Unappreciated compliments

[Cueball1]

My first thought on the tramlining was alignment.  An agressive track set up will not work well on the street.  Not sure if that's the problem but certainly something to look at.

 

As far as dei, you know who doesn't seem to be complaining about asians losing out on university admissions?  Asians.  It's largely a talking point for anti dei white conservatives not a reality in university admissions.  

 

My snide comment is....

 

Heaven forbid the race of people who have clearly tipped the scales in their favor for 250 years might have to give up some small percentage of advantage in an attempt to help bring those suppressed for 15 generations up to speed.  Racism blatantly exists even if you don't want folks to believe it.  In policing, n the courts, in schooling and in opportunities.  To blame a single parent culture is to blame the culture white folks created through slavery, jim crow, separate but obviously not equal and continued bias in many aspects of life.  Sorry but couldn't disagree more on that topic.  

 

Didn't want to say anything but found I couldn't stay silent.  This is why I'd much rather talk tires and track set up!  

 

Will move my tire talk to the appropriate thread and unfollow this one.  The ideas presented are not fun or educational.  There is enough discord in life I don't need to participate in it at a forum that's been an escape and community for me until this point.  Have fun.  I'm done. 

[coffee break]

I would insert the "beating a dead horse" GIF but I can't find it.

[barbox]

@SENC once again, thank you for your very reasonable and thoughtful response.

 

I think I can meet you at least half way on most of that.  The David Duke example in particular changed my stance - there are times when people are forthcoming with their intent, and give you no reason to doubt them.  And particularly in cases like that, it'd be crazy to not consider their intent.

 

I think my opinions on intent vs outcome were formed by countless examples of people in power straight up lying about their true intent.  If someone wants to lie about their intent, then getting into a debate about their intent is akin to calling them a liar, and that just isn't going to go anywhere productive or change anything for the better. So, in those cases, I think it makes sense to sidestep the intent debate and focus on actions and outcomes.  That doesn't mean intent isn't worth discussing in other scenarios.

 

On the definitions front... language changes and evolves over time, often within our lifetime.  We don't have to like it, but we're gonna struggle to understand people if we plug our ears and pretend it isn't happening.  But, I particularly like this example of yours:

19 hours ago, SENC said:

You may define racist or racism based on an outcome with no/zero intent implied ("on the basis of" eliminated).  You are welcome to that personal definition, and if you tell me that is what you mean and then tell me in a personal conversation a behavior or action of mine is racist I'll be less offended (I can't say I won't be offended at all as the word carries too much historical baggage for me).  But tell me that without clarifying your definition, or in a public space where I'm going to assume the generally accepted definition applies and I'll be highly offended and go on defensive or shut down entirely.

 

When words are being used in new ways, particularly a word as historically charged as "racist", the onus should be on the person using it in the new way to clarify that meaning up front.  Otherwise, the outcome of their using it will predictably be offense felt by the receiving party.  Saying "hey man, that's kinda racist" is never going to go over as well as "hey man, I know you didn't mean it this way, but that's kinda racist".

[Vovchandr]

52 minutes ago, barbox said:

I think my opinions on intent vs outcome were formed by countless examples of people in power straight up lying about their true intent.  If someone wants to lie about their intent, then getting into a debate about their intent is akin to calling them a liar, and that just isn't going to go anywhere productive or change anything for the better. So, in those cases, I think it makes sense to sidestep the intent debate and focus on actions and outcomes.  That doesn't mean intent isn't worth discussing in other scenarios.

 

It's funny you say that.

 

Way too often the "people in power" when it comes to apologize, say "I'm sorry if you were offended" or the like.

 

.... That's not an apology for what you've done/said and I think your guy's discussion is at the core of the issue.

 

There are people who don't think they should apologize for anything they do or say if the negative intent wasn't there and there are people who don't care what the intent was if it hurt/offended them.

 

Which is kind of where we are with the thread and Bruce.

 

At first he said he shouldn't apologize for anything he says because his intent was good.

 

Then he changed the tune (I dont think he ever apologized for anything?) and relented that he should compare Croc to somebody else (I don't think a different person was given)

 

Then without a hint of irony he became offended at my compliment when my intent was to compliment and not hurt.

 

So he tried to have his cake and eat it too.

[Bruce K]

12 hours ago, barbox said:

@SENC once again, thank you for your very reasonable and thoughtful response.

 

I think I can meet you at least half way on most of that.  The David Duke example in particular changed my stance - there are times when people are forthcoming with their intent, and give you no reason to doubt them.  And particularly in cases like that, it'd be crazy to not consider their intent.

 

I think my opinions on intent vs outcome were formed by countless examples of people in power straight up lying about their true intent.  If someone wants to lie about their intent, then getting into a debate about their intent is akin to calling them a liar, and that just isn't going to go anywhere productive or change anything for the better. So, in those cases, I think it makes sense to sidestep the intent debate and focus on actions and outcomes.  That doesn't mean intent isn't worth discussing in other scenarios.

 

On the definitions front... language changes and evolves over time, often within our lifetime.  We don't have to like it, but we're gonna struggle to understand people if we plug our ears and pretend it isn't happening.  But, I particularly like this example of yours:

 

When words are being used in new ways, particularly a word as historically charged as "racist", the onus should be on the person using it in the new way to clarify that meaning up front.  Otherwise, the outcome of their using it will predictably be offense felt by the receiving party.  Saying "hey man, that's kinda racist" is never going to go over as well as "hey man, I know you didn't mean it this way, but that's kinda racist".

@SENC & @barbox - I am following your discussion with enjoyment.  As with most previous conversatons on this thread, participants are reasonable, educated adults who are diving deep for their best arguments, and their best diction with which to express them.  Accommodations are being reached, and most participants are learning about, and improving, themselves.  For these reasons,  I continue to suggest that this thread title be changed to "Settling Disputes"  or "Ongoing Arguments", or some other title that more correctly suits its developing purpose.

 

I have an overview:  IMO most reasonably educated people in our country are not racist, and only rarely cogitate the subject independently.  When they do, it is usually because the subject was raised on the internet or on TV, as racism is often charged on liberal news sources, and denied on conservative ones (but sometimes the reverse, as with race restrictions regarding college admissions).  However, I also firmly believe people notice race all the time, and I believe, in many to most cases, people are most comfortable around individuals of their own race.  This is not racism - it is ethnocentrism, which is a sort of sociological reflex.  It is not an evil or amoral reaction, as opposed to overt acts of racism.  It is a measure of tribal comfort.  This reflex, too, may ultimately disappear as races continue to interbreed and share DNA.  Indeed ethnocentrism may already be attenuating or effectively disappearing among Gen Zers.

 

Of course, I am not denying the existence of racism.  Prison populations generally divide along racial lines.  It is easy to find evidence of restricted racist enclaves like neo-nazis and Black, Irish, Italian, Mexican and Russian criminal gangs, including just some of the most notorious.  But, IMO, extrapolating the racist ideologies of these groups to the general population is a mistake.  I believe most evidences of overt racism have disappeared, or are just waiting for an applicable law to smite them.  I also believe racism receives much undeserved attention, because the issue generates news, funding and votes.

 

Concerning the crucial subject of language:  I agree with SENC that the meaning of words continues to evolve.  That is why dictionaries publish new editions, often annually (I'll bet Wiktionary changes daily).  But I also disagree with SENC, in that most words don't change meaning often, and those that do are usually by slight nuance.  Only a small number change radically, usually via adoption into slang, hip-hop, rap or other sub-cultures, and usually with a broadened or different meaning.  This is why language is so effective - ordinary people can effectively communicate their ideas because most words are well-understood.  That makes management of discussion much easier - only a few words, like racism, need to be defined before or as discussion deepens (word etymology has been a study of mine for many years.  During that time, I have researched the etymology of countless thousands of words, and noted differences between archaic, British, early 20th century, and geographical or cultural dialect and other usages.  ATTACHED is a published short story I wrote about my Porsche 935, but written in the style of Edgar Allen Poe.  Nearly one word in every sentence required etymological research. According to feedback, it is an enjoyable read.  Note the words that have gone out of vogue since the mid 19th century epoch of Poe:)

 

 

 

 

 

'The Pit and the Porsche (for Halloween) REVISED 11-5-23.pdf

Edited February 1 by Bruce K
correction

[Bruce K]

A recent federal lawsuit filed by a Penn State university professor illustrates the racism endemic to DEI, and why it is beginning to be corralled nationwide (just became illegal in Utah, with many states considering similar legislation).  The professor claims his civil rights were violated, per the Civil Rights Act of 1964.  Epoch Times reported the following sworn testimony today:

 

     "After the murder of George Floyd in 2020, all Penn State faculty and staff were told to attend a “Conversation on Racial Climate” on Zoom. During the session, Alina Wong, an assistant vice provost for educational equity, “led the faculty in a breathing exercise,” De Piero’s complaint states, “in which she instructed the ‘White and non-Black people of color to hold it just a little longer—to feel the pain.’"

     On at least four other occasions in 2020 and 2021, the judge wrote, De Piero “was obligated to attend conferences or trainings that discussed racial issues in essentialist and deterministic terms—ascribing negative traits to white people or white teachers without exception and as flowing inevitably from their race.” One session involved a presentation about “White Language Supremacy.” Another included examples of ostensibly racist comments “where every hypothetical perpetrator was white,” the judge continued.

The ruling noted De Piero’s claim that he was subject to “race-based theories condemning white people for no other reason than they spoke or were simply present while being ‘white,’” and that his supervisor “spoke of race conscious grading” and accused white faculty of unwittingly reproducing “racist discourses and practices” in the classroom. Once, faculty members even had to watch a training video titled “White Teachers Are a Problem.” In 2021, De Piero told an administrator that he felt harassed and singled out because of his race and asked that anti-racism training sessions be stopped. He filed a report with the Pennsylvania Human Relations Commission. He also filed a bias report with Penn State’s affirmative-action office. A staffer there allegedly told him, “There is a problem with the white race,” and urged him to keep attending anti-racism workshops.

    In ruling that these and other allegations “plausibly amount to ‘pervasive’ harassment,” Judge Beetlestone did not necessarily conclude that everything happened just as De Piero claims. But if events did happen that way, she reasoned, then Penn State is “plausibly” guilty of creating a hostile climate. When I asked Penn State for comment on the factual accuracy of De Piero’s complaint, a spokesperson replied that the university does not comment on ongoing litigation."

Edited February 1 by Bruce K

[Vovchandr]

Posting articles and anecdotes now.

 

I'm one away from a Bingo!

[SENC]

Thanks @barbox (and @Bruce K), I've found the conversation valuable, even if others have found it tedious or even mockable.  As a lifelong "devils advocate", I've never viewed discussion/debate as argument over right/wrong nor as a way to change either side's opinion, but rather as a way to better understand opposing viewpoints and, if possible, identify common ground.  I think we've achieved that, at least from my perspective, so, thank you!

[SENC]

duplicate

Edited February 1 by SENC

[Bruce K]

8 hours ago, SENC said:

Thanks @barbox (and @Bruce K), I've found the conversation valuable, even if others have found it tedious or even mockable.  As a lifelong "devils advocate", I've never viewed discussion/debate as argument over right/wrong nor as a way to change either side's opinion, but rather as a way to better understand opposing viewpoints and, if possible, identify common ground.  I think we've achieved that, at least from my perspective, so, thank you!

@SENC - I agree with the value of behaving as a devil's advocate.  However, I also believe it important to attempt to change minds, because I have personally experienced changes of opinion and behavior and degrees of belief.  Unless we attempt to change minds, we are ceding defeat to those who believe opposite us.  If our beliefs are, in our considered opinion, important, we need to persuade others to them.  I know you are a man of considered opinion and belief, and capable of influencing others, so keep trying.

[Bruce K]

@Croc - Just letting you know that your interchanges with @Marek have been added to the Upgrade and Repair Manual in the chapter on Alignment.  We are up to 200 pages of indexed, practical knowledge.

[Bruce K]

@JohnCh, @Croc - this post is directed to the moderators.  Besides the excellent current tire information, there are nearly two pages of a clinic on Super Seven alignment.  IMO, THE TIRE PURCHASE AND ALIGNMENT POSTS SHOULD BE MOVED TO A THREAD WHERE MORE MEMBERS CAN LEARN FROM THEM.  WHERE MEMBERS WOULD TURN IF THESE QUESTIONS AROSE.  THIS IN GREAT INFO FOR ANYONE SEEKING TO ALIGN A SEVEN, WHICH OFTEN INCLUDES NEW TIRE PURCHASE.

 

[barbox]

On 2/5/2024 at 2:23 PM, Bruce K said:

@JohnCh, @Croc - this post is directed to the moderators.  Besides the excellent current tire information, there are nearly two pages of a clinic on Super Seven alignment.  IMO, THE TIRE PURCHASE AND ALIGNMENT POSTS SHOULD BE MOVED TO A THREAD WHERE MORE MEMBERS CAN LEARN FROM THEM.  WHERE MEMBERS WOULD TURN IF THESE QUESTIONS AROSE.  THIS IN GREAT INFO FOR ANYONE SEEKING TO ALIGN A SEVEN, WHICH OFTEN INCLUDES NEW TIRE PURCHASE.

 

This is now the fourth time you've requested edits to other people's posts in this thread (BUT THE FIRST TO FEATURE CAPS LOCK).  All of those requests came after you posted this in the original thread:

 

On 1/16/2024 at 3:32 PM, Bruce K said:

Thanks for the free speech support, MV8.  ...  We need free speech to be truly free, not contorted into attacks.

 

To which Vovchandr correctly pointed out that there is certainly no Free Speech As Protected By The First Amendment issue here, as none of us represent the Government.  But, giving you the benefit of the doubt by assuming you were talking about the principle of free speech, not the protected right to free speech, it's still a ridiculous thing to bring up, because your words were being criticized, but not controlled. And, of course, because the principle of free speech would protect those criticisms just as much as it protects your original words.

 

But the sheer audacity to cry "Freeze Peach!" when your words are criticized without requests for edit or deletion, and to then go on to repeatedly request admins/mods edit others' posts... I mean, it would almost astound, if it weren't so predictable.  I did say the hypocrisy was never-ending.

 

Granted, the edits you've requested are not unreasonable.  But, still, if you believe in the principle of free speech, shouldn't you want to leave people's posts as and where they chose to post them?

[Croc]

Oh dear, I seem to have made some comments which were unappreciated for their location?   

 

I will move the tire related content when (a) this thread has petered out and (b) I am good and ready and not when someone is doing the forum equivalent of yelling (i.e. all caps). 

 

I type up variations of this tire commentary every two or three years so its easy enough to find with the search function if someone else needs it.    No urgency - it can wait.  

 

 

[Bruce K]

@barbox & @Croc - good grief!  I was only recommending the move because I BELIEVED THE CONTENT WAS SO IMPORTANT.  I am from the old school, where caps were simply emphasis - I was not yelling at anyone, which should have been apparent from the nice things I was saying.  I had received no response to my earlier recommendations, so I chose to emphasize the suggestion.  My only intention was to have Croc's posts seen by as many members as possible.  I thought that could be best effectuated by a move to a thread concerning suspension setup.  Apparently, Croc covers this info repeatedly, rendering movement unnecessary, of which I was unaware.

 

Accusations of hypocrisy - so over the top!  IMO, way too much sensitivity on display here.  I receive texts all the time, where senders left the caps lock on, and even some short emails.  The caps were not associated with any particular request for expedition, and they have never offended me - never crossed my mind.  Indeed, most of my subject post was complimentary to others, as noted above.  To claim offense because I spoke my compliments with emphasis - really?  This was no issue to pick a fight over.  You should wait until I write something demeaning or controversial, instead of flattering.

[JohnCh]

I've been absent from the forum for over two weeks, in large measure due to this thread.  Despite being only a volunteer, I maintain a sense of pride in the forum and what it represents. Frankly, I found much of the initial content in this thread embarrassing. It fails to reflect the supportive community we have collectively worked so hard to build, and it made me question why I invest my time to perform this role. Right or wrong, I chose to temporarily step away instead of further expressing my opinions and contributing to the continuation of this thread.

 

Subsequently, certain individuals introduced a more reasoned approach to the conversation (thank you), while others initiated a radical thread drift, not-so-subtly implying that enough is enough. Nevertheless, none of these efforts seem to be effective, and this thread refuses to die a natural death.  So here is what happens next.

1. This thread is now closed. Anyone attempting to restart it elsewhere or complain about its closure will receive a two-week timeout. Repeat offenders will be banned.  
2. Bringing up claims that this action hinders your free speech will result in a two-week timeout to allow you time to research the factual inaccuracies of your assertion.
3. If you disagree with the above measures, you are free to leave. I will not continue to volunteer my time to run this forum as a platform for such behavior. Remember, if I depart, Mazda will need to find a replacement volunteer to keep the forum backend afloat. Your departure only removes your perspective from future conversations.  
4. Sending me a PM to bitch and moan about any of the above will not receive a response, nor will I waste my time reading your entire treatise.  
5. I will break out the technical content to a new thread when I have time.  I don't wish to expose someone doing a search for that type of information to this embarrassment.  It's not fair to them and doesn't accurately reflect USA7s.

Please bear in mind that while this thread is located in the "Politics, Religion, and Controversy" subforum, the concerns many of us have do not solely revolve around the topic itself but rather how specific opinions were expressed. Additionally, even if someone chooses to ignore this thread, it will still be visible in the standard activity feeds, making it difficult to completely disregard.  I'm disheartened it has come to this – I hate to be heavy handed – but am hopeful we can reset and get back to what this forum is about.

 

-John