Good Libertarian! *pats head*

Just because ostracism looks like a viable method of reasoning with those who cannot be reasoned with, does not mean it's a viable way of getting people to do what you want who are simply uninformed. On a forum which will remain unnamed, a poster who shall remain equally anonymous is sufficiently irritated that people say "succeed" and "succession" as if they meant secede and secession, and said anonymous has taken to ostracizing those people.

This is a community where it seems to be the popular opinion that all you have to do is ostracize people into doing what you want them to do.

Why not just tell them "hey, it's spelled 'secede', dickwad". This would like it would get much better results.

When smart people do stupid shit like this, I tend to look for a real motive and discard the claimed or implied motive. This anonymous does not want people to correctly choose between "secede" and "succeed" as strongly as they want to look like the idea-making most-libertarian haha-look-at-me-implementing-our-brilliant-libertarian-tactic type. A "good libertarian". Not as opposed to a "bad libertarian", but as opposed to a "non-standard, disagreeable libertarian, who won't get positive reinforcement from others". There's "good" everythings. "Good atheists" say dumb shit like "Oh my science!". "Good Christians" say dumb shit like "The bible says it's true, that makes it true". (I personally don't believe people seriously, deeply, truly believe that the Bible is infalliable. If their other Good Christian friends shunned them for insisting it to be true, they'd probably stop really quickly, or find new friends.) There's "Good Politicians". Don't make me describe them.

Don't become one of these kinds of "Good Humans". If you're mentally dependent to the point that you require others to believe you're a good whatever-they-are, you've got issues. This crap is stupid. So is ostracism as a way of getting people to do what you want. (Unless you want to get them to be reasonable.)

No comments: