Kobal 2 should not be suspended

[Kobal2]

Why can’t it be both, like the late Earl Warren ?

[Ibn_Warraq]

@UltraVires

This argument about “dog whistles” and whether they are dog whistles, or how we go about proving they are dog whistles, etc. misses the point. A thread might go as follows:

Poster 1: <argument>
Poster 2: Politely, sir, I respectfully suggest that your statement is merely a dog whistle.
Poster 1: No, it isn’t because…
Poster 2: Yes, it is because…
<thread derailed over whether Poster 1’s original comment was a dog whistle>

As I said earlier, the implication that another poster is hiding his true racist agenda by the use of code words is an ad hominem attack which does not refute his position, nor does it contribute to the topic of the thread. Whether that is done politely or with racial epithets, it is nothing more than a personal insult.

I’m not concerned with the method by which one pollutes GD with personal attacks, but by the fact that the topic is now derailed by an insult towards the prior poster. Just argue the facts without impugning motive behind them. Suppose that the prior poster IS, in fact, the grand cyclops of the KKK. The position he is advocating should be debated on its own merits without resorting to insulting him. There is another forum for the insults that such poster would so richly deserve.

Why not keep GD about actual debates on the merits of the position?

No, saying a poster is using “a dog whistle” is criticizing the post not the poster.

If someone refers to Barack Obama as a “boy” it’s painfully obvious he’s using a dog whistle and if he refers to George Bush as such, he’s not.

[Ibn_Warraq]

Oh, welcome back Kobal!

Edited because my spellchecker changed it to welcome back Kotter!

[billfish678]

@Ibn_Warraq

If someone refers to Barack Obama as a “boy” it’s painfully obvious he’s using a dog whistle and if he refers to George Bush as such, he’s not.

You mean like talking about watermelons vs dates in a thread having to do with racist language and accusations of racism?

[Kobal2]

@billfish678

You mean like talking about watermelons vs dates in a thread having to do with racist language and accusations of racism?

You know, I really should get around to making that Pit thread about cargo cult rhetoric at some point. But Steam sales…

[D_Anconia]

@Ibn_Warraq

No, saying a poster is using “a dog whistle” is criticizing the post not the poster.

Either way, the usage invariably derails the thread, and should be discouraged in GD for that reason alone. IMHO.

[John_Mace]

@Ibn_Warraq

If someone refers to Barack Obama as a “boy” it’s painfully obvious he’s using a dog whistle and if he refers to George Bush as such, he’s not.

As noted upthread, that’s the whole dog, not a whistle.

A dog whistle needs to be a euphemism that has at least the veneer of deniability to it.

[Colibri]

@UltraVires

This argument about “dog whistles” and whether they are dog whistles, or how we go about proving they are dog whistles, etc. misses the point. A thread might go as follows:

Poster 1: <argument>
Poster 2: Politely, sir, I respectfully suggest that your statement is merely a dog whistle.
Poster 1: No, it isn’t because…
Poster 2: Yes, it is because…
<thread derailed over whether Poster 1’s original comment was a dog whistle>

As I said earlier, the implication that another poster is hiding his true racist agenda by the use of code words is an ad hominem attack which does not refute his position, nor does it contribute to the topic of the thread. Whether that is done politely or with racial epithets, it is nothing more than a personal insult.

I’m not concerned with the method by which one pollutes GD with personal attacks, but by the fact that the topic is now derailed by an insult towards the prior poster. Just argue the facts without impugning motive behind them. Suppose that the prior poster IS, in fact, the grand cyclops of the KKK. The position he is advocating should be debated on its own merits without resorting to insulting him. There is another forum for the insults that such poster would so richly deserve.

Why not keep GD about actual debates on the merits of the position?

@DrDeth

This is an excellent point. Basically, by doing so, you’re attacking the poster instead of the post.

@Ibn_Warraq

No, saying a poster is using “a dog whistle” is criticizing the post not the poster.

If someone refers to Barack Obama as a “boy” it’s painfully obvious he’s using a dog whistle and if he refers to George Bush as such, he’s not.

@D_Anconia

Either way, the usage invariably derails the thread, and should be discouraged in GD for that reason alone. IMHO.

@John_Mace

As noted upthread, that’s the whole dog, not a whistle.

A dog whistle needs to be a euphemism that has at least the veneer of deniability to it.

Moderator Instructions

I’m reminding everyone that back in post #192, engineer_comp_geek gave instructions to drop the hijack about “dog whistles.” Let’s drop this tangent.

[cmyk]

@Colibri

Moderator Instructions

I’m reminding everyone that back in post #192, engineer_comp_geek gave instructions to drop the hijack about “dog whistles.” Let’s drop this tangent.

The tail’s wagging the dog in this thread.

[samclem]

@Colibri

Moderator Instructions

I’m reminding everyone that back in post #192, engineer_comp_geek gave instructions to drop the hijack about “dog whistles.” Let’s drop this tangent.

@cmyk

The tail’s wagging the dog in this thread.

Since this one has gone past it’s shelf life, I’ll close it. The OP has been answered and dissected to death.

samclem, moderator