Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

1) "Speaking up" is just one of many forms of speech. Why is speaking up "the purpose of speech", or even the purpose of social media speech?

2) There are many reasons to speak up. One may be to organize like-minded people into an effective advocacy group. Another may just be to lament something that you can't change.

3) I'm not trying to be snarky, but do you have any examples of changing people's minds on HN or social media? I personally don't feel like I ever change anyone's mind.



I’ve had my mind changed due to HN. But the posters of comments would never know. I’ll give them an upvote and move on.


> I’ve had my mind changed due to HN.

Do you have an example?


No specific one comes to mind, but normally the comments move my position, not flip it on its head. This is most effectively done by the poster giving an example of something I didn’t know about along with a link to a primary resource.


Speaking is meant to exchange information. You're not exchanging any information when the other side agrees with you and knows everything you're saying.

An advocacy group is ineffective if all its members have this mindset. With signaling mindset you have no chance to convince anyone of anything. I'd rather get someone thinking differently a little bit confused than lament something with people who think the same. It doesn't reinforce helplessness.

I have many anecdotes with somewhat low chance of moving opinions. Few people will admit changing their minds, but sometimes they will agree with you but still offer a weaker counterpoint of the opposing narrative.

You can't flip someone's opinion 180° on the internet, but you can get someone on the other side to acknowledge a counter point.


> Speaking is meant to exchange information.

Speaking has many purposes. Why do you keep trying to "limit speech", so to speak?

> You're not exchanging any information when the other side agrees with you

I disagree. Is there not a difference between facts and opinions? Why do I have to "change my mind" in order to learn a new fact? What if the new fact actually supports my opinion?

> and knows everything you're saying

Confirming that another person knows what you know can be useful.

> An advocacy group is ineffective if all its members have this mindset.

To the contrary, advocacy groups are most effective when the members agree with each other, and most ineffective when they fight among themselves.

> Few people will admit changing their minds, but sometimes they will agree with you but still offer a weaker counterpoint of the opposing narrative.

This gives the appearance to me that you're telling yourself you've changed other people's mind and that they now agree with you, despite evidence to the contrary.

> You can't flip someone's opinion 180° on the internet, but you can get someone on the other side to acknowledge a counter point.

What does this mean? To me it sounds kind of like debate club, a game with scoring.


If you change your mind right now that people's minds are changed on HN then you will have evidence of it happening : - )




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: