prev <-> next
[2021-03-24 13:59:12] - paul: "Is that racist?" hmmm. probably a grey area, so i'm not too excited about it. so its definitely not something i'd say about my doctor. sounds misguided at best. but, doctors are (probably?) typically biased towards certain races and genders etc, in an unhealthy way, so that kinda sucks too, i guess. ~a
[2021-03-24 13:56:59] - paul: "What if I wanted "representation" for Asians on a basketball team?" shitty analogy: we're talking about a position where physical differences between people won't affect performance. "Or men as daycare workers?" this is a perfect analogy and a laudable goal. men are very often discriminated against in early childhood development and promoting equality and inclusion of men in early childhood development should be encouraged. ~a
[2021-03-24 13:56:55] - a: I've seen people post to social media about how they're excited to have a brown doctor. Is that racist? What if they were excited to have a white doctor? What if the person saying it is brown? Should it matter? -Paul
[2021-03-24 13:53:53] - paul: "Asian females are one of the demographic groups least likely to be victims of violent crime" where did you see this? ~a
[2021-03-24 13:53:43] - a: "she's not demanding anything unreasonable" I disagree. I think for something as important as a cabinet position, your top qualifications should be, well, your qualifications, not your ethnic background. What if I wanted "representation" for Asians on a basketball team? Or men as daycare workers? -Paul
[2021-03-24 13:51:53] - https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2021/03/is-americas-great-crime-decline-over/618381/ Apparently it's not just hate crimes against Asians that have gone up in 2020. Of note: I saw somewhere else that Asian females are one of the demographic groups least likely to be victims of violent crime. -Paul
[2021-03-24 13:30:42] - a: I generally find exploiting a tragedy for political point scoring to be a repulsive endeavor, so I can't say I agree. - mig
[2021-03-24 12:54:19] - mig: yeah but i agreed that it seems like she's trying to milk the controversy. the timing seems dumb. opportunism and exploitation at its worst. but, honestly i don't blame her really: never waste a good crisis? ~a
[2021-03-24 12:50:44] - paul: "Where does diversity and inclusion end and race-based discrimination begin?" i'm sure there are a *lot* of grey areas, but this doesn't feel like one of them. she's not demanding anything unreasonable (except, as everybody here has mentioned, her timing seems dumb). "it seems like almost a textbook definition of racism to say that a job can only be given to somebody of a certain race" not exactly, no. ~a
[2021-03-24 11:15:55] - a: but the question - why now? Why not back in December/Jan when his list of nominees was known? Why VOTE FOR all the nominees? What good does complaining now do after all the nominees have been confirmed? - mig
[2021-03-24 03:18:48] - a: I mean, it seems like almost a textbook definition of racism to say that a job can only be given to somebody of a certain race, no? -Paul
[2021-03-24 03:18:17] - a: Where does diversity and inclusion end and race-based discrimination begin? Is it really fine to effectively say that you will oppose any candidate of a certain race (with the implication being that she will accept any candidate as long as the race is the right one)? -Paul
[2021-03-24 03:04:57] - but I do think miguel is right, it seems like she's trying to milk the controversy. but it could be it just seems that way? there is no need to jump to conclusions about her motivations?? ~a
[2021-03-24 02:58:34] - paul: im not sure I agree looking for some diversity and inclusion is racist, no. ~a
[2021-03-24 02:52:06] - this feels like trying to milk the Atlanta shooting tragedy for clout. - mig
[2021-03-24 02:51:18] - paul: isn’t it a little late for this complaint? why not bring this up while Biden’s list of nominees was being formed? - mig
[2021-03-24 01:39:36] - https://www.politico.com/news/2021/03/23/tammy-duckworth-biden-cabinet-477676 Is Duckworth's opposition (that is based solely on race) racist? -Paul
[2021-03-24 01:35:38] - Is that last fact relevant? Maybe not. Probably not. But it was impossible for me to read anything about the Atlanta shooting without knowing exactly the number of Asian victims and the gender and ethnicity of the shooter. -Paul
[2021-03-24 01:34:29] - mig: It's pretty incredible the totally different narratives between the two shootings. No headlines mentioning the races of the victims. No politicians bemoaning Trump's rhetoric. I'm pretty sure if it wasn't for random right-ish people on Twitter, I wouldn't even know the shooter was Muslim. -Paul
[2021-03-24 01:32:04] - Daniel: I know a few people who seemed completely obsessed with every stupid tweet and dumb speech he made. It felt like every time I spoke with them the convo would start with: "Did you hear what Trump said?" -Paul
[2021-03-24 01:31:08] - Daniel: "Gotta get that $" Sadly, I agree that plays a role... maybe a big one. Outrage drives clicks and subscriptions and money. Just look at how well the NY Times and MSNBC did during the Trump administration. People were drawn to how ridiculous he was and bizarrely wanted to hear all about it. -Paul
[2021-03-23 19:40:47] - paul: at the end of the day, it just seems there's a large swath of people who are only capable of living their lives in the world of a zero-sum political tribalism. Something terrible happened? How can I blame this on the people I don't like politically.? - mig
[2021-03-23 19:12:02] - paul: it's amusing some of the responses to the twitter thread saying, "well he's TECHNICALLY white!". Just as I said earlier - They (this time, middle easterners) are POCs when it's useful for them to be, but part of "white supremacy" when they aren't. - mig
[2021-03-23 18:04:52] - Everyone body wants attention because attention at some point = $. Websites, news papers, politicians, political causes, charities. Gotta get that $. -Daniel
[2021-03-23 18:03:34] - Partly maybe (probably?) because there is so much stuff out there now that is easily accessible you have to be very noticeable to generate attention. This leads to clickbait, less local news, and pumping outrage - none of which are great but there isn't really a great answer for either? -Daniel
[2021-03-23 18:00:33] - I'm sure there are other reasons too. I don't think its a simple thing. I think if it wasn't somewhat effective though then it wouldn't continue but I bet that both pro gun and anti gun people end up netting $ after crap like this which is pretty sad but probably true (no evidence of that just a guess). -Daniel
[2021-03-23 17:59:33] - Paul: I mean there are different factors I think that go into it across the broad spectrum of 'the public'. Some is just emotional because people are emotional and have emotions. Some is trying to capitalize on that emotion to try and build political momentum because right then is when people are paying attention / thinking about it. Some because they think the other side is going to do so they better do it too. -Daniel
[2021-03-23 17:57:10] - Why can't we just wait until there is more information before passing judgement? -Paul
[2021-03-23 17:56:52] - https://twitter.com/CalebJHull/status/1374389271021297670 I'm not interested in the "idiotic leftists" part of this thread, but this is part of why I dislike the focus on race and motive when it comes to the tragedies in Atlanta and Boulder. Why do so many people feel the need to politicize tragedies like this in the immediate aftermath when so little information is known? -Paul
[2021-03-23 17:35:36] - paul: nope. if you told me that a restaurant (or whatever) that i liked, was black owned, i'd be like "oh cool!". but alternatively, if a restaurant i hated was blacked owned, i'd be like "ok . . . "? based on this, i don't think it actually helps me find new vendors. if i'm actually searching out businesses, the signal to noise ratio is too small. ~a
[2021-03-23 17:31:11] - a: Cool. I think we're in agreement, although I guess I am a little surprised. You don't think it's a positive to highlight things like "black owned businesses" or "female owned businesses"? -Paul
[2021-03-23 17:26:56] - i'm fine with it being public information, obviously, but maintaining this feature seems like a terrible waste of resources for only a bad result. ~a
[2021-03-23 17:26:08] - both features seem like irrelevant information that can only be used for dumb useless bullshit. ~a
[2021-03-23 17:25:46] - right. ~a
[2021-03-23 17:25:34] - a: Not even for "*only* certain races/genders/sexualities"? -Paul
[2021-03-23 15:59:01] - well nah, i'd be in favor of 'no such feature' actually. ~a
[2021-03-23 15:57:52] - a: "*only* certain races/genders/sexualities" Not surprising at all, but that's why I asked it the way I did. I'm curious if people here would be in favor of a filter which could be used for any and all races/genders/sexualities, not just the "right" ones. -Paul
[2021-03-22 19:26:44] - also if you zoom in enough it will often return zero results. ~a
[2021-03-22 19:23:31] - paul: it doesn't return the results you're expecting if you're expecting businesses that are owned by males or white people. it returns much fewer results, mostly just businesses that literally have "men" in the name. like "two men and a truck", that sort of thing. ~a
[2021-03-22 19:22:09] - a: "that kinda surprised me, i guess" How does it not let you do that anymore? Does it just not return results? -Paul
[2021-03-22 19:06:20] - paul: i guess i didn't say specifically, but you *can* still search on google maps for "black owned businesses" and "women owned businesses". so, along those lines, if shopify does anything like google does, you will be able to search for "results by the race / gender / sexuality of the business owner" but *only* certain races/genders/sexualities
~a[2021-03-22 19:00:15] - paul: sorry that i'm not answering your question (i guess my answer is "i dunno"), but its relevant that google *maps* used to let you search for "men owned businesses" and "white owned businesses", but those options were removed at some point! that kinda surprised me, i guess. ~a
[2021-03-22 18:55:27] - So my question to everybody is: How would you feel about a company like Shopify adding a filter criteria where customers could choose to filter results by the race / gender / sexuality of the business owner? -Paul
[2021-03-22 18:54:43] - Somewhat along those lines, I had a thought recently. So Shopify has a marketplace of sorts where you can browse from products offered by a number of different companies. They recently advertised a section highlighted "black owned businesses" that people could choose to shop from. -Paul
[2021-03-22 18:53:15] - "oppression Olympics", "no one identity ever stands on its own", "Seems relevant" Absolutely. It's why I absolutely hate all of this identity politics where so much importance is put on not who you are as a person, but the color of your skin. It seems deeply racist to me. -Paul
[2021-03-22 15:22:06] - In random googling cause it was a new term for me - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oppression_Olympics#Current_hierarchy implies that definitely some people have a hierarchy! -Daniel
[2021-03-22 15:19:43] - Thats from the article you posted Paul. Seems relevant. I think there is always some type of context. Its about listening to people and trying to understand them I think. I don't know that there are easy answers when the problems are this layered and complex. -Daniel
[2021-03-22 15:18:20] - None of these questions have definitive, satisfying answers. For one thing, it’s fruitless to argue over which marginalized identities are more or less marginalized. (This kind of reductive, zero-sum appraisal of structural inequity is often, and correctly, derided as “oppression Olympics.”) More importantly, no one identity ever stands on its own.
[2021-03-22 14:59:34] - https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2019/03/pete-buttigieg-gay-diversity-white-male-candidate.html Is it "progress" if a person of race D but who is a member of group E is nominated? -Paul
[2021-03-22 14:58:53] - Daniel: That would be nice in theory, but that's not typically how the "people are unequal" thinking gets put to use. Instead, it's about determining what people can and cannot do based on their race. Can race X create their own school club? Can business advertise they are actively looking for group Y? Can somebody of race A play a character of race B? -Paul
[2021-03-22 14:21:42] - I don't think knowing people aren't being treated equally means you have to have a hierarchy. If you know that A!=B and C!=A and D!=F and C!=E you know there are things to work on but you don't need a hierarchy to tell that. -Daniel
[2021-03-22 14:08:17] - Daniel: "people don't get treated equally" I would specify that it's not that people don't get treated equally, but races that don't get treated equally (not my opinion, but what I believe is the "woke" opinion). And with that being the case, wouldn't there have to be a hierarchy? Otherwise, how do you know who is getting treated worse or better? -Paul
[2021-03-22 14:00:14] - Paul: I think the idea is that everyone is equal but that people don't get treated equally so to be aware of things (the structural stuff etc) in order to better get to where everyone is equal. But I'm not sure there is a hierarchy. -Daniel
[2021-03-22 13:47:56] - Daniel: "I think we also need a better term than 'woke hierarchy'" What term would you prefer? I think "woke" is fairly specific in what it describes. -Paul
[2021-03-22 13:47:30] - Daniel: "Isn't the point of woke hierarchy that everyone is supposed to be equal?" I would argue the point is actually the exact opposite: that people aren't equal because of white supremacy and structural racism and everything else. -Paul
[2021-03-22 13:39:32] - Paul: Isn't the point of woke hierarchy that everyone is supposed to be equal? Also if we need a better term than 'far right' I think we also need a better term than 'woke hierarchy'
-Daniel[2021-03-22 13:38:32] - something, something, kids in cages - mig
[2021-03-21 17:59:01] - paul: it’s simple. they are POCs when they are useful as political currency (recent attacks on asians), and denigrated as part of white supremacy when they aren’t (diversity in school admissions). Hispanics are treated very similarly. - mig
[2021-03-21 16:04:11] - Whatever that even means. -Paul
[2021-03-21 16:04:04] - mig: I'm still super confused on where Asians are supposed to stand in the woke hierarchy. Sometimes it seems as if they are considered white, other times it seems like people want to consider them a minority but are angry that Asians aren't "acting" like a minority. -Paul
[2021-03-21 16:00:54] - https://www.cnn.com/2021/03/20/media/biden-border-transparency/index.html Just wanted to reiterate that, while I do think there have been plenty of instances of the press being way too easy on Biden, I have been super impressed by their critical coverage of what is going on at the border. -Paul
[2021-03-21 15:58:50] - a:Yup, I introduced the term. I do think we would be better off being more specific (we as a culture, not necessarily specifically here). If some group is super out there, let's try to be specific about what views they have that are extreme. -Paul
[2021-03-20 12:30:32] - https://news.yahoo.com/sf-school-board-member-accused-170126722.html dem tweets, ummm, wow. - mig
[2021-03-20 11:36:26] - oh date on the article 3/6. that probably explains it. - mig
[2021-03-20 11:30:49] - a: I scanned Politico, CNN, and MSNBC and I haven’t seen any follow up reporting on what’s in the rolling stone piece. Not saying it may be inaccurate just yet, but man that is weird. - mig
[2021-03-19 20:17:55] - daniel: certainly would not agree this is an example of "internalized racism" (not sure if that was your point thought). - mig
[2021-03-19 20:13:38] - mig: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cBEwQHjdw14 I don't know that I'm an expert or want to defend it in depth though. -Daniel
[2021-03-19 20:10:49] - daniel: not to derail, but i find the concept of internalized racism to be a bullshit concept. - mig
[2021-03-19 20:07:59] - ah. so as long as i'm a strictly practicing muslim, and male, they're cool with me? yeah, i could see that. ~a
[2021-03-19 20:07:21] - a: Mostly just based on my googling they seemed all about religion and gender issues not race based ones. /shrug. -Daniel
[2021-03-19 20:06:27] - paul: ok. would you prefer we use a different term? if it matters, you were the first one to use it in this conversation.
~a[2021-03-19 20:05:56] - daniel: how? i guess i don't follow. taliban might not be racist if you pick a certain specific definition of racism? ~a
[2021-03-19 20:05:41] - paul: I think its fair that its not a well defined term. I think its anyone past the "normal" right in the US but that isn't well defined either. Like is the Tea Party far right? Or just on the far side of the normal right? Anyone to the right of Romney? I would agree its not a well defined term. -Daniel
[2021-03-19 20:02:39] - a: Put another way, it almost feels like "far right" is a union of racists, fascists, white supremacists, homophobes, terfs, republicans, etc. -Paul
[2021-03-19 20:01:40] - a: "the venn diagram of these four things overlap soooo much" As has been alluded to, I think the problem here is the term: "far right". I've honestly never known exactly what it means and have seen it applied to everything from libertarians to white supremacists to Trump supporters to people like Dave Rubin. It honestly seems like a generic term used to denigrate (and frame as extreme) somebody the left doesn't like. -Paul
[2021-03-19 19:54:03] - a: I'm not 100% - I tried to do some quick googlling but it might need a deeper search but I think maybe the Taliban isn't racist? maybe? -Daniel
[2021-03-19 19:31:52] - mig: i don't think anybody here would confuse (generic) libertarians with "far right". wikipedia seems to focus on "authoritarian", "ultranationalist", and "nativist" when describing "far-right". ~a
[2021-03-19 19:27:50] - daniel: yes, good point. he picked the word "hate" though. ~a
[2021-03-19 19:26:55] - a: we might need an official defintion of "far right" before I can answer that question. I've heard enough declarations that libretarians are "far right" that I would certainly dispute that notion that "can you think of a far right group that isn't also . . . say . . . racist?" - mig
[2021-03-19 19:26:49] - a: Maybe the semantic difference is "hating" your own race but https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internalized_racism is a thing. -Daniel
[2021-03-19 19:21:44] - paul: ah, ok you said basically that. so i'll ask you this then: can you think of a far right group that isn't also . . . say . . . racist? ~a
[2021-03-19 19:20:54] - paul: "racist = white supremacy = fascist = far right" not excusing people for being sloppy, but, the venn diagram of these four things overlap soooo much. there's like not a lot of people that fit "far right" but not any of the other three. ~a
[2021-03-19 19:18:56] - When all of those mean different things and while they CAN go together (and maybe even often do), they don't have to and can be found separately too. It's totally possible for there to be a racist, far right group that isn't also white nationalist. -Paul
[2021-03-19 19:17:50] - a: "but they're, imo, also secondarily: anti-immigrant, anti-islamist, and racist too." Sure. That seems fair. My only note is that all of those things can be separate from being white nationalist. I worry sometimes we (not anybody specifically here, but more society in general) gets sloppy with language and tends to associate racist = white supremacy = fascist = far right. -Paul
[2021-03-19 19:07:41] - but the proud boys are a large group of people of various races (and mostly white). ~a
[2021-03-19 19:06:09] - mig: no. about zero of them. hating your own race is probably super rare. ~a
[2021-03-19 19:04:29] - a: do you believe those black people who oppose blm hate black people? - mig
[2021-03-19 18:16:07] - paul: it made me question it at first, yes. but, proud boys is openly racist, they hate muslim people, and immigrants, and beat the shit out of anti-racism protesters, so *shrug*? i agree that they're say primarily: a far-right and violent organization, sure. but they're, imo, also secondarily: anti-immigrant, anti-islamist, and racist too. ~a
[2021-03-19 18:09:53] - a: Does it make you question, at all, the idea that the proud boys are a white nationalist organization (as wikipedia describes them) when their leader is "Afro-Cuban"? I mean, they can still be far right and anti-BLM and all sorts of other things, but to me it makes the charge of them being white nationalist a little harder to swallow. -Paul
[2021-03-19 18:05:39] - its a strange contradiction, yes. lots of black people are anti-blm. lots of latino people are for the trump-wall. lots of immigrants are anti-immigration. the world is a weird place. ~a
[2021-03-19 18:02:28] - a: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enrique_Tarrio Isn't the head of the proud boys black? I'm not necessarily disagreeing with your account of them being anti-black (I honestly am not very familiar with the proud boys at all), but it seems like a strange contradiction, no? -Paul
[2021-03-19 17:50:20] - hmmm, yeah, maybe i was a little too hung up on my "black church" metaphor. totally guessing, but the proud boys probably don't like asians either? i know the proud boys have asian members, but still who knows. ~a
[2021-03-19 17:44:59] - a: I was still hung up on ties to the Atlanta shooting and trying to figure out how this supports the idea that the shooter being racist and sexist is more important than him simply being sexist (or whatever motive we want to assign). -paul
[2021-03-19 17:44:02] - a: "its that the federal government was working to further their causes" Yup, sure, I understand your point now and agree. It is certainly worth noting that there were members in the government working with the proud boys (although I also don't know if that's totally surprising given the size of the government and the characters in the previous administration). -Paul
[2021-03-19 17:25:56] - paul: the federal government was actively working with an organization that is openly violent towards black people. the federal government was actively working with an organization as it was working to try to overthrow said federal government. both of these are things we should avoid? both of these are 100 bad? ~a
[2021-03-19 17:25:38] - paul: "we should still be against violence against black people and against capital riots regardless of if the proud boys were involved or whatever". agreed. but its not just that the proud boys were involved. its that the federal government was working to further their causes. ~a
[2021-03-19 17:12:35] - a: Like, we should still be against violence against black people and against capital riots regardless of if the proud boys were involved or whatever. -Paul
[2021-03-19 17:11:47] - a: Huh, okay, then I am not sure I follow. Capital riot was bad independent of the proud boys being violent against black people. Violence against black people is bad independent of the capital riot. Them being tied together I suppose is interesting in some way, but from a practical standpoint I don't know what the big takeaway is. -Paul
[2021-03-19 16:59:14] - paul: no, the proud boys is a pro-facist white-nationalist organization that has been particularly violent against black people and blm. the fact that they were "only" fomenting an armed uprising against the united states government this time, doesn't change their sordid history. ~a
[2021-03-19 16:49:14] - a: I assume the "black churches" comment is a metaphor? Isn't this just about the capitol riot? -Paul
[2021-03-19 16:01:37] - paul: actively working *with* people who would like to do harm to black people / black churches / blm has also gone from 99 bad to 100 bad. ~a
[2021-03-19 15:44:06] - paul:
yah. i'm also happy when the media does its job. ~a[2021-03-19 15:43:17] - a: If you had asked me before, I would've bet there would be silence, but it is making news. -Paul
[2021-03-19 15:42:44] - a: https://www.npr.org/2021/03/18/979014713/hundreds-of-migrant-children-held-in-border-detention-for-more-than-10-days So, I think we kind of agreed in the past that the press might be being easy on Biden, but I admit I am surprised that they are at least reporting on the situation with minors at the border and how bad it is. -Paul
[2021-03-19 15:29:11] - paul: i don't think that's the only change we can make. but, yes. ~a
[2021-03-19 15:28:47] - paul: yes. ~a
[2021-03-19 15:28:28] - a: "we can do things to stem the tide" Like what? Let's take this particular shooting. What changes if we can know for sure that it was racially motivated? We already know Trump's Kung Flu comments were stupid and bad. Does this just make them go from 99 bad to 100 bad? -Paul
[2021-03-19 15:25:53] - paul: these movements are usually already being watched by the fbi and the splc. these movements are usually fueled by rhetoric of hate and emboldened by members of our government and some in the media. we can do things to stem the tide. ~a
[2021-03-19 15:25:50] - paul: people who bomb any churches usually have some mental illness issues. so, in both cases we can say, increase education about mental illness, and help fund mental illness facilities. but, people who bomb "black churches", in addition to being crazy, they're usually also indoctrinated by movements of people who want to to harm to black people. ~a
[2021-03-19 15:24:17] - It's a little odd that this rush to try to paint this (perhaps accurately) as anti-Asian is overshadowing the seemingly just as important (and more obvious) fact that it was anti-woman. -Paul
[2021-03-19 15:24:15] - I don't know that we have to determine the most important - but if we know that things are important people can spend energy towards addressing them. Different people will work on different problems but I think people want to know they are working on something that matters. -Daniel
[2021-03-19 15:22:40] - Which would be more important? That he hated Asians? Or hated women? Or was angry at massage parlors? -Paul
[2021-03-19 15:22:04] - Also, isn't it likely that most of the time the motivations come down to: It's complicated? Like in this situation, even if we get definitive proof he targeted Asians and we can say with 100% certainty it was racially motivated, it also seems pretty clearly motivated by gender and... uh... massage parlor activity? -Paul
[2021-03-19 15:19:56] - a: "it matters because what we learn, how we change to avoid repeating history, is very different in those two situations." How? How do we prevent future church bombings or massage parlor shootings if we can definitively say that they are motivated by race or gender or religion or something else? -Paul
[2021-03-19 15:18:31] - daniel: i'll endorse "definitely suggestive of racism" ~a
[2021-03-19 15:18:03] - I'm with Adrian on why it matters. I also agree with Paul that I'm not sure that given a small sample size I'm willing to conclude "definitely racist" but would be more at "definitely suggestive of racism". -Daniel
[2021-03-19 15:02:35] - paul: does it matter if i bomb a "black church" because i'm crazy and hate black people, or just a "church" because i'm just regular crazy? yes. it matters. it matters because what we learn, how we change to avoid repeating history, is very different in those two situations. ~a
[2021-03-19 15:01:04] - let's use the "black church bombing" analogy, because i think this is really close to this situation, since one of the three parlors literally said "asian" on the outside. ~a
[2021-03-19 15:00:24] - but i can make a big argument for why it matters if you'd like. ~a
[2021-03-19 14:57:11] - paul: you seem to agree that it matters. ~a
[2021-03-19 14:56:13] - a: It's part of why I often think it's silly to spend so much time trying to ascertain the motivations for stuff like this. Does it matter if he hated women or hated Asians or hated massage workers or was just a random psycho? -Paul
[2021-03-19 14:54:49] - a: "does it matter that one of the massage parlors literally said "asian" on the outside? seems like a perfect analogy for black church?" Sure, it certainly could be. Was it the massage parlor he frequented before? Was it a coincidence that he frequented an "Asian" parlor? I suspect we'll probably never "know". -Paul
[2021-03-19 14:50:28] - paul: . . . and even the other two teams, he has to be shooting mostly black people in a city with very close to zero black people? ~a
[2021-03-19 14:49:37] - paul: your nba analogy requires one of the three teams he shot at needs to be "black person team". ~a
[2021-03-19 14:48:12] - paul: does it matter that one of the massage parlors literally said "asian" on the outside? seems like a perfect analogy for black church? ~a
[2021-03-19 14:47:40] - a: I mean, if somebody hated NBA players and shot a bunch of them and it happened to be 75% black players, would that be racially motivated? It could be, depending on why he hated NBA players, but I don't think it has to be. -Paul
[2021-03-19 14:46:42] - a: No need to be sorry.
I was probably not specific enough. I think there's a difference between bombing a black church and bombing a massage parlor. One is kinda specifically (and maybe exclusively?) black and the other just happens to over-index for a certain ethnicity. -Paul[2021-03-19 14:44:28] - paul: "What if 75% of Atlanta massage parlor employees are Asian?" yeah, that's kinda the point. i'm not sure this helps your case? if you bomb a black church, people are going to rightly argue "hate crime". ~a
[2021-03-19 14:42:25] - ok. you said "maybe" before, and i was replying to thatsorry. ~a
[2021-03-19 14:42:03] - a: Well, was it a truly random sampling? No. I don't think anybody is arguing it was a truly random sampling of Atlanta residents. I think it's generally acknowledged that he targeted massage parlors. The question is if he targeted Asians specifically. What if 75% of Atlanta massage parlor employees are Asian? -Paul
[2021-03-19 14:28:58] - paul: "I don't know. Maybe we'll find out" no, i'm referring to how random samplings work . . . like mathematically? atlanta is ~4% asian. the chance of 6 or more in 8 deaths being asian in a random sampling is 4%6 ⋅ (8 choose 2) = 0.00001%. can you agree that this is unlikely to be a random sampling of atlanta residents? like, if this was a "focus group" of atlanteans, you'd def question how random the focus group was? ~a
[2021-03-19 14:03:26] - Paul: Yeah I agree. -Daniel
[2021-03-19 13:59:27] - If it turns out he was MAGA all the way and has a journal where he talks about hating Asians, then sure, it turns out the first impressions were right. I'm 100% fine with believing that once the evidence is in. -Paul
[2021-03-19 13:58:39] - Daniel: And I'm like, "Can we at least slow down a little bit before blaming everything on our former President and politicizing every tragedy as being another sign of white supremacy?" -Paul
[2021-03-19 13:57:49] - Daniel: I'm not saying we can't speculate what the motives are. I just saw way too many people (and not just randos, but politicians and journalists and blue checkmarks on Twitter) immediately leaping to "another clear example of racist anti-Asian violence thanks to Trump's Kung Flu comments". -Paul
[2021-03-19 13:56:27] - Daniel: My match was against another bronze person who seemed pretty good. If I had to guess, he played at gold level, so maybe that happened to both of us. Or maybe I'm just that bad.
-Paul[2021-03-19 05:51:30] - Paul: On bronze 3 I watched Vibe tonight and he said there were bugs with MMR and a lot of people were either being put in bronze 3 or masters 3 for some reason. So that might explain you and Dewey. -Daniel
[2021-03-19 05:50:54] - I think I'm with Paul somewhat that we should wait to conclude it was a racist attack and throw around statements about how he was racist. I do not think we have to wait / its to early to be like 6/8 victims were Asian and hatecrimes had a big uptick in that demographic last year so its entirely possible there is a racist angle here that is worth investigating. I also do think there are many public figures to quick to the first part.-Daniel
[2021-03-19 03:03:45] - a: I had the same thought with the link. I think I mostly agree, but there was no supporting evidence and some seemed a little dubious or overly optimistic (armies going away?) -Paul
[2021-03-19 03:01:32] - I just played a game of 1v1 in SC2 for the first time in forever and got placed in bronze 3. Seems about right.
-Paul[2021-03-19 02:54:39] - a: "so, we can probably agree (right?!) that he didn't do a random sampling" I don't know. Maybe we'll find out. The NYT seems to indicate the hispanic victim might have been accidentally shot (https://www.nytimes.com/2021/03/17/us/atlanta-spa-shootings.html). -Paul
[2021-03-18 21:53:15] - paul: my biggest issue with bitcoinmythology is they source a grand total of zero of their claims. its a very interesting read, but i find myself replying "what? really?" to a lot of these statements. i'm even on their side . . . and at least somewhat knowledgeable about the topic? but i'm skeptical. ~a
[2021-03-18 21:43:21] - paul: ok, sure. lets wait. that's fine. in the mean time: atlanta is 4% asian and 5% hispanic. so, we can probably agree (right?!) that he didn't do a random sampling. so *something* happened. if he picked one location, and there just happened to be a lot of non-white people in there, sure, that's likely. but three different locations? sure, whatever, lets wait . . . ? ~a
[2021-03-18 21:41:34] - a: "we don't *need* to wait a few days" Disagree. I think it's incredibly dangerous when people fly off the handle with speculation based on little to no information. First impressions are often the only impressions people get of events. How many people still believe the initial reporting of events in Ferguson or Covington Catholic or other events? -Paul
[2021-03-18 21:39:14] - paul: we don't *need* to wait a few days. i'm always fine changing my opinion based on new information. fuck, i've already changed my mind twice already today. with the info we have so far, it seems to be tending towards being racially motivated. ~a
[2021-03-18 21:38:47] - a: "i'm not sure it helps your case if he picked out three parlors and killed 75% asian people" I don't know if I get this point. The fact that 75% of the people killed were Asian isn't in dispute. What is in dispute is if he specifically target Asians (either in the parlors or I suppose Asian parlors) because they were Asian. -Paul
[2021-03-18 21:36:55] - a: Either way, can we at least all agree that maybe it makes some sense to wait a few days for all the evidence to come in before we start declaring how this is an obvious example of racially motivated violence against Asians? -Paul
[2021-03-18 21:33:47] - paul: "Would that make this a racially motivated shooting?" yes. i understand your point that he keeps these two things in his mind separate (his fetish with his murderous rage about his sex addiction), but in my mind he still decided to kill a bunch of people of one race. ~a
[2021-03-18 21:32:41] - paul: i'm not sure it helps your case if he picked out three parlors and killed 75% asian people. ~a
[2021-03-18 21:32:04] - a: That would tie together a lot of the various threads. -Paul
[2021-03-18 21:31:34] - a: What if we find out this person had an Asian fetish or something, which is why he frequented Asian massage parlors. But the reason he shot up the parlors is because he frequented them (which, he wouldn't be frequenting if it not for his fetish, to bring things full circle). Would that make this a racially motivated shooting? -Paul
[2021-03-18 21:27:10] - a: Were they "Asian" massage parlors? What exactly makes a massage parlor Asian (or non-Asian)? I guess one had the word "Asian" in it so that seems like a strong argument there.... -Paul
[2021-03-18 21:25:38] - https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/tanyachen/asian-women-fetish-racist-atlanta-shootings I haven't read the article (only the headline), but I guess case closed: Even if the motive was sex addiction, it's still about race. -Paul
[2021-03-18 21:22:52] - paul: ok, i'm going to switch sides again! (i'm against the "paul" motion) he went to three different massage parlors and all three of them were asian massage parlors. he didn't just go to one massage parlor and it just "happened" to be asian. no. he went to three. all three of them, were asian massage parlors. that could be a coincidence, of course, but its unlikely. ~a
[2021-03-18 21:21:13] - mig: Right, I think I've seen more articles decrying the horribleness of white supremacy in the wake of this shooting than I have seen discussing the non-Asian victims. -Paul
[2021-03-18 21:20:41] - a: https://bitcoinmythology.org/ I can't find Tim's Facebook post anymore (and I do wonder just how strong the arguments here are), but I was going to post this. -Paul
[2021-03-18 20:01:53] - paul: the uber cynical take is that there's a rush to ascribe these tragedies to racism because it's an excellent opportunity for media talking heads and woke scolds to wag their fingers at white people. - mig
[2021-03-18 19:40:10] - NPR reported about the non asian victims so its not getting ignored completely but I think the focus has definitely been on the potentially racist part. I don't know if I was a family member if I would be upset or not about national narratives leaving out my love one. Its hard to say and probably depends on the people in question if they think that is good or bad. -Daniel
[2021-03-18 19:31:31] - They're just as dead and it's just as much of a tragedy. -Paul
[2021-03-18 19:31:08] - a: But the almost ignoring of the non-Asian victims is one of the biggest reasons why this knee-jerk reaction to cast it as anti-Asian violence is annoying to me. How would you feel if your loved one was one of the non-Asian victims? Wouldn't it kind of suck that nobody seems to care about them? -Paul
[2021-03-18 19:29:42] - a: I agree that it's weird that nobody seems interested in pointing that out, but it's easy enough to find. Check wikipedia. To be clear, I am not saying it wasn't racially motivated, but I am saying there seems to be zero evidence (beyond the majority of victims being Asian) and maybe we should wait to draw conclusions. -Paul
[2021-03-18 19:28:01] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2021_Atlanta_spa_shootings#Motive "The same officials said they believe Long may in the past have patronized one or more of the spas he targeted." "According to officials from the Cherokee County Sheriff's office, Long was traveling to Florida with the intention to attack "some type of porn industry."" -paul
[2021-03-18 19:26:19] - biggest thing for me was (i'll assume you're not a giant liar) . . . that he shot three non-asians. its a bit weird that literally nobody but you has said this, but i trust you over randoms on the internet.
~a[2021-03-18 19:25:02] - paul: i changed sides, sorry. you convinced me, it wasn't racially motivated until i learn more information? ~a
[2021-03-18 19:24:02] - Presumably law enforcement will help to figure that out. -Daniel
[2021-03-18 19:23:44] - a: I'm not entirely sure I follow which way you are arguing. Is it relevant that he picked a massage parlor instead of a strip joint? I don't know that we know (which is somewhat the point I think) but if it turns out he picked massage parlor specifically in order to get more Asians then it would substantiate racist motivations. I mean maybe he picked them because they were in bike riding distance and he hates cars? I dunno. -Daniel
[2021-03-18 19:07:02] - daniel: do we know if he frequented strip clubs? i'm not sure that's a relevant complaint otherwise. ~a
[2021-03-18 18:52:03] - Paul: I mostly agree with that I don't know its concluded their were racist motivations for the ATL shooting but the point that did sway me some was if you are just going for sex workers why not a strip joint or something instead of the massage parlor which is more likely to be asian? -Daniel
[2021-03-18 18:30:00] - yah ~a
[2021-03-18 18:25:01] - a: If he shot the only Asian employees of those massage parlors working at that time, then that would certainly be suspicious. On the flip side, if the majority of people working there at the time were Asian.... then it would seem to be a little less suspicious (although obviously there is the question of why those three parlors). -Paul
[2021-03-18 18:23:19] - interesting, ok. ~a
[2021-03-18 18:22:41] - a: "why he happened to only pick asians?" He didn't, for starters. Two of the victims (a quarter) were non-Asian, which included two whites and I believe a hispanic man who survived. His claimed motive was revenge for his sex addiction. Why were they mostly Asian? Well, I would be curious to see what the ethnic make-up of the employees at those massage parlors are. -paul
[2021-03-18 18:05:01] - paul: "it sounds like there is no(?) evidence that the shooter's motives were racially based" what's your theory btw. i don't disagree that there is a lack of evidence, just wondering what your thoughts are on why he happened to only pick asians? ~a
[2021-03-18 18:04:24] - Daniel: Yeah, but depending on how much of 2021 that covers, that could be a deceleration from 2020 (I didn't see if that was up until mid-March or something shorter like only January). -Paul
[2021-03-18 18:03:28] - a: Daniel's numbers are why I was suspicious that the journalists had "something" and weren't just lazy. If you have such striking numbers like an increase of 1,900%, why not use it? That's not just being lazy, that's almost missing the whole point if your story is focused on rising anti-Asian violence. -Paul
[2021-03-18 18:01:49] - The report does have the line "Stop AAPI Hate received reports of 503 incidents that occured in 2021." - So that does suggest its continued into 2021. But yeah I think its been something trending that is getting talked about a lot currently. -Daniel
[2021-03-18 17:57:39] - Daniel: Ah, okay, so the increase happened back in 2020 and is (mostly) just getting reported on now? That makes more sense, as I was wondering why there would be an increase now. -Paul
[2021-03-18 17:55:12] - Those stats that Adrian posted are the ones cited here and by NPR so I think that is the best answer. Thats an org that tracks it and says its increased. So I guess if you think they are lying / wrong but otherwise I think thats the main source. -Daniel
[2021-03-18 17:53:55] - from https://time.com/5938482/asian-american-attacks/ -Daniel
[2021-03-18 17:53:36] - "The NYPD reported that hate crimes motivated by anti-Asian sentiment jumped 1,900% in New York City in 2020. Stop AAPI Hate, a reporting database created at the beginning of the pandemic as a response to the increase in racial violence, received 2,808 reports of anti-Asian discrimination between March 19 and December 31, 2020."
[2021-03-18 17:51:56] - Daniel: Sure, I don't doubt at all that there have been incidents all around the country. I just wonder if it's an increase or not. Also, everybody is pointing to the shooting in Atlanta as being anti-Asian violence but it sounds like there is no(?) evidence that the shooter's motives were racially based. -Paul
[2021-03-18 17:50:29] - paul: well as long as we're super general about what "something" is . . . i don't doubt they found "something"?
~a[2021-03-18 17:49:39] - a: "i don't doubt they found something. but i'm not sure what it was they found" Right, and I guess I AM doubting that they found something, because a lot of times in cases like these the data lags by a lot so it's really hard to see if there is an actual spike or if it's just perception. -Paul
[2021-03-18 17:43:54] - which isn't like national statistics but just as one more concrete example at least. -Daniel
[2021-03-18 17:43:30] - https://www.reddit.com/r/sanantonio/comments/m4z4nt/awful_hate_crime_in_san_antonio_go_show_some_love/ Thats the one I saw for SA. -Daniel
[2021-03-18 17:42:30] - lazy reporting imo. ~a
[2021-03-18 17:41:49] - paul/daniel: i tried to find the increase they're referring to, and none of the articles i found seem to want to source that info. i don't doubt they found something. but i'm not sure what it was they found. ~a
[2021-03-18 17:41:32] - bleh double.
[2021-03-18 17:41:21] - Paul: I've read about more incidents occurring in the last couple of months. I think something was talking about Oakland specifically maybe? I know a restaurant here in SA was vandalized for being 'Asian'. -Daniel
[2021-03-18 17:41:19] - Paul: I've read about more incidents occurring in the last couple of months. I think something was talking about Oakland specifically maybe? I know a restaurant here in SA was vandalized for being 'Asian'. -Daniel
[2021-03-18 17:28:13] - a: Yes, I gathered that is what they were reacting to. I was more wondering if there has actually been an increase in violence against Asians lately or... not. I only saw one data point from your link which seemed to compare 2020 to 2021 and it sounds like the trend is lower for 2021 so far? I guess it depends on how much of 2021 it covers. -Paul
[2021-03-18 17:12:55] - paul: ok then they're probably reacting to the shooter in atlanta? npr reported on these statistics yesterday. take that how you will. ~a
[2021-03-18 17:11:27] - a: Yes. -Paul
[2021-03-18 17:10:15] - paul: does the text mention the shooter in atlanta? ~a
[2021-03-18 17:03:57] - I just got a text about how FCPS is against violence against Asians. All I can see anywhere is condemnation of the rising tide of violence against Asians. Can anybody point me to any numbers that support that there is an increase in violence against Asians? -Paul
[2021-03-18 16:30:59] - mig: they mention "multiple recounts" in the article. what's the story there? ~a
[2021-03-18 16:30:03] - i would definitely forever question any politician that decided to vote for refusing to accept legally certified election results. like, wtf, why would you want to join that list of republicans that did it so recently in january? ~a
[2021-03-18 16:26:35] - daniel: agreed. you can refuse to accept the certified results only if the certification is like . . . fraudulent or something, right? this seems like not the case. ~a
[2021-03-18 16:19:01] - mig: It does seem concerning that she took it to congress and not courts. If there is some reason that the vote totals should be changed it seems like Iowa courts would be the ones to determine that. -Daniel
[2021-03-18 15:53:59] - mig: "didn't even bother to try and challenge the results in court" what a dummy.
"if democrats ultimately decide to just declare Hart the winner" i agree, but i doubt this will happen. ~a[2021-03-18 15:49:15] - Trump's claim was far more ludicrous, but I think it's just as much of a electoral crisis if democrats ultimately decide to just declare Hart the winner. - mig
[2021-03-18 15:47:27] - a: It should be important to also note that Hart (the loser of the election) didn't even bother to try and challenge the results in court, instead appealing directly to congress to just chuck out the results. I don't buy the "not enough time to file" excuse. - mig
[2021-03-18 15:32:36] - mig: having the election certified does seem pretty damning, i'll agree there. but still: apples and oranges. if trump wanted to complain about a 0.00 percentage point difference in 2020, i think we'd be talking about a whole different situation. ~a
[2021-03-18 15:31:00] - 0.00 even. ~a
[2021-03-18 15:30:06] - mig: seems like apples and oranges to me? does it matter that trump lost by seven million votes (4.4 percentage points)? this is a ~0.0 percentage points difference? ~a
[2021-03-18 15:24:17] - https://www.cnn.com/2021/03/18/politics/iowa-2nd-district-rita-hart-marianette-miller-meeks-trump/index.html undermining elections is ok when we do it. - mig
[2021-03-17 18:56:43] - paul: i'm not sure. maybe non-citizens? lots of fringe stuff that does worry me: yes, coercion of kids could be a big problem. and i didn't think of that. near national borders: i could easily imagine people going across the border and voting. ~a
[2021-03-17 18:56:35] - weinstein pretty much admitted what he did, Cuomo also did a half admission. Al Franken had that really bad photo of him copping a feel. - mig
[2021-03-17 18:56:23] - mig: not always though right? ~a
[2021-03-17 18:56:01] - a: I think the big thing that separates some of the democrats that have been hammered by me too is they half admit or admit to the allegations. - mig
[2021-03-17 18:55:04] - a: So, should there be any restrictions on who can vote? Citizens only? -Paul
[2021-03-17 18:54:25] - paul: oh i don't think its taken a back seat. ~a
[2021-03-17 18:54:02] - mig: ok. ~a
[2021-03-17 18:53:25] - a: But even before the "Me Too" stuff, Cuomo was (finally?) getting some flack from the national media for his nursing home decision. In fact, it's a little disappointing that that scandal has taken a back seat to what I would consider to be a slightly less serious scandal. -Paul
[2021-03-17 18:52:38] - a: joe biden, bill clinton, justin fairfax. - mig
[2021-03-17 18:49:18] - paul: "It's incredible the 180 the fates of both have done" when a democrat does something shitty, other democrats tend turn their back on them quickly. me-too-ed democrats are kicked out of the public sphere quickly. this isn't always the case . . . but it does seems to be the general rule. ~a
[2021-03-17 18:40:55] - paul: i think age is a poor metric, yes, i'll agree that far. maybe "intelligence" is also a poor metric too though. i guess we have to pick something, though, right? ~a
[2021-03-17 18:38:13] - a: I guess I don't quite get the point of that statement unless it was to say that age isn't too deterministic when it comes to "worthiness" to vote. -Paul
[2021-03-17 18:37:26] - a: Heh, I hadn't even gotten to any proposal yet! I thought you said, "the smartest quartile of 12 year olds is smarter than the dumbest quartile of 30 year olds". Doesn't that imply that age is a poor metric to use? Or is the takeaway that intelligence is unconnected to voting worth? -Paul
[2021-03-17 18:24:23] - proposal: compulsory voting once you can read and write. death penalty for vote coercion / intimidation. ~a
[2021-03-17 18:22:06] - "he was smiling" something about the specifics here (biden and bernie) makes me smile too
~a[2021-03-17 18:21:24] - mig: i would have a tough time ratting a parent at 18+ too. ~a
[2021-03-17 18:20:21] - paul: no actually i don't agree with that. the least politically engaged and least educated have just as much to lose (actually, usually a lot more) and usually this system is already biased against them as-is. your proposal (suggestion?) could make a shitty problem much worse. ~a
[2021-03-17 18:17:56] - a: I had one of those stories too, from the primary. Woman and her adult son (teenager, still in high school, or JUST graduated) and he voted Bernie (obviously) and she probably voted Biden. I heard them as they were leaving and she was giving him an earful. But he was smiling. -- Xpovos
[2021-03-17 18:17:50] - a: partially true, let's be honest though. I would personally have a tough time ratting a parent out, knowing the legal consequences, even if I didn't like it and knew it was wrong. - mig
[2021-03-17 18:17:27] - Do we agree here that age might be less of a good determiner of how "good" of a voter is than some other metric (political engagement, education, etc)? -Paul
[2021-03-17 18:15:06] - a: technically no, but at 18 you have more legal options than you would have at < 18. - mig
[2021-03-17 18:14:38] - mig: otoh, "you are voting for Biden or you are grounded" might decrease if it becomes (/ continues to be) a felony. ~a
[2021-03-17 18:13:26] - mig: i could see that. obviously that won't stop at 18 though, right? ~a
[2021-03-17 18:09:57] - xpovos: understood. great story. ~a
[2021-03-17 18:07:59] - Is the mother effectively voting three times? Yes, probably. Would the men, if they were more cognizant, change their mother's vote to something else? Probably not. I will say, they may not fully understand the law, but they take great joy in voting. -- Xpovos
[2021-03-17 18:06:53] - They have not been deemed mentally incapable of voting, and so their registration holds, and therefore they vote, and I make sure they get no interference. Their mother assists, as permitted by law and paperwork I process. -- Xpovos
[2021-03-17 18:06:12] - a: Absolutely. I've also witnessed it and had to intervene (voter coercion). I also have a family of voters who come every election (except this latest one, where I assume they voted absentee). A mother and her two adult sons who are severely mentally handicapped. They're very nice people, and I'm having hard to call them kids, because they're not. They're in their 30s, but with the mental capacity of 3-6 year olds, probably. -- Xpovos
[2021-03-17 18:01:43] - a: I mean, both, I can very easily see pushy parents tell their kids, "you are voting for Biden or you are grounded." - mig
[2021-03-17 17:57:14] - https://www.cnn.com/2021/03/17/politics/ron-desantis-covid-florida/index.html This goes back to the Cuomo vs DeSantis thing I posted awhile back. It's incredible the 180 the fates of both have done (in the media at least) the past month or so. Even CNN seems to be begrudgingly giving DeSantis some credit here. -Paul
[2021-03-17 17:50:22] - mig: coercing people to vote at all? or for a specific candidate? assuming its the latter, then i think its why we have secret ballots and the photograph thing. its not a unique problem among young voters, but i guess depending on how young we're talking about i don't think it'd be any worse than adults. already shit-tons of adults vote for the same party as their parents: we should increase the voting age to 50 maybe? ~a
[2021-03-17 17:45:58] - a: I'm talking more specifically to coercing people to vote, not prevention, which isn't the same thing, and I think would be of a unique problem among hypothetical young voters. - mig
[2021-03-17 16:34:11] - mig: i guess, slightly related, voter intimidation is more or less common depending on who you talk to. ~a
[2021-03-17 16:32:51] - xpovos: have you heard stories of (attempted or otherwise) coercion? ~a
[2021-03-17 16:31:46] - mig: does it exist? or could it exist? like you mentioned its a felony, so i haven't witnessed it, but yeah, its happened historically. i believe its why our ballots are secret. and why you aren't allowed to photograph the process of voting? ~a
[2021-03-17 16:28:55] - a: how is there any coercion among adults? That would be news to me, I haven't voted since 2013 maybe? - mig
[2021-03-17 16:25:55] - daniel: technically, that might be a felony if kids were able to legally vote. - mig
[2021-03-17 16:25:30] - mig/daniel: coercion is also an issue with adults. the smartest quartile of 12 year olds is smarter than the dumbest quartile of 30 year olds. i completely made that fact up, but seriously, most of the situations you're going to come up with are going to apply to adults that are allowed to vote. and those adults will be WAY less affected by the results of the vote (because of remaining life expectancy). ~a
[2021-03-17 16:24:17] - Pretty sure I could Alex to vote for anything I wanted for literally an oreo. -Daniel
[2021-03-17 16:23:21] - kids don't really have the same sort of agency though. I guess one downside is you'll have pushy political parents coercing their kids to vote. - mig
[2021-03-17 16:20:36] - daniel: trump is allowed to vote in florida. he barely knows math. and economics and tax policy definitely go over his head. ~a
[2021-03-17 16:03:19] - a: SIX?! Whoa. Alex is seven and barely knows math. I don't know that economics or tax policy or things like sharing is good have totally taken root yet. -Daniel
[2021-03-17 15:51:53] - daniel: we allow many adults to vote that have the foresight and understanding of a six year-old. so . . . 6? maybe 8? i dunno. what do people in the "election ink" countries do about age? ~a
prev <-> next