My main point is that his post did not read like someone speaking earnestly about their addiction! It read like someone who was giving slightly more context to their main point by alerting the reader that they're very familiar with alcohol and cannabis.

Had it read as you're suggesting it does, I'm arguing that the response he got with the emoji would never have happened.

But it wasn't clear. And so he got that response...

The dude's first point is about everything in moderation, and if that's not the case then there's probabaly something wrong underying it all.

In no universe is the main point in the original passage (given again below), "i want to earnestly talk about my addiction":

As someone who has abused both alcohol and cannabis, I can say cannabis is much less harmful. However, it's pretty easy to go overboard with it. Like most things in life, it's best in moderation. I enjoy it once or twice a week now, sometimes even less. I think if you're getting drunk or high every day there are probably some other issues at play

[–] purpleworm@hexbear.net 0 points 22 hours ago (1 children)

I agree that that's not the main point of the comment, the main point is that overuse in general is bad, but my point isn't what the thesis of the comment is (that's an arbitrary goalpost), it's that you are being given information about this person's background that that, by itself, is enough to tell you that you shouldn't address the subject flippantly to them in response to that very comment.

If no one replied talking about the commenter's history of substance abuse but just the topic of substance abuse generally, those would have been perfectly appropriate, but responding to this person saying getting wasted every day is probably problematic with "it's actually being cool lol" is tactless.

[–] TheOtherwise@hexbear.net 4 points 21 hours ago* (last edited 21 hours ago) (1 children)

i agree that that's not the main point of the comment, the main point is that overuse in general is bad,

Thank you for acknolwedging that.

but my point isn't what the thesis of the comment is (that's an arbitrary goalpost), it's that you are being given information about this person's background that that, by itself, is enough to tell you that you shouldn't address the subject flippantly to them in response to that very comment.

I disagree. The information given isn't clear. People talk like this all the time without having experienced--as it turns out was the case--a rough life-altering addiction.

It could've been said by someone referring to how they experienced binge drinking too much one semester away at college, but caught the issue and corrected it before their life was seriously affected. They probabaly wouldnt have minded the response. It just wasn't clear until the guy's follow up post.

Honestly, you should do a bit of self-crit and ask yourself why you communciated with ME in the manner you have.

[–] purpleworm@hexbear.net 0 points 21 hours ago* (last edited 21 hours ago) (1 children)

I love assigning self-crit like homework, it's just abusing "leftist" parlance to say "I'm correct and you should be ashamed of yourself." "Honestly," fuck off with that.

You keep assigning arbitrary goalposts. No, you cannot infer from the original comment that substance abuse was profoundly destructive on his life*, I never said that and that was never my argument. When someone tells you they have had trouble with substance abuse and you don't know how bad it was you shouldn't respond under the assumption that it was borderline trivial and has no emotional valence. That's what I'm saying.

*Not that it was, I'm just giving an example of an extreme characterization.

[–] TheOtherwise@hexbear.net 3 points 21 hours ago* (last edited 21 hours ago)

I love assigning self-crit like homework, it's just abusing "leftist" parlance to say "I'm correct and you should be ashamed of yourself." "Honestly," fuck off with that

You've objectively been unable to have a calm discussion about this.

When someone tells you they have had trouble with substance abuse and you don't know how bad it was you shouldn't respond under the assumption that it was borderline trivial and has no emotional valence. That's what I'm saying.

And what I am saying is that to expect this on Hexbear is misguided UNLESS one clarifies their seriousness.

Do people come here for seriousness? Sure. Do people come here to throw around emojis? Yes.

Both are forms of community. Someone got them mixed up in an ubderstandable way. Big whoop.

Edit:

you keep assigning arbitrary goalposts

Just because you jumped at me from the get go and failed to comprehend my very consistent point...that doesn't mean goalposts have been changed... wowee

It's like you're usage of quotes around "honestly" just now

you assumed i was using quotes in a similar deragatory way earlier around "abused". I had to clarify for you because you chose to jump on me without seeking to understand.