He's way too cool for that. It's much more adult to cry and take your ball home.

Good riddance.

Despite my overall stance, rep never setting foot in that thread as a containee is perfectly respectable.

I don’t take these exchanges personally. The substantive point seems silly to me, however: the vast majority of people out there behave very differently online than they do IRL and it seems wholly incorrect to me to judge someone by their worst conduct in an anonymous forum that diminishes restraint and instead encourages rhetorical exaggeration.

I think, when saying that the vast majority behave very differently online vs. IRL, you're speaking specifically to the vast majority of people who post like unhinged lunatics rather than the vast majority of everyone participating in online discourse in general.

Do you really think most of OOT is filled with people who are behaving as some sort of significantly different character online? That certainly hasn't been my sense.

Shakespeare was complimenting lawyers you plebs.

I'm nothing like my online persona. I'm kind of a dick in real life.

I think that’s likely in certain types of threads. I think OOT is a small enough community that the differences here are less than on 4chan or some reddit forums, but there are definitely people here who post like unhinged lunatics. I do not think +rep is in any way an unhinged lunatic IRL and I don’t think his unhinged lunatic posting here is particularly probative of his unhinged lunacy status IRL.

I was going to point that out — me recollection is that the bard is making the inferential point that lawyers help prevent autocracy — but thought 27 would immediately hit me with the sniftergif, so I let that one go.

Based on rep's self reports in Politics, he is not that much different irl than he is here.

So, I do agree with one thing you said previously, that the nature of online communications allows for and in some ways even encourages a more unrestrained level of expression. Isn't it a pretty strong insight into who a person really is if they seize that opportunity to act like a hyper-aggressive jerk with the knowledge that it probably won't cause them IRL blowback?

Who we really are isn't accurately reflected in how we behave when we know people from our real lives are watching. It's reflected in how we behave when we believe that they're not.

Butter fans- thought I should note that there are currently four types of butter in my household:

1)LoL unsalted
2)LoL salted
3)LoL “olive oil and sea salt”
4)LoL “light butter”

My brother’s gf bought the last two- not really sure why. I like to have salted to leave out in a butter dish for bread- doesn’t get used much otherwise but it keeps well so no harm in having it. Obviously using unsalted for most applications.

Four is certainly excessive and unnecessary, but we haven’t had any butter confusion issues.

I was thinking this too. It's only been a couple days since he described himself in there, and it sure sounds a lot like 2p2-rep.

Obviously agree with LKJ's overall points, and especially his last post. "I may be a huge superdouche online but I'm really not a superdouche, really", said no one ever except huge superdouches, and apparently Howard*

* I understand this is not literally exactly what Howard is saying.

Excellent point, and to back it up with data - when I met Howard in person, his attempts to politard our discussion were limited to no greater than 20-22% of his overall effort. Contrast this with the 68-72% we see from him in OOT, and one will quickly realize that Howard is much more reasonable in person. Unfortunately, the replacement was Philosophy 202 tripe, but you can't win em all. Eventually he felt more comfortable around me after a few decent pieces of nigiri, and confided that the insecurity stemmed from his fears of lapka never sharing the same depth of feeling toward him that he does toward her. I wanted to comfort him and tell him everything was going to be OK, but shifted the topic instead, as I didn't feel that lying was ethical in that spot.



While this is certainly true in many circumstances, that is a pessimistically large brush that you are painting with. The sentiment is absolutely valid, but the inference is that there is a difference in behavior between the two scenarios, and this is certainly not always the case. The degree of difference when it exists is also material, and what really matters.

Reminds me of: "The true measure of a man is how he treats someone who can do him absolutely no good."

Which matters more, a genuinely held internal belief, or the fact that a given person would never act on that belief in his entire life? It seems to me that what we think we are is quite different from what we actually are.

Chop’s lies are amusing, but they remain lies nonetheless. I am certain that lapka was never mentioned during my otherwise pleasant IRL sushi dinner with chop.

I am pleased to see that my philosophical musings were at least upper-division ones rather than introductory ones.

lkj’s 2nd point is similar to the faux-wise observation that using the word ‘honestly’ is a hint that a person may be dishonest. i belive lkj is correct to a degree though, applying mainly to the most socially clueless of people, which +rep definitely isn’t.

I'm having trouble divining what we're discussing in terms of what rep would never act on. To my knowledge, he doesn't actually go around threatening people or anything. Of course, a person doesn't have to create a physical danger in order to have poor character. I guess I don't know how to answer your question.

I disagree with the sentiment that our sincerely-held beliefs are quite different from what we are.

FWIW, while I get why people say that about "honestly," I've never thought this was a very strong point by proponents of it.

That's the way some lawyers want to hear it. It's a joke, sorta, but it's going along with the description of a utopian world, where of course, there would be no lawyers. Just a typical lawyer joke used exactly the same way it's used today. This scene was not a serious planning meeting on how to carry out the a revolution.

http://www.spectacle.org/797/finkel.html

I have to take more LKJ's side.

If we look for example at DZ... I believe that he is actually good and nice, but tends to misbehave online. So how should I treat him and react to his misbehavior?

He will get a push back from me on his school boyish trying to pull piggy tails of OOT, regardless that I believe, that he as a person is actually a lot more interesting.

I myself, am a ton more neurotic online. Since I noticed that I try to live out all my neuroses also in RL. I am definitely more "me" here than I am in RL.

This is an outstanding post.

HT - upper division starts at the 300 level

Micro,

All of those are compliments. Players gonna play play play. Haters gonna hate hate hate.

At my school upper division started at 100.

This translates in a way. Using the word “honestly” is more likely to be a learned verbal tick picked up in your social circle than a tell in my opinion. If people are given the task to substitute “frankly” it doesn’t change their level of trustworthiness. Not a very good gauge when there are social factors that impact the behavior as much or more than subconscious.

Similarly, the internet is a brutal place. It may very well be an insight into a person how susceptible they are to being influenced by the culture of it, and how they take advantage of the opportunity, but even then we are talking about a more complex character flaw than straight cowardice.

just so you know, i spent the morning considering this validity. the use of ‘honestly’, outside of being humorous, may indicate someone to be unthoughtful about words, thus in general. if lacking in brains begets breaches of ethics, then the premise may follow an accurate line of thinking....ending with a similar conclusion from a completely different reasoning.

Do you claim full consistency between your beliefs and your actions, LKJ?