What grinds my gears...

[marbles]

Just now, leicsmac said:

That's fine up until the point what they buy into affects other people as well as themselves.

 

What then?

Why do I get the feeling you lose sleep over this?

 

What then?  Nothing.

If they are not spewing clear cut hatred or calls to violence - the rest of the world is allowed to make a decision for themselves.

 

You simply cannot police opinions.  Even if you stopped them from posting on FB/Insta/Twitter - how do you stop the sites you aren’t aware of?  
Then, do you plan on hunting them down and making sure they don’t meet in some dark room and discuss things you disagree with?

 

We shouldn’t be trying to protect people from themselves.  That energy should be spent on better educating people and nurturing inquisitiveness so that they don’t simply accept a sentence they read online - or in a bathroom stall.

 

[leicsmac]

39 minutes ago, marbles said:

Why do I get the feeling you lose sleep over this?

 

Not lose sleep, but I do worry when it is entirely possible in a democracy that such erroneous opinions become matters of political policy and that doesn't end well for anyone.

 

It's all very well saying "well yeah, people should be free to choose the wrong path if they like" but I'm entirely unconvinced that freedom extends so far as to cost the health and lives of innocent parties.

 

41 minutes ago, marbles said:

 

What then?  Nothing.

If they are not spewing clear cut hatred or calls to violence - the rest of the world is allowed to make a decision for themselves.

 

....when someone tells someone to do something that could harm them, and that person does it, does that mean it's entirely the fault of the person who did it then, as opposed to the person who said they should?

 

42 minutes ago, marbles said:

 

You simply cannot police opinions.  Even if you stopped them from posting on FB/Insta/Twitter - how do you stop the sites you aren’t aware of?  
Then, do you plan on hunting them down and making sure they don’t meet in some dark room and discuss things you disagree with?

 

I'm sorry, but this is a perfect solution fallacy. Of course it's not possible to chase all the misinformation down every rabbit hole and deal with it, but it is possible (and should be done) to address such misinformation when it comes up on popular platforms where a lot more people might buy into it. Of course, offering a convincing counter-narrative is the best first step, but sometimes that's not enough. Perhaps it's enough for enough people, though.

 

45 minutes ago, marbles said:

We shouldn’t be trying to protect people from themselves.  That energy should be spent on better educating people and nurturing inquisitiveness so that they don’t simply accept a sentence they read online - or in a bathroom stall.

 

I certainly agree that critical thinking should be encouraged from an early age.

[ozleicester]

1 minute ago, leicsmac said:

 

 

I certainly agree that critical thinking should be encouraged from an early age.

Sadly, our society and our education system particularly, are actually focused on the exact opposite. Schools are designed to produce compliant drones.

[leicsmac]

3 minutes ago, ozleicester said:

Sadly, our society and our education system particularly, are actually focused on the exact opposite. Schools are designed to produce compliant drones.

And sometimes, unity of thought leading to unity of action is a necessity.

 

It's difficult and needs a flexible approach depending on the particular problem faced.

[ozleicester]

7 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

And sometimes, unity of thought leading to unity of action is a necessity.

 

It's difficult and needs a flexible approach depending on the particular problem faced.

Hmm will have to think further on this, although my first thought is, it requires individual, independent, outside the box thinkingt to solve many problems, which then gets collective support and action.

[leicsmac]

11 minutes ago, ozleicester said:

Hmm will have to think further on this, although my first thought is, it requires individual, independent, outside the box thinkingt to solve many problems, which then gets collective support and action.

That's a very good way of framing it, and I would agree.

[marbles]

2 hours ago, leicsmac said:

Not lose sleep, but I do worry when it is entirely possible in a democracy that such erroneous opinions become matters of political policy and that doesn't end well for anyone.

 

It's all very well saying "well yeah, people should be free to choose the wrong path if they like" but I'm entirely unconvinced that freedom extends so far as to cost the health and lives of innocent parties.

 

....when someone tells someone to do something that could harm them, and that person does it, does that mean it's entirely the fault of the person who did it then, as opposed to the person who said they should?

 

I'm sorry, but this is a perfect solution fallacy. Of course it's not possible to chase all the misinformation down every rabbit hole and deal with it, but it is possible (and should be done) to address such misinformation when it comes up on popular platforms where a lot more people might buy into it. Of course, offering a convincing counter-narrative is the best first step, but sometimes that's not enough. Perhaps it's enough for enough people, though.

 

I certainly agree that critical thinking should be encouraged from an early age.

Sorry, I can’t split up your posts.  Something to do with my old smartphone not being very smart (or it could be me that’s not very smart, who knows)

 

Freedom to have an opinion does not bring harm to other people.  What brings harm is people that are too stupid to verify before doing.  That’s on them.  Sorry, but it is.  You can’t have both freedom to make your own decisions, but not have the freedom to choose for yourself - it doesn’t work that way.  
 

We’ve had this discussion before. I just don’t understand your desire to not allow people the right to publicly state an opinion.  I just don’t.  Sorry.

If the opinion does not incite violence, or spew hatred - I don’t have a problem with it.  
Why?  Because I am smart enough to form an intelligent opinion. I don’t need you to protect me, and neither should any other adult.

 

Now, you want to fix misinformation, instead of going after bloggers or people posting wherever they post - go after the news.  The vast majority of news outlets report opinions and pass them off as facts.  That sounds like a bigger issue than  Billy Jo Bob saying “he don’t believe in no vaccine”.  
These same news organizations skew the truth, or in some cases just outright lie in order to push their agenda.

You wanna start with them?  I’m on board.  
 

 

If a person injured themselves because they listened to someone else - sorry, but that’s on them.  Again, you cannot protect people from themselves.  People need to be responsible for the decisions they make, not be given a scapegoat.

 

 

 

 

 

Edited 6 April 2023 by marbles

[grobyfox1990]

5 hours ago, leicsmac said:

On topic and relevant to this thread title:

 

How do you deal with deliberate misleading misinformation peddled in public like this? You can't convince them otherwise (because they have flat-out said they're not listening) and you can't ignore them either (because people may well buy into what they say).

 

So what can you do other than report, hopefully have their platform booted out from underneath their feet and have them whine about "freedom of speech", and that seems like "not cricket" to me?

You as in what do you and I do? Nothing. Stand, point and laugh. The world is way too overpopulated and in not too long people like this will no longer be a drain on resources, one less pension I have to fund 

[grobyfox1990]

1 hour ago, marbles said:

Sorry, I can’t split up your posts.  Something to do with my old smartphone not being very smart (or it could be me that’s not very smart, who knows)

 

Freedom to have an opinion does not bring harm to other people.  What brings harm is people that are too stupid to verify before doing.  That’s on them.  Sorry, but it is.  You can’t have both freedom to make your own decisions, but not have the freedom to choose for yourself - it doesn’t work that way.  
 

We’ve had this discussion before. I just don’t understand your desire to not allow people the right to publicly state an opinion.  I just don’t.  Sorry.

If the opinion does not incite violence, or spew hatred - I don’t have a problem with it.  
Why?  Because I am smart enough to form an intelligent opinion. I don’t need you to protect me, and neither should any other adult.

 

Now, you want to fix misinformation, instead of going after bloggers or people posting wherever they post - go after the news.  The vast majority of news outlets report opinions and pass them off as facts.  That sounds like a bigger issue than  Billy Jo Bob saying “he don’t believe in no vaccine”.  
These same news organizations skew the truth, or in some cases just outright lie in order to push their agenda.

You wanna start with them?  I’m on board.  
 

 

If a person injured themselves because they listened to someone else - sorry, but that’s on them.  Again, you cannot protect people from themselves.  People need to be responsible for the decisions they make, not be given a scapegoat.

 

 

 

 

 

Innit, got material sections of the media saying ‘the boat people are coming for youuuu’ etc etc to sidetrack from the very real structural, long term, issues going on in our country. And people buy it! Who gives a f4ck what chazza and Dave say on foxes talk and Facebook, other than for our own entertainment

[filthyfox]

The government plopping a barge of 500 migrants into my local vicinity.

 

This area is on its knees, with infrastructure breaking, fracturing, crashing down in a heap.

 

So... let's add to the problems, shall we???

[filthyfox]

Also- people that don't believe in vaccines-  not just covid, but dog, cat and rabbit vaccines.

 

The "let's treat it with some parsley brigade".

 

These people live in the dark ages.

Edited 6 April 2023 by filthyfox

[The Bear]

42 minutes ago, filthyfox said:

Also- people that don't believe in vaccines-  not just covid, but dog, cat and rabbit vaccines.

 

The "let's treat it with some parsley brigade".

 

These people live in the dark ages.

Same as the people that try and make their cat/dog eat vegan the same as them. Need animals taking off them. 

[leicsmac]

3 hours ago, marbles said:

Sorry, I can’t split up your posts.  Something to do with my old smartphone not being very smart (or it could be me that’s not very smart, who knows)

 

Freedom to have an opinion does not bring harm to other people.  What brings harm is people that are too stupid to verify before doing.  That’s on them.  Sorry, but it is.  You can’t have both freedom to make your own decisions, but not have the freedom to choose for yourself - it doesn’t work that way.  
 

We’ve had this discussion before. I just don’t understand your desire to not allow people the right to publicly state an opinion.  I just don’t.  Sorry.

If the opinion does not incite violence, or spew hatred - I don’t have a problem with it.  
Why?  Because I am smart enough to form an intelligent opinion. I don’t need you to protect me, and neither should any other adult.

 

Now, you want to fix misinformation, instead of going after bloggers or people posting wherever they post - go after the news.  The vast majority of news outlets report opinions and pass them off as facts.  That sounds like a bigger issue than  Billy Jo Bob saying “he don’t believe in no vaccine”.  
These same news organizations skew the truth, or in some cases just outright lie in order to push their agenda.

You wanna start with them?  I’m on board.  
 

 

If a person injured themselves because they listened to someone else - sorry, but that’s on them.  Again, you cannot protect people from themselves.  People need to be responsible for the decisions they make, not be given a scapegoat.

 

 

 

 

 

 

2 hours ago, grobyfox1990 said:

You as in what do you and I do? Nothing. Stand, point and laugh. The world is way too overpopulated and in not too long people like this will no longer be a drain on resources, one less pension I have to fund 

Honestly, I get the arguments for absolute personal responsibility and while I would think the form of social Darwinism spoken of here is wildly unethical, I can see the utility in the argument.

 

However, from my own experiences and what's gone on in the world for the last few years, I still think you guys are underestimating (or I am overestimating, or both) the proliferation of digital information and the effect it can have on the very idea of "truth" and subsequently on the lives of lots of people, including all of us here - regardless of whether or not we can critically think or not.

 

Kojima had it right over twenty years ago:

Edited 6 April 2023 by leicsmac

[filthyfox]

3 hours ago, The Bear said:

Same as the people that try and make their cat/dog eat vegan the same as them. Need animals taking off them. 

I can actually do that! Will need to prove the diet is unsuitable 

[leicsmac]

Freedom of expression, of course, but imagine if a place in Germany had a street named after Adolf Hitler?

 

In Tennessee:

 

 

[Free Falling Foxes]

8 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

Freedom of expression, of course, but imagine if a place in Germany had a street named after Adolf Hitler?

 

In Tennessee:

 

 

Bloody outrageous..............

 

 

 

 

 

 

.....after I Googled who Bedford Forrest was.

[leicsmac]

1 minute ago, Free Falling Foxes said:

Bloody outrageous..............

 

 

 

 

 

 

.....after I Googled who Bedford Forrest was.

Ha, yes. Perhaps I should have included the cliff notes on the guy in the post, but what he got up to (and how some places still clearly consider him to be a hero in spite of, or perhaps because of that) is worth looking up.

[Free Falling Foxes]

Just now, leicsmac said:

Ha, yes. Perhaps I should have included the cliff notes on the guy in the post, but what he got up to (and how some places still clearly consider him to be a hero in spite of, or perhaps because of that) is worth looking up.

Indeed. It made me read up on the fella.

[Zear0]

9 minutes ago, Free Falling Foxes said:

Bloody outrageous..............

 

 

 

 

 

 

.....after I Googled who Bedford Forrest was.

Might have been a tribute to the 1983 FA cup qualifier between Bedford Town and Notts Forest (finally a use for ChatGPT)?

[leicsmac]

Just now, Zear0 said:

Might have been a tribute to the 1983 FA cup qualifier between Bedford Town and Notts Forest (finally a use for ChatGPT)?

How did that one pan out? Sounds like it was worth remembering.

[Zear0]

19 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

How did that one pan out? Sounds like it was worth remembering.

Sadly they won 2-1.

[leicsmac]

4 minutes ago, Zear0 said:

Sadly they won 2-1.

Evidently some folks in Tennessee are Bedford fans then, seeing as they named a street after a lost cause.

[marbles]

6 hours ago, leicsmac said:

Freedom of expression, of course, but imagine if a place in Germany had a street named after Adolf Hitler?

 

In Tennessee:

 

 

I had to look the guy up since I never heard of him.

 

With that said, it’s not spelled the same.  Are you sure that’s what it’s named after?

 

 

Edited 7 April 2023 by marbles

[Smudge]

6 hours ago, leicsmac said:

Ha, yes. Perhaps I should have included the cliff notes on the guy in the post, but what he got up to (and how some places still clearly consider him to be a hero in spite of, or perhaps because of that) is worth looking up.

And I had to Google Cliff Notes. You're the gift that keeps on giving 

[leicsmac]

6 hours ago, marbles said:

I had to look the guy up since I never heard of him.

 

With that said, it’s not spelled the same.  Are you sure that’s what it’s named after?

 

 

I'm surprised you haven't. And yes:

 

 

Given the nearby context, I'm pretty sure, and they just missed the extra "r".

 

Actually, now that I think on it, I think comparing it to naming a street after Hitler is rather unfair, seeing as one was a national leader and one was not. Perhaps instead it's comparable to a general like Goering, who was allowed to found a Nazi Revival/Continuation organisation after WWII finished and some people were so keen on the idea they memorialised him with street names. Imagine that.

 

6 hours ago, Smudge said:

And I had to Google Cliff Notes. You're the gift that keeps on giving 

I enjoy sharing knowledge - and more than that, enjoy encouraging people to seek that knowledge for themselves.