[YuriNiyazov]

Do you have an arrest record? If not: there's the magic power. Statistically speaking, a poor young black male is much more likely to have an arrest record than a poor young white male.

Edit: holy batman the downvotes. I never considered the possibility that maybe #hnwatch is right.

[ElComradio]

You are comparing an individual to a group which is a mismatch.

It would be absurd to tell someone to recognize their privilege that the odds were in their favor but nonetheless they rolled poorly. It's like telling some white guy on death row to feel privileged he had a lower chance of being there.

[YuriNiyazov]

That's not absurd at all.

Being a white male is being allowed at a table in a casino where the expected value of the game is positive, and much higher than any other table. You can still lose, but the players in general don't. You should be thankful for being allowed to play a game with the highest expected value.

[ElComradio]

If you lose all your chips at the "black table" and I lose mine at the "white table", as we cry over our beers it would be ridiculous for you to assert that I should feel privileged compared to you when our outcomes have turned out to be identical.

[YuriNiyazov]

If we look around the bar, and see that the vast majority of people crying over the beers are black, would it be a reasonable thing for me to assert that the white folk that are here (you included) must've gotten extra unlucky?

I think that's a reasonable thing to assert. That's what privilege is: the number of times you can fuck up (self-inflicted bad things) or be unlucky (externally inflicted bad things) before you lose all your chips.

That's the nice things about probability and statistics. They allow us to compare an individual to a group.

[ElComradio]

As a fellow loser at the bar, how is the knowledge that I am extra unlucky supposed to make me feel towards you? Am I supposed to consider myself fortunate that I had a greater chance at winning even as we both sit there with no chips? Am I supposed to buy you a beer because you had less of a chance?

[YuriNiyazov]

"How is this supposed to make you feel?" - I have no idea, and I certainly don't think that in your sorry state you owe a beer to anyone. However, I do think you should say to your fellow losers "I am sorry that you guys are forced play a harder game, and I promise to remember that if I ever manage to leave the losers' bar."

[yoodenvranx]

I live in Germany, so that does not really apply to me ;)

[YuriNiyazov]

Sorry about my earlier Nazi comment, then.

[hartpuff]

And what if he does have an arrest record? Got any other stats instead to conclusively demonstrate his undeniable white magic? Where does a black person with no arrest record fit on your magic powers scale?

Oh, never mind, I forgot for a second you're addressing something/someone specific with generalisations that are meaningless to him and have nothing to do with his life or status.

Your argument is piss poor; that's why you were downvoted (not by me). Congrats on your successful upvote fishing, by implying/imagining some kind of HN conspiracy/agenda/hive mind.

[dang]

This comment breaks the HN guidelines, as do several other of the comments you've posted, including in this thread. We ban accounts that do this, and it's the last thing this angry thread needs more of. Kindly reread the HN guidelines and follow them when posting here:

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

https://news.ycombinator.com/newswelcome.html

[hartpuff]

The poster I replied to was whining about being downvoted in order to score upvotes ("Please resist commenting about being downvoted."), when in fact their argument was just a bad one. In another post he made a stupid and offensive reference to the Nazis because someone said they were from Germany. So either he was trolling or he's an idiot.

I'm not sure if pointing that out was what violated the guidelines or just the way I did it, but in future, assuming this has not been banned, I'll try to keep my opinion of someone's argument or intellect to myself. Thanks for the heads up.

[dang]

Yes, the comment about downvoting broke the rules, and yes the comment about Germany would have merited chiding if the author hadn't deleted it. But the HN guidelines apply to you, as to all of us, whether the other person breaks the rules or not.

Your entire comment upthread was uncivil. If you're sincere about abiding by the guidelines (as I hope you are), it would be an instructive exercise to rewrite it in a neutral, respectful way, editing out the nose-tweaking and every trace of snark. Do that on three or four occasions and you'll see how much better your contributions get, regardless of what you're arguing for. I know that sounds patronizing, but I don't mean it that way—it's a process that many of us, including me, have gone through, and it helps.

[hartpuff]

Thanks. I don't know if you mean edit posts I've made (which AFAICS is not possible) or future posts, before posting, but I agree, polite, respectful posts mean better signal to noise, and I'll try not to slip into bad habits.

I hope it's still possible to disagree, argue or take a negative position towards someone's post or argument without it necessarily being taken as personal or uncivil though.

[YuriNiyazov]

Do you not have an "edit" link next to your posts? It disappears after a while, but it's there right after you post.

[dang]

Editing is open for 2 hours, which is lots of time to review what you wrote and take out the uncivil bits. That's what I do, or try to.

It's definitely still possible to disagree, of course. It's entirely a matter of how.

[jshevek]

> Do you have an arrest record? If not: there's the magic power. Statistically speaking, a poor young black male is much more likely to have an arrest record than a poor young white male.

> Edit: holy batman the downvotes. I never considered the possibility that maybe #hnwatch is right.

Its unfortunate that you are being downvoted without comment. The downvotes may or may not be evidence that #hnwatch is correct, it would depend on the motivation. It would not be rational for us to assume that the downvotes are evidence that #hnwatch is correct, in the absence of any explanation for the downvotes.

[moron4hire]

The mistake of sociological studies labeling a concept called white privilege was when people started using it to villify others for the negative space of discrimination they didn't receive.

IDK why, but people tend to not like being blamed for things they didn't do.

If that's not the mesaage we're supposed to take out of the concept, them somebody has got a lot of work to do to figure out a better way of communicating it. Someone who is not me, because I'm a programmer, just trying to take care of my own family, not a sociologist.

[jshevek]

I don't see how your comment relates to mine. My point was that the simple fact of the existence of downvotes alone are a wholly insufficient basis for reaching a conclusion about #hnwatch.

Its too common for people to be so certain of their own viewpoint that they will simply assume the worst (ie racism and sexism) of anyone who disagrees with them, rather than consider that their critics might have damn good (non-racist, non-sexist) reasons for disagreeing with them.

[YuriNiyazov]

I am pretty sure that if the prior for #hnwatch being right has non-zero probability, then the downvotes are evidence that strengthens the posterior.