If I understand correctly you don’t want the culture to change due to the sentimental value you ascribe to it. I wouldn’t want to alienate the existing members of the community and that was not my intention. I appreciate how clear you were in your disagreement.

I’ll try to show what I meant in response to this comment. There are a few points here which I will make explicit and argue against explicitly for clarity. I hope it makes it easier for us to come to an understanding.

Argument

P1: you are manifestly not leading the charge on engaging liberals “productively and fruitfully”.

P2: Why don’t you engage liberals in the way you recommend?

P3: This is the second post like this from a low activity account

P4: I like the culture here.

P5: The admins are also aggressive and meme-y sometimes.

P6: I like that too. I would not be here without that.

C: and it honestly is starting to feel like wrecker shit to suck the fun out of the grad.

Examination

If I did not get the points or conclusion correct please let me know.

You made an inductive claim in P1 stating that as someone without a history of engaging in quality discourse I have not provided evidence of this being a valid strategy, either because I presume as someone who has not engaged in it I cannot know the effectiveness of what I claim perhaps due to some idealistic notion. There is some knowledge conferred through experience which I do not have and which I may have if I had engaged in the way I mentioned. The other point I see is that there is a degree of authority I lack as someone who does not have this experience which could be deferred to if I at least did engage even if it was not done “productively and fruitfully”.

For P2 I think this is the stronger charge, you question my actions as not lining up with what I espoused. If this was such a great method why not engage in it? There are several reasons why this may not be the case but they would require being open-minded and considerate of options which are non-typical. As you said I am new, at least this account is, I have been doing my best to learn, observe, and lurk, prior to making any comments or engagements. I did not think I had even a base level of understanding until now where I think I have met some threshold. The other, I may be able to, as a seeming outsider, to give a useful perspective from a different standpoint as I have not subsumed the specific tendencies in this community. The weakness here comes from you not knowing where I come from or what my strengths might be. This is definitely less of an argument based on the content but rather closer (but I would not say it is) an attack or questioning of character and authority.

In the case of P3 the frequency of this type of post brings into question its validity. I do not think this is particularly important but perhaps it is because you have been a member for a while and the recent uptick is notable.

P4 and P6 are similar, these are emotive claims about your sentimental value towards the community and the norms and customs you have become accustomed to. Any change to this would presumably want to be avoided as it would necessitate change in the behaviour in existing members and what made this community, going so far as to push away the members which made this community what it is. This is disastrous as change could mean a cessation of what made this community as it is and there is little guarantee that some future evolution of this community would maintain what made the community initially great to you.

P5 This is an appeal to authority, perhaps there must be some good reason the admins behave in the way they do. The other is that though it works for them, it is something non-admins can attempt to emulate. This could be modus operandi which works for admins but not others.

C The current mood and environment of the community is starting to sour and turn you and potentially others away from the community. I mentioned why this could be an issue in my response to P4 and P6, as well it causes discomfort towards you and perhaps others.

Response

I’ll put my response as clearly as I can below.

1 Change in communities always occurs. Members of communities always adjust. There is a rate of change and rate of adjustment which can be made so as not to alienate existing members and also develop the community towards some goal. Explicitly monitoring and modifying these rates is useful as opposed to in-explicitly or organically.

2 There is always some goal for some community, it may be vague, it may be better represented as multiple points, but the set contained is the goal.

3 Working towards a goal is beneficial for the belongingness of members of the community and it can mitigate any alienation or issues with change.

4 The feelings or sentiment members have is important, and can be accommodated through open and regular dialogue. This is true besides notions I am advocating for.

5 There is a way which members of the community can engage which develops their argumentation and theoretical knowledge which is preferable or better than it currently is. This is true generally and certainly not for all.

6 Engaging in such a way is an extension of the beliefs and values of the community.

C We should at least attempt to do something different even if it seems unviable. As scientific thinkers we cannot determine in advance what will happen and experiments are necessary. The costs and the benefits must considered, but it should not be avoided for fear of potential harm. We use models to determine what may happen, as materialists we know what we think is provisional and not the same as the material world.

Thank you for coming to my TED Talk