this post was submitted on 18 Apr 2025
266 points (96.8% liked)
Casual Conversation
3156 readers
153 users here now
Share a story, ask a question, or start a conversation about (almost) anything you desire. Maybe you'll make some friends in the process.
RULES (updated 01/22/25)
- Be respectful: no harassment, hate speech, bigotry, and/or trolling. To be concise, disrespect is defined by escalation.
- Encourage conversation in your OP. This means including heavily implicative subject matter when you can and also engaging in your thread when possible. You won't be punished for trying.
- Avoid controversial topics (politics or societal debates come to mind, though we are not saying not to talk about anything that resembles these). There's a guide in the protocol book offered as a mod model that can be used for that; it's vague until you realize it was made for things like the rule in question. At least four purple answers must apply to a "controversial" message for it to be allowed.
- Keep it clean and SFW: No illegal content or anything gross and inappropriate. A rule of thumb is if a recording of a conversation put on another platform would get someone a COPPA violation response, that exact exchange should be avoided when possible.
- No solicitation such as ads, promotional content, spam, surveys etc. The chart redirected to above applies to spam material as well, which is one of the reasons its wording is vague, as it applies to a few things. Again, a "spammy" message must be applicable to four purple answers before it's allowed.
- Respect privacy as well as truth: Don’t ask for or share any personal information or slander anyone. A rule of thumb is if something is enough info to go by that it "would be a copyright violation if the info was art" as another group put it, or that it alone can be used to narrow someone down to 150 physical humans (Dunbar's Number) or less, it's considered an excess breach of privacy. Slander is defined by intentional utilitarian misguidance at the expense (positive or negative) of a sentient entity. This often links back to or mixes with rule one, which implies, for example, that even something that is true can still amount to what slander is trying to achieve, and that will be looked down upon.
Casual conversation communities:
Related discussion-focused communities
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Go on... so what's the right one? I can't understand why anyone would go to attack others without offering a superior alternative. Like, you may as well just not say anything, then. If you don't have a better idea, then theirs isn't worse because you didn't even provide a rebuttal.
I'm not even on the side of the person you responded to, but why would you not want to state what would work better? That's just trolling.
The "right one" is to stop treating it as a "single issue" matter and dismissing literally decades of education research.
Maybe go read a modern textbook on education and see what issues there are, what the research on the subject says, and derive from that some conclusions about any "single issue" approach to education (whether it's "TEHY JUST NEED MORE JEEBUS!" or "we should throw everything out and replace it with reading").
So the "right one" is to shut the fuck up if you think there's a one-size-fits-all approach to education. Kind of like if you think there's a one-size-fits-all approach to anything. Even carpentry.
But you're not offering even any example of possible models so how can anyone take your position seriously if you refuse to share more of your stance when asked? Lack of transparency is not cool, as well as assuming; I never once said one-size-fits-all.
I gave you an example of a possible model.
READ A BOOK BEFORE OPENING YOUR MOUTH AND SPEWING DRIVEL.
I'm not here to give you an Education 101 course. (Frankly, given your performance here thus far, I'm not even certain you could understand the contents of such a course.)
And if "throw everything way but this one thing" isn't "one size fits all" what is it!? You're literally saying "everything being done now is wrong and we should do this ONE THING for everyone. That's practically the definition of "one size fits all"!
I get it. You're a techie and have been trained by techie culture to think (or at least pretend) you're the smartest person in the room. But to first causally dismiss literally decades of research to then propose a "solution" that is risible on the face of it goes well past typical techie arrogance and into Elon Musk territory.
"Given your performance?" Since when were discussions, heated or not, a performance? I never said anyone was right or wrong here with their stance towards education, but you've only said to not treat it as a single issue and nothing more, which is what I have beef with. When I asked, "so what's the right one," I didn't say that I believe there is any "one" right way of education, but you're continually saying to just read "a modern textbook on education" without even suggesting exactly what to read. What such book do you recommend?
I have not once called you "arrogant," I have not called you "a techie," and I have not said you have been "spewing drivel"; name-calling is the territory of Reddit and I hope we can agree to leave it there, but you didn't even bother to reply to the original commentator's response, maybe because he's right; that's what I was going off of. All I'm getting at is to not troll people in that closed way.