Funny Events of the "Woke" world

[Phoenixmgs]

Quod erat demonstrandum. I quote the definition several times over, from multiple sources - two from Dunning himself - give you a brief overview of the findings and what in particular the paper was explaining, I quote the abstract itself, and briefly explain how the paper's results are not as you claimed...and you're still trying to argue that that doesn't count because you're convinced you simply know better and that therefore a good definition must align with your preconceptions.

The effect does literally the same thing in the other regard, but you want to ignore the other regard because it makes you right?

No, stop there, because you weren't asked about the study.



As has already been explained, this doesn't mean that people think they're "average". Someone in the bottom quartile believing themself in the top quartile is exhibiting Dunning-Kruger, but not believing themself average.



What the hell does this have to do with me? I don't even know why you're talking about ludonarrative dissonance. As far as I can tell its just a pure deflection. I never said anything about it in this thread, and I've not even played more than about 20 minutes of Uncharted.

That's where the effect came from, the study... Again, if I take a portion of a covid vaccine study to find an "effect", I can say no one should get a covid vaccine because there was an effect in groups where the vaccine was worse than contracting covid. You can't make some blanket effect claim while only looking at a portion of the data.

They didn't think they were in the top quartile.

Can't you follow basic comparisons? I never claimed it was specifically you. I said most gamers, probably 99+%, think ludonarrative dissonance is something a game like Uncharted has when it in fact doesn't because nobody knows why/how the term was actually coined.

---

Could not agree more with the video. He starts talking about the "controversy" at like 4:40. 99+% of people saying it's ethically bad to buy the game have given money everyday to someone that is far far far far far worse than JK Rowling.

 

[Buyetyen]

The effect does literally the same thing in the other regard, but you want to ignore the other regard because it makes you right?

Question: Why do you believe you understand the study better than its authors?

Could not agree more with the video. He starts talking about the "controversy" at like 4:40. 99+% of people saying it's ethically bad to buy the game have given money everyday to someone that is far far far far far worse than JK Rowling.

No ethical consumption under capitalism. But we all get to pick our battles.

 

[Silvanus]

That's where the effect came from, the study...

OK, very straightforward question now, yes or no.

If a concept is derived from the findings of a study, does that necessarily mean that everything in that study demonstrates the concept?

They didn't think they were in the top quartile.

In that study they didn't, on average. But we're not discussing the study. We're discussing Dunning-Kruger. Which is not limited to exactly the same results as that study.

Can't you follow basic comparisons? I never claimed it was specifically you. I said most gamers, probably 99+%, think ludonarrative dissonance is something a game like Uncharted has when it in fact doesn't because nobody knows why/how the term was actually coined.

I can certainly follow basic comparisons, it's just an odd one to throw at me in an accusatory manner when I never said anything of the sort.

 

[Asita]

The effect does literally the same thing in the other regard, but you want to ignore the other regard because it makes you right?

Stop trying to deflect from the point by projecting your flaws onto other people, Phoenix. The entire reason that we're even having this discussion in the first place is because you wanted to score petty gotcha points by claiming that the people calling you out on overestimating your expertise were using the wrong term, which you claimed to know better.

Again: Of the two of us, I'm the one who cited the definition (from everything from the dictionary to medical journals). I'm the one who directly quoted and explained the results of the study, and how they are appreciably different from your thirdhand mischaracterization of the study. And I'm the one who quoted Dunning's own explanation of what the Dunning-Kruger Effect was. And you're the one who is plugging your ears and going "nuh-uh, that doesn't count" because you just want to think you're right and are arguing that the editorialized characterization you're citing - that you think validates your opinion - should be treated as the true definition even overruling the psychological journals and the authors themselves.

And in light of all that, you want to say that because I'm telling you that you're wrong, that I'm the one who "wants to ignore the other regard because it makes [me] right"? Bruh. Of the two of us, you're quite clearly the one who's demonstrating the obstinate ego in this exchange.

 

[Thaluikhain]

There's something ''funny'' about the left wing streamer Hasan. I'm not all too familiar with the guy but recently he did a bit of an oopsie regarding Hogwarts Legacy. That itself is fairly boring, but I noticed several left wing youtubers treating him with kids glove and assuring us he was just a good guy with one bad take.

Now the only other thing I know this Hasan guy from is his stance regarding Ukraine which can be described as very Russophilic. To the point he described the theft of Crimea as ''a completely justified fucking act''

Isn't that a view that should get you canceled and blacklisted by any lefty worth his or her salt? Because if you go to bat Putin's Russia than any leftist or moral credentials one might hold suddenly collapse. I don't care what Hasan does, or doesn't think about Hogwards legacy, but I do care about ''breadtube'' not immediately ousting him from their ranks after his views on Ukraine and Russia became public. He's not ''a good guy with one bad take''.

Lots of nominal leftwingers support the glorious Russian stand against Americo-fascism or whatever excuse they have for killing Ukranians.

It should, it absolutely should discount one from being leftwing, but unfortunately it does not.

 

[Phoenixmgs]

Question: Why do you believe you understand the study better than its authors?



No ethical consumption under capitalism. But we all get to pick our battles.

Just look at the dataset yourself, why is this such a hard concept?

And the rest of us can point out the hypocrisy.

OK, very straightforward question now, yes or no.

If a concept is derived from the findings of a study, does that necessarily mean that everything in that study demonstrates the concept?



In that study they didn't, on average. But we're not discussing the study. We're discussing Dunning-Kruger. Which is not limited to exactly the same results as that study.



I can certainly follow basic comparisons, it's just an odd one to throw at me in an accusatory manner when I never said anything of the sort.

Yes. Like I said if you look at a portion of the covid vaccine study, you can say the vaccine effect is pointless and harmful; however, the risk reduction stat was from the entirety of the study. Sure, you can look at specific groups and differing effects among them but as an overall effect, it's the whole study.

Where is this data anywhere saying that people in the bottom quartile thought they were in the top quartile? I'm a data person, just show me the data. Like how I instantly agreed that ivermectin didn't work once a legit study said it didn't. Yet legit studies keep saying masks don't work and you won't accept them.

Never threw it at you directly. Since we are on a gaming website, I''m pretty sure you know of ludonarrative dissonance and what games generally are said to have it. Do you disagree with that?

Stop trying to deflect from the point by projecting your flaws onto other people, Phoenix. The entire reason that we're even having this discussion in the first place is because you wanted to score petty gotcha points by claiming that the people calling you out on overestimating your expertise were using the wrong term, which you claimed to know better.

Again: Of the two of us, I'm the one who cited the definition (from everything from the dictionary to medical journals). I'm the one who directly quoted and explained the results of the study, and how they are appreciably different from your thirdhand mischaracterization of the study. And I'm the one who quoted Dunning's own explanation of what the Dunning-Kruger Effect was. And you're the one who is plugging your ears and going "nuh-uh, that doesn't count" because you just want to think you're right and are arguing that the editorialized characterization you're citing - that you think validates your opinion - should be treated as the true definition even overruling the psychological journals and the authors themselves.

And in light of all that, you want to say that because I'm telling you that you're wrong, that I'm the one who "wants to ignore the other regard because it makes [me] right"? Bruh. Of the two of us, you're quite clearly the one who's demonstrating the obstinate ego in this exchange.

Literally the first thing you see on Google...


Also, Dunning-Kruger isn't even a real human bias because you get the same results with random numbers.

 

[Buyetyen]

Just look at the dataset yourself, why is this such a hard concept?

You're not answering the question. You've been presented with quotes from Dunning himself. Why do you think you know better than one of the authors of the study.

And the rest of us can point out the hypocrisy.

There's no ethical consumption for you either, bro. You pick your battles same as everybody else does, you just put less thought into it.

 

[Silvanus]

Yes. Like I said if you look at a portion of the covid vaccine study, you can say the vaccine effect is pointless and harmful; however, the risk reduction stat was from the entirety of the study. Sure, you can look at specific groups and differing effects among them but as an overall effect, it's the whole study.

I'm not only "looking at a portion of the study". Only a portion of the respondents in the study exhibited Dunning-Kruger.

Dude, it is categorically, unarguably wrong that if a study shows a certain effect, therefore everything in the study must show that effect. That's completely ludicrous.

Take the same logic that you're using now, and apply it to (for instance) a covid vaccine trial. Let's say 95% of participants show elevated antibodies afterwards. So you would say the effect you're recording is the vaccine prompting the body to produce antibodies.

Now, you've just said that if you see an effect in a study, therefore all the data in the study must show that effect. You just said yes to that. Which means that you're telling me the 5% of participants who didn't exhibit elevated antibody levels are also exhibiting the effect.

Can you see how this is patently ridiculous?

Where is this data anywhere saying that people in the bottom quartile thought they were in the top quartile? I'm a data person, just show me the data. Like how I instantly agreed that ivermectin didn't work once a legit study said it didn't. Yet legit studies keep saying masks don't work and you won't accept them.

*facepalm*

Thats a hypothetical example. The original study didn't show that. But Dunning-Kruger is not limited to what happened in the one study that originated the term. Please get that into your head

Never threw it at you directly. Since we are on a gaming website, I''m pretty sure you know of ludonarrative dissonance and what games generally are said to have it. Do you disagree with that?

No. I just think this is a weird and pointless tangent.

 

[Asita]

Literally the first thing you see on Google...
View attachment 7917

Also, Dunning-Kruger isn't even a real human bias because you get the same results with random numbers.

And yet again you're trying to champion the definition supplied by an editorial as superior to that from the dictionary, encyclopedia, psychological journals, the actual study itself, and the author himself.

 

[Thaluikhain]

Just pointing out, Phoenixmgs and the Dunning-Kruger thing has been going on for more than two weeks now.

That is the discussion of it, not the other one.

 

[Chimpzy]

White racial slurs not from Auburn Black Student Union GroupMe chat channel, university says

The group chat did also not belong to "part of any recognized Auburn University organization channel," the university said.

www.al.com

Also, I clicked the link so you don't have to

Of course, Turning Point USA is involved, which immediately makes it suspect. Then again,some of these are legit hilarious, so perhaps real cuz conservatives are generally uncreative bores and could never come up with something as top tier as "no purpose flour"

 

[Thaluikhain]

Most of theose are pretty meh, but Klu Klux Karen is pretty good.

"White enough to sunburn" isn't terrible anything.

 

[RhombusHatesYou]

Most of theose are pretty meh, but Klu Klux Karen is pretty good.

I liked Mayosapien.

"White enough to sunburn" isn't terrible anything.

Everyone can get sunburned... it's just a sliding scale of time required.

 

[Gordon_4]

White racial slurs not from Auburn Black Student Union GroupMe chat channel, university says

The group chat did also not belong to "part of any recognized Auburn University organization channel," the university said.

www.al.com

Also, I clicked the link so you don't have to

Of course, Turning Point USA is involved, which immediately makes it suspect. Then again,some of these are legit hilarious, so perhaps real cuz conservatives are generally uncreative bores and could never come up with something as top tier as "no purpose flour"

Some of these are mean, but Jesus are some of them also fucking hilarious. Also I don't really think they'd work as slurs because there's just no baggage to them. Also some of them are too damn long. Insults need to be, if I may borrow from a wiser man, succinct and punchy.

And my favourite out of that list is 'Spiceless girls'.

 

[Ag3ma]

Some of these are mean, but Jesus are some of them also fucking hilarious. Also I don't really think they'd work as slurs because there's just no baggage to them. Also some of them are too damn long. Insults need to be, if I may borrow from a wiser man, succinct and punchy.

And my favourite out of that list is 'Spiceless girls'.

I think "Mayosapiens" is inspired. A lot of them are just feeble.

 

[The Rogue Wolf]

White racial slurs not from Auburn Black Student Union GroupMe chat channel, university says

The group chat did also not belong to "part of any recognized Auburn University organization channel," the university said.

www.al.com

Also, I clicked the link so you don't have to

Of course, Turning Point USA is involved, which immediately makes it suspect. Then again,some of these are legit hilarious, so perhaps real cuz conservatives are generally uncreative bores and could never come up with something as top tier as "no purpose flour"

Some asshat is going to come along, point at these and say "Look, white people are victims of racism too!". To which I would answer that, if I heard a black policeman say one of these things while approaching me, I would not immediately fear that I was about to die.

 

[Chimpzy]

Some asshat is going to come along, point at these and say "Look, white people are victims of racism too!". To which I would answer that, if I heard a black policeman say one of these things while approaching me, I would not immediately fear that I was about to die.

Too late, Turning Point reported on it. Their headline has 'exposed' in all caps in the title.

 

[Avnger]

Some asshat is going to come along, point at these and say "Look, white people are victims of racism too!". To which I would answer that, if I heard a black policeman say one of these things while approaching me, I would not immediately fear that I was about to die.

Right, that's exactly the difference. These are undeniably racist, but they're also entirely powerless and meaningless. There's a reason we can all sit and laugh at how ridiculous they are and the sheer absurdity of being called any of them in real life. It's because, outside of a very few niche situations, I'm not going to be denied a job/housing/loan application or followed down a street by a man with a gun or "searched and frisked" by a cop due to the attitudes they represent. In the US, in particular, and "the West," more generally, anti-white*** racism isn't baked into the structures of power with hundreds of years of historical reinforcement behind it.

*** depending on the definition of "white" in any given culture

 

[Gergar12]

Outer Space Treaty - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

The dumbest treaty in the world.

U.S. Weighs Shift to Support Hague Court as It Investigates Russian Atrocities (Published 2022)

The government is hamstrung from helping the world’s war-crimes court by two laws and a policy aimed at barring it from charging Americans.

www.nytimes.com

I love Biden, we still haven't signed it, but we are forcing other countries to abide by it, but if I were a moralist I would argue for it, but I am not. It basically means the US, and the countries that haven't signed it live by one set of rules(AKA the great power rules), and the middle size countries have their limitations.

It sucks if you are not hypocritic, but all empires are.

 

[RhombusHatesYou]

I love Biden, we still haven't signed it, but we are forcing other countries to abide by it

It was the same during Bosnia and Kosovo... only in those instances they did have the fig leaf of using NATO nations that were signatories to fill in the paperwork.