On That Reddit Debate

So a handful of people reading this may be aware that there was a small debate between me and a couple alt-right asshats on Reddit. I pretty much went idle for a couple months and, admittedly that's mostly just my laziness there. But I decided to check up on it today and, it was god awful as always.

See, the main gist is that I was responding to a post about race and crime. There was a response written by a couple blokes to my post and, while they're both poor (I'll elaborate on this momentarily), ultimately I won't be responding too anytime soon for reasons detailed.

For one, I made the post prematurely. It was a few months ago, and I didn't have a coherent plan for the different concepts that I'd be tackling - which is problematic. There's a lot needed to understand about this debate, both for concepts directly stated in the Reddit posts as well as things implied in discussions. It ultimately deals with intricate points about heritability, genetic theory, supposed fallacies, how statistical measures ought to be used, et cetera. To try to demonstrate all this on Reddit of all things is hilariously bad, because it leads to a very shitty understanding of what's being talked about, as is the case with 'BasementInhabitant' - who dismisses criticisms of say national crime statistics that point out their unreliability, especially for racial minorities, and blatant inaccuracies as simply 'minor' without elaboration on what'd exactly constitute a damning criticism to him, or maybe citing a 'variance inflation factor' as a rebuttal to a point I made even though it's a factor used for statistical model comparisons that's irrelevant towards the study at hand. Not to mention his little pal who made points about articles that were directly contradicted by said articles - such as how the bulk of one's points about the probability of racial encounters directly rebutted what he said, and instead he chose out of context points, especially for ones about other studies that, with proper context, reveal his own misunderstanding of my own points (such as why I cited Hispanic individuals even though that Hispanic folk weren't being discussed - primarily because I anticipated that as a separate counterpoint) among other things.

This probably all makes little sense out of context, and that's understandable - frankly I more wanted a bit of a space to vent about it, so why not use a paragraph and confuse the twenty or so people who'll read this.

I digress though, because ultimately, along with my failure to provide adequate context (and, an admitted poor explanation of my points at some parts), and with the clear ideological motivations behind alt-rightists not interested in debate, I ultimately decided to take a step back from it. It'll be going on in circles for far too long of a time, and a better overall point can be made if I stick to this blog format - which is what I'll do from now on, bad move on my part to try to cover multiple grounds. So, while I won't be covering the race and crime bits - or even education bits - immediately, anticipate it in the next couple months or so. For now, I want to establish some basics. Which leads me to what the next non-shitpost/filler/update post will be about - and, as is likely apparent from the prior one about the concept of race, it'll be all about the fixation index and it's relevance towards the whole 'race' debate. Following that, I'll likely cover expert opinion on it, then concepts of race, and then go over some important aspects about statistical measures and genetic theory. After all that, anticipation for some discussion about that sort of a topic can be found.