[hackerspaces] Sigh -- I'm not helping with Maker Faires this year.

Tim Krabec tkrabec at gmail.com
Thu Apr 5 16:58:57 CEST 2012

I think the choice to not be involved is hippo-critical, especially when
one uses the internet and various other things that have come out of DARPA
funding.  A better approach IMHO would be to accept & work with the DARPA
funds on projects that advance goals consistent with your agenda.

On Thu, Apr 5, 2012 at 1:20 AM, Matt Joyce <matt at nycresistor.com> wrote:

> A Critique of Will Bradley's email by a Troll
> On Wed, Apr 4, 2012 at 8:19 PM, Will Bradley <bradley.will at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > Dale posted a reply* on this topic, but his argument amounts to "the ends
> > justify the means."
> Will's opening statement does frame his argument well.  And his choice
> of argument is exceptional.  Anyone with an even rudimentary level of
> knowledge concerning the schools of thought in modern sociology would
> know that different schools of ethics view "the ends justify the
> means" in different light.  Thus arguing from this point you are
> already discounting a number of folks perfectly valid ethical views
> while providing an implicit support of others.
> That being said I would have taken this chance to poison Dale's
> decision to address the issue.  One way to do this would be a simple
> if by whiskey, however I'd prefer something more subtle like a veiled
> reference to a seemingly altruistic motive that I can pervert later to
> my own ends.  All in all not a bad start but it could be better.
> > He ignores objections to the military-industrial
> > complex, instead assuring us with talk of open-source.
> I don't believe Will realizes how much fun this particular sentence
> is.  But I enjoyed its depth unintentional or not.  He promotes the
> idea that Dale is purposefully refusing to address his objections to
> the military industrial complex and refuses to elaborate on that
> instead assuming the role of the vox populi and making his own views
> yours.  I like that a lot.  It's a great way to pick up some support
> from dumber readers and rally people who already have beef with the
> vaguely defined military industrial complex.   What's important to
> realize here is that very argument is a straw man in and of itself.
> Because the state of the "military industrial complex" is not at issue
> here or relevant to Make in the least.  But it is a topic that might
> push some buttons on some folks.  So well played William.  This is a
> text book use of the straw man in the first part of the sentence.
> The next component of the sentence is a complete non sequitur in
> logic, that seems to denigrate the possible future contributions of
> people on this list.  Or at least serve a base to introduce a
> subconscious bias against a range of possible arguments.  I like the
> attempt but the execution was over reaching and not very elegant.
> > Why should the military be funding education when military spending has
> been
> > astronomical and education spending has been strangled for the past
> decade?
> This is another straw man argument.  The structure is textbook, but
> the choice of components is poor.  The link between military funding
> being high and the the ethical concerns related to military investment
> in education is tenuous at best.  In fact William has left his straw
> man open for use by his opponents.  Now I am willing to accept that
> MIGHT be baiting to force them down a line of argument's that's built
> on the sand of a straw man argument but... I doubt it.  It's too poor
> a choice of elements for that strategy to be effective here.  All in
> all, I'd say this is a major mistake in Will's effort.  I also don't
> like stylistically that he reused a fallacy so quickly.
> > A principled person would advocate adjusting the budgets of the DoD and
> DoE
> > instead of siphoning military money to education.
> I like how he immediately implies that to be principled you MUST agree
> with the next part of his statement.  It sets up a conditional state
> that's false.  But ultimately it's another straw man argument.
> Obviously attempting to build on his previous failed attempt to push
> military funding into the argument set he's again beating on the
> strawman fallacy.  It's getting fairly tired now.  An if by whiskey
> would have worked very well here.  Alternatively an argument from
> ignorance could have done wonders.  I want to be wowed.  This is the
> meat of your opening argument.  Show me some creativity.
> All in all.  I'm underwhelmed by the quality of trolling now and many
> readers have likely already been shaken loose from the original hook
> of the email.  Some will take the bait still but it's possible you've
> hit critical mass in people that will openly discount your continued
> contributions.  That's dangerous to the troll's effectiveness.
> > The ends don't justify the means.
> > Education is failing partly because teachers are making less than bus
> > drivers yet expected to buy 50-student-classrooms full of supplies; just
> > follow the money (or lack thereof.)
> We could have seen a really delicious argument from authority here.
> No effort was made.  I am saddened by this.  But maybe Will will read
> this and take some time next time to look through his arsenal and use
> some of the other tools he has available to him.  Or maybe he left
> this as bait and has a full battery of arguments from ignorance to
> bludgeon to death the way he bludgeoned the straw man fallacy to
> death.  I cringe at the very thought.
> >
> > *
> http://blog.makezine.com/2012/04/04/makerspaces-in-education-and-darpa/
> >
> Link back.  Nice.  Gives it the feel of a citation and formal
> argument.  Had you used an argument from authority or ignorance you
> could have footnoted the arguments to supporting stats / etc.  And
> then possibly baited some folks into a correlative fallacy.  You
> missed an opportunity earlier, but the framework at least was in place
> to capitalize on it had you not done so.  As a rifle instructor might
> say.  You are terrible, but you don't have very many bad habits.  You
> can be trained.  I hope you take this email to heart when you are
> constructing future trolls.
> Good luck noble troll.
> -openfly
> _______________________________________________
> Discuss mailing list
> Discuss at lists.hackerspaces.org
> http://lists.hackerspaces.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

Tim Krabec
www.smbminute.com (podcast)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.hackerspaces.org/pipermail/discuss/attachments/20120405/1d878146/attachment.html>

More information about the Discuss mailing list