What does “with white 3 tpot people” mean?
TPOT stands for “this part of twitter” and is apparently a Rationalist splinter group.
I really like how he specifies he only does it when with white people, just to dispel any doubt this happens in the context of discussing Lovecraft’s cat.
it certainly is, my dude. it certainly is
For those that don’t want to look it up and are ok with a potentially incomplete version:
Apparently it’s when someone (in PUA context, a woman) says, does, or demands something disingenuously to see how you react to it. My guess is that there are PUA doctrines about how to react and detect this sort of thing.
As is a PUA framed thing, it’s probably a way for someone to dismiss any boundary setting behaviour as gaslighting, which is ofc fucked.
This is how I understood it, when women ‘shit test’ a man it is to see if he is an alpha or not. It is an absolutely toxic mindset which will lead to weird dudes interpreting absolutely normal behavior (“hey Bob, it is your turn to do the dishes as agreed” “No Sarah! I will not do the dishes, you do it you <slurs>”) as shit tests. When men do the shit test it is to show how alpha and not constrained by social conventions they are. or something like that. To show the value of their genes to the women.
But yeah, it is pretty bad that the LW-community has taken up these kinds of terms.
(Edit: changed the wording a bit here, for some reason I started my first sentence different than I wanted to start it, my bad, I meant to explain how the concept is gendered (at least from how I got it, and yes pua stuff is very hetro), no idea why I messed up the start).
@Architeuthis I had to google PUA term, but it al makes sense now.
LW always had a bit of a toxic PUA problem, if you are a bit familiar with hbomberguys youtube (and if you are not, you can just stop reading now and save yourself the time), you might have heard of his ‘what is it with you guys and skulls’ joke, starting from him mocking the weird Davis Aurini guy he actually had a LW account for a while. Sure he was not active for long, but he was active at the start, the rot goes quote deep in LW (seems a lot of the Aurini LW stuff has not been scrubbed), but they always had a weird fascination for PUA stuff, that is also why Scott wrote published the anti-heartiste faq (the who? just a neo-nazi pickup artist, well known enough in the LW community to need an anti-FAQ (and yes he stole his name from the bdsm book Story of O. Very clever, he read a book).
Just like neo-reaction, pua stuff is an amazing rabbithole of toxicity to go down which has had quite the influence on our culture. Without heartiste (who if I understood everything correctly was the main intellectual (lol) driving force in that community after the game was released) there would be no Andrew Tate for example (and this also shows the neo-nazi and ephebophilic roots of the modern movement (There was a period most of them pointed back to heartiste as their thought leader, which is why the anti-faq was made, he was the steelman position to attack)).
What makes this heartiste thing worse is the fact (looked it up) that him being a raging racist was already well knowin in 2013, and the FAQ was written in 2014, but Scott still posted it and talked about heartiste “in a spirit of sincere collaborative truth-seeking”. Introducing many more people to this toxicity.
Something I’d like to investigate is this very right-wing phenomenon of defending granular “freedoms,” like saying slurs in public with strangers, or not wearing a mask during a pandemic etc.
The easy explanation as to why they do this so often is that the boot rwers lack the intellectual capacity to reason about what “freedom” really means and how it’s not a matter of being able to do whatever small atomic action that their overlords, the tie rwers, tell them is important. The thing getting in my way of believing this easy explanation is that it’s kind of heartbreaking to think people can be that stupid.
RE: boot and tie terminology: see here
I really like this question, I couldn’t possibly get to the bottom of it but here’s a couple of half-explanations/related phenomena:
- The simple desire to own the libs. They understand what freedom and personal responsibility is, but also really, really want to DEBATE ME BRO with someone that they don’t like.
- Legitimate paranoia that one day somebody is gonna 1984 them, so they’re morally responsible for constantly pushing social boundaries.
- Virtue signaling, like the post alludes to.
This is great, they think it is a 4d chess(*) move they pull on people. They think it both outs people who take offense and preselects your friend group for people you can convert into neo-nazism. And anybody who takes offense gets to look like a crazy person and leaves.
What actually happens is that people don’t always react to your slurs directly but certainly talk among each other, this will close doors for you and cause people to deprioritize you as a friend. You will just get invited less and ‘forgotten’ by people (unless they suffer from the geek social fallacies, but geeks do talk to each other about those), you will get the reputation as the n-word guy, and people will warn others about you, like you are a broken stair. It also creates a culture of shittesting your friends and regularly testing your friends to see if they match up with your ideals or are ‘good friends’ is a very toxic way to instill paranoia in yourself and reduce the amount of friendships and professional opportunities you have. So I’d suggest he carries on with it, ow sorry ‘his friend’.
*: it is 4d chess, in a sense that he made up his own rules, they are way more complicated than needed, don’t actually add anything compared to normal 2d/3d chess, and by playing a different game than the rest of the world you are actually just making illegal moves which ensure people will not play with you anymore. Confusing a social game for an intellectual game.
E: forgot to ask, who is this dweeb again? Answered my own question: Ow wait it is Putanumonit
It also creates a culture of shittesting your friends
btw, remember how Duncan Sabien wrote about how cool it was to casually hit people playing “punch buggy” without prior agreement, because his good friend Brent Dill convinced him it was good to do
I do not, or at least I don’t always remember specific names. (I also forgot who the guy was who had this epic LW style breakup with his gf, that was a legendary post), but yeah that is a bit toxic. In a way it reminds me of the ‘strong men create bla bla times’ memes and the fremen mirage of how acting like barbarians creates a tough character which can conquer your local Rome equivalent “sir, this is a Wendies, and if you hit our server one more time you will be banned”. Prob also related to early open source techbro ‘say whatever you want with no filters’ culture, which even Torvalds now realizes was a bit of a mistake. A bit of Survivorship bias, if only there was a community of smart people to teach others about biasses. ;).
I do not
‘say whatever you want with no filters’ culture
aka ‘say whatever I want with no filters’ culture
you forgot the last stage of the evolution,
you’ll later find out that people were talking about you, your actions, your words, and that being ghosted was in fact the consequence of your actions, and then you’ll have one last opportunity to turn it all around
- do some self introspection and reconcile what actually happened vs what you intended to happen, and decide that it is in fact possible to create relationships without trying to meta discomfort them for your purposes specifically
or
- wokeism is the reason, so this time you need to be even MORE obnoxious, to filter people out who would talk behind your back even strongester! (repeat from the top of your flow)
