this. On the one hand, for a good chunk of the population that is true and yet, one knows that is absolutely not true to individuals, who will be affected.

Since I do have multiple breaches under my belt, I could offer you an anecdote, but I won't. Do you know why? Because it is not up to me to quantify harm that was done the same way I don't have to explain, to a reasonable person, why doxxing people is not something people should have to suffer through.

I have a personal theory as to why that state persists. The quantifiable harm is small per individual affected, but high across the population and thus underreported. Sadly, the entities that could confirm that are not exactly incentivized to say they are causing harm to begin with..