Some critiques or thoughts occur to people near-universally upon exposure to an idea. For example, the HN comments section on scientific studies showing an association between X and Y are packed with people spitballing explanatory theories after a few minutes' thought. Given a certain level of legitimacy of the idea source, it is basically insulting to assume you've thought of a meaningful critique within minutes. Most of the time, these critiques are (to reuse my term) appallingly mundane, obviously considered by the idea source (to assume otherwise is to assume they're idiots, hence insulting) and easily addressed. Beyond this, since many, many people have the exact same mundane thought, it becomes useful to have a shorthand dismissal - here, retirement police.
> Some critiques or thoughts occur to people near-universally upon exposure to an idea.
Indeed. And in some cases those critiques are spot on and shouting them down or inventing catchy names for those critiquing the ideas / principles / choice of definition of words does not necessarily mean that they are wrong.
This is an element of cult behavior where the cult is trained to respond reflexively to criticisms and in fact is egged on to shout down outsiders. See also: certain politicians.
I think this kind of behavior rather cheapens the whole MMM brand but if you feel that it strengthens it then that is your privilege.
In my not so humble opinion as soon as you resort to namecalling instead of reasoned debate then you probably would have lost the debate. MMM is rife with such traits and even though I very much subscribe to most of the basic tenets of the way he lives I would not respond to those who question my choices or choice of words by calling them names. Instead I'd try to figure out how our situations differ and to address the criticism directly rather than to try to drive a wedge between those that criticize and those that are 'true followers'. After all, if a critique is mundane then it is nothing a FAQ can't answer.
I dislike cliques, always have and probably always will.
I don't follow you but that probably makes me a complainypants.
Some critiques or thoughts occur to people near-universally upon exposure to an idea. For example, the HN comments section on scientific studies showing an association between X and Y are packed with people spitballing explanatory theories after a few minutes' thought. Given a certain level of legitimacy of the idea source, it is basically insulting to assume you've thought of a meaningful critique within minutes. Most of the time, these critiques are (to reuse my term) appallingly mundane, obviously considered by the idea source (to assume otherwise is to assume they're idiots, hence insulting) and easily addressed. Beyond this, since many, many people have the exact same mundane thought, it becomes useful to have a shorthand dismissal - here, retirement police.
> Some critiques or thoughts occur to people near-universally upon exposure to an idea.
Indeed. And in some cases those critiques are spot on and shouting them down or inventing catchy names for those critiquing the ideas / principles / choice of definition of words does not necessarily mean that they are wrong.
This is an element of cult behavior where the cult is trained to respond reflexively to criticisms and in fact is egged on to shout down outsiders. See also: certain politicians.
I think this kind of behavior rather cheapens the whole MMM brand but if you feel that it strengthens it then that is your privilege.
In my not so humble opinion as soon as you resort to namecalling instead of reasoned debate then you probably would have lost the debate. MMM is rife with such traits and even though I very much subscribe to most of the basic tenets of the way he lives I would not respond to those who question my choices or choice of words by calling them names. Instead I'd try to figure out how our situations differ and to address the criticism directly rather than to try to drive a wedge between those that criticize and those that are 'true followers'. After all, if a critique is mundane then it is nothing a FAQ can't answer.
I dislike cliques, always have and probably always will.