Club PA 2.0 has arrived! If you'd like to access some extra PA content and help support the forums, check it out at patreon.com/ClubPA
The image size limit has been raised to 1mb! Anything larger than that should be linked to. This is a HARD limit, please do not abuse it.
Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it, follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.
Our rules have been updated and given their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!

Do you recycle? I don't even have the option. (Also incentivizing "green" behavior)

11011121416

Posts

  • Jebus314Jebus314 Registered User regular
    Quid wrote: »
    Do you honestly believe that the way to improve societies environmental impact is to convince people that their priorities are wrong? That their complaints are stupid?

    Convincing people their priorities are wrong is a great way to do it. And if their reasons are stupid then I have no problem saying their reasons are stupid along with an explanation why.

    And I do not see a single person in this thread touting what great environmentalists they are.

    It seems inherent when you say "you are a very poor environmentalist" that you are claiming that you are in fact a much better one. That being said, I think maybe we are talking about different things. If you are trying to change someones priorities by trying to convince them that the consequences are bigger than they think, or buy showing them alternative solutions, or by nullifying their fears, then sure that is productive. In my mind that's changing the situation more than the priorities per se, but whatever that's just semantics. What isn't productive is saying "I don't care if you don't want to spend the extra time to drive your recycling in, you're a bad person if you don't". Or, saying "you're a goose if you don't go to bottle returns because of homeless people". That's great that it doesn't bother you if a homeless person is at your bottle return. If you want to try and convince SKFM that it's illogical to be concerned about homeless people I am 100% behind you. Let's quote some statistics on how often people are attacked in bottle returns. If instead you just want to say "you're a goose, man up and return the bottles anyway", I can't support that.

    "The world is a mess, and I just need to rule it" - Dr Horrible
  • QuidQuid I don't... what... hnnng Registered User regular
    Feral wrote: »
    Feral wrote: »
    Feral wrote: »
    But I generally see problems like this not on an individual scale, but on a social scale.

    As individuals, it is much much much harder to get people to put effort towards doing a moral good, than it is to convince them to refrain from putting effort towards committing a moral evil. The action of a single individual towards a social good is a tiny drop compared to the movement of an entire community (except when that individual serves to inspire and lead the community).

    On a social level, we should endeavor towards making good deeds as convenient and cheap (or free) as possible.

    This is why I stare blankly when libertarians argue that charity should take the place of tax-paid welfare; it's also why I sigh and roll my eyes when people accuse Al Gore of hypocrisy for taking a plane to his talks.

    If I were SKFM, I wouldn't put my effort towards recycling, I'd put my effort towards convincing my HOA to hire recycling pickup.

    False dichotomies are the best dichotomies. What if you could do both?

    The power is yours!

    I would still only do the latter.

    Well that's you're choice, but it's not a particularly noble or endearing one. It's not like he goes up to the HOA and says "I think we should get curbside recycling" and they shoot him in the face because he dropped off some cans at Target earlier that week.

    I mean, come on, Feral.

    I have no idea why you're "come on"ing at me or what your "shoot him in the face" statement is supposed to mean.

    Do you honestly believe that people have a moral responsibility to recycle regardless of the inconvenience, and that failure to do so is justification for social shame?

    Before or after they've said they really wish they could except for the great hobo menace?

    AManFromEarth
  • AManFromEarthAManFromEarth Let's get to twerk! The King in the SwampRegistered User regular
    I mean, I thought this thread couldn't get more pointless, but now we're debating the debate about the debate.

    Recycling: It's fun and easy. Do it if you like, or don't.

    But if you don't, don't piss in my mouth and tell me it's raining.

    Lh96QHG.png
    Harry DresdenQuidGennenalyse RuebenKnight_
  • tbloxhamtbloxham Registered User regular
    There are areas where high albedo roofs would possibly do more harm then good. A black roof is actually an asset for a good chunk of the year up here. Of course the insulation in homes tends to be a lot better here out of necessity so the roofing material probably isn't really a huge factor in homes to begin with.

    For the majority of the country I absolutely agree though.

    Heating is VASTLY more efficient than air conditioning. That's why high albedo roofs are a good idea almost everywhere. In areas where it's really cold in winter, you would tend to get a ton of snow on the roof which would make a black roof pointless.

    Also, reflecting energy back into space (which would actually be done in a noticable amount if everyones roof was white) is a real environmental benefit.

    "That is cool" - Abraham Lincoln
  • spacekungfumanspacekungfuman Poor and minority-filled Registered User, __BANNED USERS regular
    Quid wrote: »
    Quid wrote: »
    Jebus314 wrote: »
    Quid wrote: »
    The way to achieve environmental goals is not, and never will be, to badger people into sacrificing their own interests to further something YOU perceive as more important.

    This is literally what got SKFM to start using a reusable coffee mug.

    Actually I'm pretty sure that what got him to change was a discussion of reasonable alternatives. SKFM seems very pragmatic (by his own admission), so presented with a solution that meet his priorities he decided to make a change. Had the solution not lived up to his priories I seriously doubt we could have badgered him in to doing anything. Case in point, he still will not be driving his recycling to some remote drop off location despite the several pages of posters informing him how stupid they find that to be.

    He'd already considered using one.

    He had not started until people pestered him repeatedly to do so.

    No. I decided to try because someone said that they use shitty paper towels at work to clean their mug and it isn't hard. That lines up with my situation, I tried it, and they were right.
    Multiple people told you repeatedly that it is easy.

    Though really common sense should have filled that gap for you.

    If I say communal sponges are gross, "no they aren't, idiot!" Is not really a compelling argument. If I say "I don't want to deal with constantly cleaning it, but not cleaning it is gross to me," then a response that you don't think it's gross is not compelling either. But eventually some people with a similiar set up and similiar concerns to my own offered practical solutions like saying they bring their own sponge, or they use shitty paper towels successfully, and that was compelling. Arguments that acknowledge the opposing position and work within that framework are much more persuasive than those that start by rejecting the other side completely (as you often do) IMO, especially when you are trying to persuade someone to change their behavior.

    7zh9uu9etcor.jpg
    Chanus wrote:
    It's been a butt come true! I get to work with the absolute best boobs in the business. What more could a money ask for? Kids, aim for the freeloaders !

    @chanus
  • zagdrobzagdrob Registered User regular
    Social shame is a pretty powerful motivator...lots of things receive an amount of social shame disproportionate to the amount of damage they actually do.

    I don't see any reason that should be excused from cost / benefit considerations when it comes to actions.

    When it comes down to it, recycling isn't that much different than littering. We don't have a problem using social shame to shame litterers or people who don't pick up after their dog because - in general - society disapproves. If society - in general - disapproves of throwing cans / bottles / etc in the garbage instead of recycling, why shouldn't social shame become a motivator?

    I mean, SKFM could tell us 'sure, I'm recycling and doing that' and we have no way of actually knowing he's doing it. But our forum here IS part of society...so why not shame him into doing what we collectively see as the right thing?

  • Harry DresdenHarry Dresden Registered User regular
    Arguments that acknowledge the opposing position and work within that framework are much more persuasive than those that start by rejecting the other side completely (as you often do) IMO, especially when you are trying to persuade someone to change their behavior.

    Strange how that is only accepted when its your side of the argument, rather then you doing the same from the opposition's stand point, isn't it?

    Quid
  • AManFromEarthAManFromEarth Let's get to twerk! The King in the SwampRegistered User regular
    Also it's hilarious that the guy who leaves "tickets" on people's cars is in here rustling feathers over "social shaming".

    Lh96QHG.png
    Harry Dresden
  • spacekungfumanspacekungfuman Poor and minority-filled Registered User, __BANNED USERS regular
    I mean, I thought this thread couldn't get more pointless, but now we're debating the debate about the debate.

    Recycling: It's fun and easy. Do it if you like, or don't.

    But if you don't, don't piss in my mouth and tell me it's raining.

    We are being environmentally friendly by reusing and recycling arguments in this thread.

    7zh9uu9etcor.jpg
    Chanus wrote:
    It's been a butt come true! I get to work with the absolute best boobs in the business. What more could a money ask for? Kids, aim for the freeloaders !

    @chanus
  • Jebus314Jebus314 Registered User regular
    I mean, I thought this thread couldn't get more pointless, but now we're debating the debate about the debate.

    Recycling: It's fun and easy. Do it if you like, or don't.

    But if you don't, don't piss in my mouth and tell me it's raining.

    I feel like it is a valid topic of discussion, although maybe off topic. If I want to promote environmentally sound behavior it absolutely matters how I do it. The effect I have will be drastically different depending on my approach. I think the approach that some people in this thread have taken is demonstrably bad, and counterproductive. I don't have specific evidence to back up that claim, but I've tried to lay out a logical case. One-offs like this post are more harmful then helpful is what I'm saying. Maybe you don't care. That's a fine position to have. I do.

    "The world is a mess, and I just need to rule it" - Dr Horrible
  • QuidQuid I don't... what... hnnng Registered User regular
    It seems inherent when you say "you are a very poor environmentalist" that you are claiming that you are in fact a much better one.

    It does. It does not, however, mean a person believes themselves to be a perfect one or even especially good. I can indeed say, with confidence, that repeatedly buying plastic ware and throwing it out to avoid spotty dishes is a terrible practice without believing I am Ma-Ti reincarnated.

    I am sorry that we're not being as supportive of SKFM's quest to create excuses. Feel free to do so yourself to convince him. Me? Around number four or five when it starts to get in to outlandish fears of getting mugged at Target I'm just going to accept that the person doesn't actually want to.

  • AManFromEarthAManFromEarth Let's get to twerk! The King in the SwampRegistered User regular
    Jebus314 wrote: »
    I mean, I thought this thread couldn't get more pointless, but now we're debating the debate about the debate.

    Recycling: It's fun and easy. Do it if you like, or don't.

    But if you don't, don't piss in my mouth and tell me it's raining.

    I feel like it is a valid topic of discussion, although maybe off topic. If I want to promote environmentally sound behavior it absolutely matters how I do it. The effect I have will be drastically different depending on my approach. I think the approach that some people in this thread have taken is demonstrably bad, and counterproductive. I don't have specific evidence to back up that claim, but I've tried to lay out a logical case. One-offs like this post are more harmful then helpful is what I'm saying. Maybe you don't care. That's a fine position to have. I do.

    Explain to me, O Muse, what it is about this post you've quoted that you find more harmful than helpful. Is it the "do it if you like, or don't" part?

    Is it the request that if you chose not to recycle, you don't try to tart up your reasoning with bad logic like "ermergerd, think of the hobos"?

    Lh96QHG.png
  • Harry DresdenHarry Dresden Registered User regular
    Also it's hilarious that the guy who leaves "tickets" on people's cars is in here rustling feathers over "social shaming".

    Space is totally cool with shunning, which he admitted in the etiquette thread IIRC.

    Quid
  • AManFromEarthAManFromEarth Let's get to twerk! The King in the SwampRegistered User regular
    Also it's hilarious that the guy who leaves "tickets" on people's cars is in here rustling feathers over "social shaming".

    Space is totally cool with shunning, which he admitted in the etiquette thread IIRC.

    That wasn't directed at Space.

    Lh96QHG.png
  • FeralFeral MEMETICHARIZARD along with you if I get drunk well I know I'm gonna be gonna be the man whoRegistered User regular
    Because you're acting like one can either "recycle at a drop off point when you go to the store" or "lobby HOA" as if they're mutually exclusive. And that's just dumb.

    No, I'm not. That's something that you read into my post. "I wouldn't do X, but I would do Y" doesn't mean there's a dichotomy between X and Y, it's a contrast between something I see as having a very slim cost:benefit ratio (driving to a recycling center) to something I see as having a strong cost:benefit ratio (convincing my community to set up a recycling program).
    I'm not really interested in the rest of this post, as you've just invented positions you now want me to either defend or reject.

    I asked you a pretty simple question: 'Do you honestly believe that people have a moral responsibility to recycle regardless of the inconvenience, and that failure to do so is justification for social shame?' If you think I'm misinterpreting your post, just say so.

    You're treating me like I'm arguing in bad faith and I don't really appreciate that.

    every person who doesn't like an acquired taste always seems to think everyone who likes it is faking it. it should be an official fallacy.
    the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
    spacekungfuman
  • AManFromEarthAManFromEarth Let's get to twerk! The King in the SwampRegistered User regular
    Feral wrote: »
    Because you're acting like one can either "recycle at a drop off point when you go to the store" or "lobby HOA" as if they're mutually exclusive. And that's just dumb.

    No, I'm not. That's something that you read into my post. "I wouldn't do X, but I would do Y" doesn't mean there's a dichotomy between X and Y, it's a contrast between something I see as having a very slim cost:benefit ratio (driving to a recycling center) to something I see as having a strong cost:benefit ratio (convincing my community to set up a recycling program).
    I'm not really interested in the rest of this post, as you've just invented positions you now want me to either defend or reject.

    I asked you a pretty simple question: 'Do you honestly believe that people have a moral responsibility to recycle regardless of the inconvenience, and that failure to do so is justification for social shame?' If you think I'm misinterpreting your post, just say so.

    You're treating me like I'm arguing in bad faith and I don't really appreciate that.

    Same to you, Feral.

    Because you are. I think people have a responsibility to be responsible about their resource management, sure. And I think that we, as a society use shame for a number of things.

    But I haven't been in here shaming Space because he doesn't recycle. I've been shaming his shitty ass excuses.

    Which makes all these defenses of him quite off base.

    Lh96QHG.png
  • FeralFeral MEMETICHARIZARD along with you if I get drunk well I know I'm gonna be gonna be the man whoRegistered User regular
    Also it's hilarious that the guy who leaves "tickets" on people's cars is in here rustling feathers over "social shaming".

    Space is totally cool with shunning, which he admitted in the etiquette thread IIRC.

    That wasn't directed at Space.

    AMFE, if you have a problem with me personally, maybe you should take it up over PM instead of dragging something irrelevant into the thread.

    every person who doesn't like an acquired taste always seems to think everyone who likes it is faking it. it should be an official fallacy.
    the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
  • QuidQuid I don't... what... hnnng Registered User regular
    Arguments that acknowledge the opposing position and work within that framework are much more persuasive than those that start by rejecting the other side completely (as you often do) IMO, especially when you are trying to persuade someone to change their behavior.

    Strange how that is only accepted when its your side of the argument, rather then you doing the same from the opposition's stand point, isn't it?

    See also: Public shaming is great when used on people whose actions he personally doesn't like.

    Harry Dresden
  • spacekungfumanspacekungfuman Poor and minority-filled Registered User, __BANNED USERS regular
    Jebus314 wrote: »
    I mean, I thought this thread couldn't get more pointless, but now we're debating the debate about the debate.

    Recycling: It's fun and easy. Do it if you like, or don't.

    But if you don't, don't piss in my mouth and tell me it's raining.

    I feel like it is a valid topic of discussion, although maybe off topic. If I want to promote environmentally sound behavior it absolutely matters how I do it. The effect I have will be drastically different depending on my approach. I think the approach that some people in this thread have taken is demonstrably bad, and counterproductive. I don't have specific evidence to back up that claim, but I've tried to lay out a logical case. One-offs like this post are more harmful then helpful is what I'm saying. Maybe you don't care. That's a fine position to have. I do.

    Explain to me, O Muse, what it is about this post you've quoted that you find more harmful than helpful. Is it the "do it if you like, or don't" part?

    Is it the request that if you chose not to recycle, you don't try to tart up your reasoning with bad logic like "ermergerd, think of the hobos"?

    Are we really saying hobos aren't scary or dangerous? Long term homeless people have high incidences of mental illness, and the only ones I interact with (in the city) are really scary and unbalanced. I don't think it is at all unreasonable to not want to associate with them, especially in small enclosed areas with no one else around (which is how the big box grocery store has set up their recycling). And I really and truly do not think it is unreasonable to say that I don't want to have to interact with the homeless just to recycle. We should have curbside pick up, but my HOA says no, and that just sucks.

    7zh9uu9etcor.jpg
    Chanus wrote:
    It's been a butt come true! I get to work with the absolute best boobs in the business. What more could a money ask for? Kids, aim for the freeloaders !

    @chanus
  • AManFromEarthAManFromEarth Let's get to twerk! The King in the SwampRegistered User regular
    Feral wrote: »
    Also it's hilarious that the guy who leaves "tickets" on people's cars is in here rustling feathers over "social shaming".

    Space is totally cool with shunning, which he admitted in the etiquette thread IIRC.

    That wasn't directed at Space.

    AMFE, if you have a problem with me personally, maybe you should take it up over PM instead of dragging something irrelevant into the thread.

    I don't have a problem with you personally. I quite like you. I do have a problem with how you've been arguing in this thread for the last couple pages.

    But I do sort of regret posting that and would like to apologize for it.

    Lh96QHG.png
  • AManFromEarthAManFromEarth Let's get to twerk! The King in the SwampRegistered User regular
    Jebus314 wrote: »
    I mean, I thought this thread couldn't get more pointless, but now we're debating the debate about the debate.

    Recycling: It's fun and easy. Do it if you like, or don't.

    But if you don't, don't piss in my mouth and tell me it's raining.

    I feel like it is a valid topic of discussion, although maybe off topic. If I want to promote environmentally sound behavior it absolutely matters how I do it. The effect I have will be drastically different depending on my approach. I think the approach that some people in this thread have taken is demonstrably bad, and counterproductive. I don't have specific evidence to back up that claim, but I've tried to lay out a logical case. One-offs like this post are more harmful then helpful is what I'm saying. Maybe you don't care. That's a fine position to have. I do.

    Explain to me, O Muse, what it is about this post you've quoted that you find more harmful than helpful. Is it the "do it if you like, or don't" part?

    Is it the request that if you chose not to recycle, you don't try to tart up your reasoning with bad logic like "ermergerd, think of the hobos"?

    Are we really saying hobos aren't scary or dangerous? Long term homeless people have high incidences of mental illness, and the only ones I interact with (in the city) are really scary and unbalanced. I don't think it is at all unreasonable to not want to associate with them, especially in small enclosed areas with no one else around (which is how the big box grocery store has set up their recycling). And I really and truly do not think it is unreasonable to say that I don't want to have to interact with the homeless just to recycle. We should have curbside pick up, but my HOA says no, and that just sucks.

    I'm saying that using the justification "but hobos!" is irrational when it comes to dropping stuff off at the bottle return.

    Lh96QHG.png
  • FeralFeral MEMETICHARIZARD along with you if I get drunk well I know I'm gonna be gonna be the man whoRegistered User regular
    edited February 2013
    But I haven't been in here shaming Space because he doesn't recycle. I've been shaming his shitty ass excuses.

    1) I didn't get that at first. That's why I asked for confirmation on what I perceived as the crux of your argument.
    2) There are other interlocutors in the thread. My initial post where I brought up SKFM's HOA wasn't meant just for you.
    3) I was trying to make an overarching point about how I see individual action as far less important than community action, but it got drowned out by the dogpile on SKFM.


    I don't have a problem with you personally. I quite like you. I do have a problem with how you've been arguing in this thread for the last couple pages.

    But I do sort of regret posting that and would like to apologize for it.

    I wasn't offended. More confused, really.

    Feral on
    every person who doesn't like an acquired taste always seems to think everyone who likes it is faking it. it should be an official fallacy.
    the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
  • Jebus314Jebus314 Registered User regular
    Jebus314 wrote: »
    I mean, I thought this thread couldn't get more pointless, but now we're debating the debate about the debate.

    Recycling: It's fun and easy. Do it if you like, or don't.

    But if you don't, don't piss in my mouth and tell me it's raining.

    I feel like it is a valid topic of discussion, although maybe off topic. If I want to promote environmentally sound behavior it absolutely matters how I do it. The effect I have will be drastically different depending on my approach. I think the approach that some people in this thread have taken is demonstrably bad, and counterproductive. I don't have specific evidence to back up that claim, but I've tried to lay out a logical case. One-offs like this post are more harmful then helpful is what I'm saying. Maybe you don't care. That's a fine position to have. I do.

    Explain to me, O Muse, what it is about this post you've quoted that you find more harmful than helpful. Is it the "do it if you like, or don't" part?

    Is it the request that if you chose not to recycle, you don't try to tart up your reasoning with bad logic like "ermergerd, think of the hobos"?

    Are we really saying hobos aren't scary or dangerous? Long term homeless people have high incidences of mental illness, and the only ones I interact with (in the city) are really scary and unbalanced. I don't think it is at all unreasonable to not want to associate with them, especially in small enclosed areas with no one else around (which is how the big box grocery store has set up their recycling). And I really and truly do not think it is unreasonable to say that I don't want to have to interact with the homeless just to recycle. We should have curbside pick up, but my HOA says no, and that just sucks.

    I'm saying that using the justification "but hobos!" is irrational when it comes to dropping stuff off at the bottle return.

    See I am ok with this last argument. That's a fine position to have. In fact you could even give some reasons why it's irrational. And then SKFM can give reasons why it isn't. This is different than your argument two quotes up where you immediately take the position that SKFM is making ridiculous arguments and should be shamed for it. Seems pretty obvious to me why that would be unhelpful. When people assume I am being a goose, I tend to do the same about them. I think most people are like this.

    That being said I am less sure than I was about public shaming being downright unhelpful. zagdrob makes a good point about social shame being a pretty commonly used motivator and I am not exactly sure where I stand on this. In my experience it often has the reverse effect, in making people more staunchly stick to their beliefs. Especially when it is given in a snarky derogatory way. But I suppose it does sometimes have the desired effect, and is not inherently harmful. Either way it is something that is far to common, and should be used more carefully than it is.

    "The world is a mess, and I just need to rule it" - Dr Horrible
  • AManFromEarthAManFromEarth Let's get to twerk! The King in the SwampRegistered User regular
    Jebus314 wrote: »
    Jebus314 wrote: »
    I mean, I thought this thread couldn't get more pointless, but now we're debating the debate about the debate.

    Recycling: It's fun and easy. Do it if you like, or don't.

    But if you don't, don't piss in my mouth and tell me it's raining.

    I feel like it is a valid topic of discussion, although maybe off topic. If I want to promote environmentally sound behavior it absolutely matters how I do it. The effect I have will be drastically different depending on my approach. I think the approach that some people in this thread have taken is demonstrably bad, and counterproductive. I don't have specific evidence to back up that claim, but I've tried to lay out a logical case. One-offs like this post are more harmful then helpful is what I'm saying. Maybe you don't care. That's a fine position to have. I do.

    Explain to me, O Muse, what it is about this post you've quoted that you find more harmful than helpful. Is it the "do it if you like, or don't" part?

    Is it the request that if you chose not to recycle, you don't try to tart up your reasoning with bad logic like "ermergerd, think of the hobos"?

    Are we really saying hobos aren't scary or dangerous? Long term homeless people have high incidences of mental illness, and the only ones I interact with (in the city) are really scary and unbalanced. I don't think it is at all unreasonable to not want to associate with them, especially in small enclosed areas with no one else around (which is how the big box grocery store has set up their recycling). And I really and truly do not think it is unreasonable to say that I don't want to have to interact with the homeless just to recycle. We should have curbside pick up, but my HOA says no, and that just sucks.

    I'm saying that using the justification "but hobos!" is irrational when it comes to dropping stuff off at the bottle return.

    See I am ok with this last argument. That's a fine position to have. In fact you could even give some reasons why it's irrational. And then SKFM can give reasons why it isn't. This is different than your argument two quotes up where you immediately take the position that SKFM is making ridiculous arguments and should be shamed for it. Seems pretty obvious to me why that would be unhelpful. When people assume I am being a goose, I tend to do the same about them. I think most people are like this.

    That being said I am less sure than I was about public shaming being downright unhelpful. zagdrob makes a good point about social shame being a pretty commonly used motivator and I am not exactly sure where I stand on this. In my experience it often has the reverse effect, in making people more staunchly stick to their beliefs. Especially when it is given in a snarky derogatory way. But I suppose it does sometimes have the desired effect, and is not inherently harmful. Either way it is something that is far to common, and should be used more carefully than it is.

    If you don't understand that Space's argument was literally "but hobos!" I'm not sure there's anything positive to come out of this continuing thread.

    Lh96QHG.png
  • Jebus314Jebus314 Registered User regular
    Jebus314 wrote: »
    Jebus314 wrote: »
    I mean, I thought this thread couldn't get more pointless, but now we're debating the debate about the debate.

    Recycling: It's fun and easy. Do it if you like, or don't.

    But if you don't, don't piss in my mouth and tell me it's raining.

    I feel like it is a valid topic of discussion, although maybe off topic. If I want to promote environmentally sound behavior it absolutely matters how I do it. The effect I have will be drastically different depending on my approach. I think the approach that some people in this thread have taken is demonstrably bad, and counterproductive. I don't have specific evidence to back up that claim, but I've tried to lay out a logical case. One-offs like this post are more harmful then helpful is what I'm saying. Maybe you don't care. That's a fine position to have. I do.

    Explain to me, O Muse, what it is about this post you've quoted that you find more harmful than helpful. Is it the "do it if you like, or don't" part?

    Is it the request that if you chose not to recycle, you don't try to tart up your reasoning with bad logic like "ermergerd, think of the hobos"?

    Are we really saying hobos aren't scary or dangerous? Long term homeless people have high incidences of mental illness, and the only ones I interact with (in the city) are really scary and unbalanced. I don't think it is at all unreasonable to not want to associate with them, especially in small enclosed areas with no one else around (which is how the big box grocery store has set up their recycling). And I really and truly do not think it is unreasonable to say that I don't want to have to interact with the homeless just to recycle. We should have curbside pick up, but my HOA says no, and that just sucks.

    I'm saying that using the justification "but hobos!" is irrational when it comes to dropping stuff off at the bottle return.

    See I am ok with this last argument. That's a fine position to have. In fact you could even give some reasons why it's irrational. And then SKFM can give reasons why it isn't. This is different than your argument two quotes up where you immediately take the position that SKFM is making ridiculous arguments and should be shamed for it. Seems pretty obvious to me why that would be unhelpful. When people assume I am being a goose, I tend to do the same about them. I think most people are like this.

    That being said I am less sure than I was about public shaming being downright unhelpful. zagdrob makes a good point about social shame being a pretty commonly used motivator and I am not exactly sure where I stand on this. In my experience it often has the reverse effect, in making people more staunchly stick to their beliefs. Especially when it is given in a snarky derogatory way. But I suppose it does sometimes have the desired effect, and is not inherently harmful. Either way it is something that is far to common, and should be used more carefully than it is.

    If you don't understand that Space's argument was literally "but hobos!" I'm not sure there's anything positive to come out of this continuing thread.

    SKFM literally gave several reasons why it's not an insane position to have in the quote tree that you posted. If you disagree that's fine, but don't act indignant when someone holds a different opinion. Dismissing an argument out of hand is very rarely something that is done in good faith.

    "The world is a mess, and I just need to rule it" - Dr Horrible
  • Harry DresdenHarry Dresden Registered User regular
    Jebus314 wrote: »
    I mean, I thought this thread couldn't get more pointless, but now we're debating the debate about the debate.

    Recycling: It's fun and easy. Do it if you like, or don't.

    But if you don't, don't piss in my mouth and tell me it's raining.

    I feel like it is a valid topic of discussion, although maybe off topic. If I want to promote environmentally sound behavior it absolutely matters how I do it. The effect I have will be drastically different depending on my approach. I think the approach that some people in this thread have taken is demonstrably bad, and counterproductive. I don't have specific evidence to back up that claim, but I've tried to lay out a logical case. One-offs like this post are more harmful then helpful is what I'm saying. Maybe you don't care. That's a fine position to have. I do.

    Explain to me, O Muse, what it is about this post you've quoted that you find more harmful than helpful. Is it the "do it if you like, or don't" part?

    Is it the request that if you chose not to recycle, you don't try to tart up your reasoning with bad logic like "ermergerd, think of the hobos"?

    Are we really saying hobos aren't scary or dangerous? Long term homeless people have high incidences of mental illness, and the only ones I interact with (in the city) are really scary and unbalanced. I don't think it is at all unreasonable to not want to associate with them, especially in small enclosed areas with no one else around (which is how the big box grocery store has set up their recycling). And I really and truly do not think it is unreasonable to say that I don't want to have to interact with the homeless just to recycle. We should have curbside pick up, but my HOA says no, and that just sucks.

    You can hire bodyguards for your trips if you're that worried about the hobos. That option isn't available to many posters and they still do it anyway. Another option is to hire someone to do it for you at times when you aren't able to.

  • QuidQuid I don't... what... hnnng Registered User regular
    Or just realize that he's not going to get mugged at a freaking Target.

    Harry DresdenAManFromEarthzagdrob
  • Harry DresdenHarry Dresden Registered User regular
    Quid wrote: »
    Or just realize that he's not going to get mugged at a freaking Target.

    That'd definitely be cheaper. :mrgreen:

  • TL DRTL DR Not at all confident in his reflexive opinions of thingsRegistered User regular
    I agree that it's more productive to tackle these issues from a social perspective, especially since SKFM has shown just how intractable convenience and habit can be.

    That really just makes me a fan of draconian measures against the lifestyle he describes as being the norm in his community, though.

  • spacekungfumanspacekungfuman Poor and minority-filled Registered User, __BANNED USERS regular
    Quid wrote: »
    Arguments that acknowledge the opposing position and work within that framework are much more persuasive than those that start by rejecting the other side completely (as you often do) IMO, especially when you are trying to persuade someone to change their behavior.

    Strange how that is only accepted when its your side of the argument, rather then you doing the same from the opposition's stand point, isn't it?

    See also: Public shaming is great when used on people whose actions he personally doesn't like.

    I have not said shaming is not appropriate. It's just hard to know if someone recycles or not in the real world, which makes shaming a much less effective tool. Contrast shaming to make sure people follow visible social norms, like dress codes, where noncompliance is very easy to see. Also, the crux of shaming is that the person being shamed actually cares. If someone somehow identified me as a nonrecycler and tried to shame me for that, I would just think they were a dick, since that is not a normal use of shaming in our society. If it was someone whose opinion I cared about, I would either change my behavior or otherwise deflect the criticism (such as making a show of it, but not really sticking with it if I didn't want to).

    7zh9uu9etcor.jpg
    Chanus wrote:
    It's been a butt come true! I get to work with the absolute best boobs in the business. What more could a money ask for? Kids, aim for the freeloaders !

    @chanus
  • ArchArch Neat-o, mosquito! Registered User regular
    @Feral
    Do you honestly believe that people have a moral responsibility to recycle regardless of the inconvenience, and that failure to do so is justification for social shame?

    Yes. Littering is quite a fantastic parallel to this discussion.

    Quidzagdrob
  • QuidQuid I don't... what... hnnng Registered User regular
    Also, the crux of shaming is that the person being shamed actually cares.

    Well at least we've established what you mean by you want to recycle.

    Harry Dresden
  • FeralFeral MEMETICHARIZARD along with you if I get drunk well I know I'm gonna be gonna be the man whoRegistered User regular
    Arch wrote: »
    @Feral
    Do you honestly believe that people have a moral responsibility to recycle regardless of the inconvenience, and that failure to do so is justification for social shame?

    Yes. Littering is quite a fantastic parallel to this discussion.

    @arch

    If the alternative to littering involved packing up your car full of trash and driving it to a recycling center, then I wouldn't fault people for littering either.

    every person who doesn't like an acquired taste always seems to think everyone who likes it is faking it. it should be an official fallacy.
    the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
  • FeralFeral MEMETICHARIZARD along with you if I get drunk well I know I'm gonna be gonna be the man whoRegistered User regular
    edited February 2013
    Fortunately, most business owners and municipal governments know that the first step to prevent littering is to make the desired behavior as convenient as possible by providing plenty of trash receptacles.

    If there's a parallel here (and, just to be clear, I think this analogy is really strained), it's in my favor.

    Feral on
    every person who doesn't like an acquired taste always seems to think everyone who likes it is faking it. it should be an official fallacy.
    the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
    spacekungfuman
  • spacekungfumanspacekungfuman Poor and minority-filled Registered User, __BANNED USERS regular
    Quid wrote: »
    Or just realize that he's not going to get mugged at a freaking Target.

    Noone said a thing about being mugged at Target. This all started when I said that my local big box grocery store has its bottle drop in a separate, isolated area that has a separate entrance, and the only people u ever see when I pass it are the ones with shopping carts full of bottles and cans, a behavior I associate with the homeless. Being concerned about being in an isolated area like that with the likely homeless is a far cry from being scared of a mugging inside a target. . .

    7zh9uu9etcor.jpg
    Chanus wrote:
    It's been a butt come true! I get to work with the absolute best boobs in the business. What more could a money ask for? Kids, aim for the freeloaders !

    @chanus
  • QuidQuid I don't... what... hnnng Registered User regular
    Oh okay you're scared of getting attacked at a major grocery store. That's clearly far more reasonable.

  • AManFromEarthAManFromEarth Let's get to twerk! The King in the SwampRegistered User regular
    Quid wrote: »
    Or just realize that he's not going to get mugged at a freaking Target.

    Noone said a thing about being mugged at Target. This all started when I said that my local big box grocery store has its bottle drop in a separate, isolated area that has a separate entrance, and the only people u ever see when I pass it are the ones with shopping carts full of bottles and cans, a behavior I associate with the homeless. Being concerned about being in an isolated area like that with the likely homeless is a far cry from being scared of a mugging inside a target. . .

    How many people get attacked there a year? Your local law enforcement agency should have the relevant statistics.

    I'll wait.

    Lh96QHG.png
  • redxredx I(x)=2(x)+1 whole numbersRegistered User regular
    SKFM, what's stopping you and a few dozen of your neighbors from finding your own contractor? I understand there was an all or nothing vote for one particular plan that was not passed, but would the home owner's association actively prevent it? Is there only one vendor in the area? Like, there are contractors that visit all the time for lawn service, no?

    No clue how huge the community might be, and a certain number of participants obviously would be required. 100 accounts for one subdivision around here wouldn't necessarily account for a particularly large percentage of the community/under a given HOA. It would cost more of course, but have you looked into what is actually standing between you and recycling pick-up?

    You could get your neighbor to recycle, and make your own life easier. Hell you'd probably even be doing something with a measurable net good, if it were to become popular.

    This machine kills threads.
  • tsmvengytsmvengy Registered User regular
    redx wrote: »
    SKFM, what's stopping you and a few dozen of your neighbors from finding your own contractor? I understand there was an all or nothing vote for one particular plan that was not passed, but would the home owner's association actively prevent it? Is there only one vendor in the area? Like, there are contractors that visit all the time for lawn service, no?

    No clue how huge the community might be, and a certain number of participants obviously would be required. 100 accounts for one subdivision around here wouldn't necessarily account for a particularly large percentage of the community/under a given HOA. It would cost more of course, but have you looked into what is actually standing between you and recycling pick-up?

    You could get your neighbor to recycle, and make your own life easier. Hell you'd probably even be doing something with a measurable net good, if it were to become popular.

    Considering his attitude, do you think the other people in his cookie-cutter cul-de-sac are going to want to pay to recycle?

    steam_sig.png
  • KiplingKipling Registered User regular
    tsmvengy wrote: »
    redx wrote: »
    SKFM, what's stopping you and a few dozen of your neighbors from finding your own contractor? I understand there was an all or nothing vote for one particular plan that was not passed, but would the home owner's association actively prevent it? Is there only one vendor in the area? Like, there are contractors that visit all the time for lawn service, no?

    No clue how huge the community might be, and a certain number of participants obviously would be required. 100 accounts for one subdivision around here wouldn't necessarily account for a particularly large percentage of the community/under a given HOA. It would cost more of course, but have you looked into what is actually standing between you and recycling pick-up?

    You could get your neighbor to recycle, and make your own life easier. Hell you'd probably even be doing something with a measurable net good, if it were to become popular.

    Considering his attitude, do you think the other people in his cookie-cutter cul-de-sac are going to want to pay to recycle?

    Yes, let's insult him and his neighbors so he doesn't even consider it. Especially since everyone who has curbside pickup for recycling is paying for it one way or another. Just like I'm paying for it by having to drop it off myself.

    3DS Friends: 1693-1781-7023
Sign In or Register to comment.