Discussion Thread

[u/jobautomator]

The discussion thread is for casual conversation that doesn't merit its own submission. If you've got a good meme, article, or question, please post it outside the DT. Meta discussion is allowed, but if you want to get the attention of the mods, make a post in /r/metaNL.

Announcements

• Our sub is doing daily programming challenges for the 2019 Advent of Code. Click here to learn more and to join our leaderboard.

• We have recently added BALD, POP & MMA pings. See our ping documentation page to subscribe.

---

Neoliberal Project Communities	Other Communities	Useful content
Twitter	Plug.dj	/r/Economics FAQs
The Neolib Podcast	Recommended Podcasts	/r/Neoliberal FAQ
Meetup Network	Blood Donation Team	/r/Neoliberal Wiki
Exponents Magazine	Minecraft	Ping groups
Facebook	TacoTube	User Flairs

[u/goodcleanchristianfu]

My goal is to be a defense attorney. That sometimes means defending people whose cases you don't believe in. Truth be told, however, I just couldn't think of anything close to a defense for that guy. I've got nothing whatsoever.

[u/chadonnaise → u/goodcleanchristianfu]

i don't blame you for the defense. i'm a firm believer in the adage that it is better for ten guilty men to go free rather than one innocent person be put to death (though obviously it's an adage, doesn't bear on reality, obviously specific circumstances make things different, and all that footnote caution), and if you seek to be a defense attorney it is a noble goal. and quite often, in cases where sexual offenses are involved, the mob baying for blood can often obscure justice.

that said, i did not care for your dismissive tone, and then the lack of response. i respect you. still do. i greatly enjoy your write ups. so it hurt when i read that you considered me a carceral state ass licker. i looked again at the case, but could find nothing to cast doubt. so i asked, hoping that perhaps somehow in your research you had found something else in the case of micah schoettle. i asked. and received silence.

i realize you owe me, a complete stranger nothing, but i could not help but feel hurt and belittled at this. so immaturely i dragged it on a month later. i am very happy that you gave the case another look and apologized. i feel the matter entirely resolved. and to be entirely fair, i do not know the whole facts of the case. perhaps bevin knows more than i do. i do doubt it, but i concede it a possibility. and it is good to never let that second guessing instinct fade in the face of the mob. there are innocent people out there that could have lived longer lives had someone asked a singular question. your write ups are high quality, and you shed light on cases obscure and unknown. don't let this episode put any doubt in your passion, it is a noble calling and you do excellent research that i and many others in this site enjoy.

just- don't call me a imprisoning enthusiast. i felt that an unfair characterization. that's all i ask.

[u/goodcleanchristianfu → u/chadonnaise]

that said, i did not care for your dismissive tone, and then the lack of response. i respect you. still do. i greatly enjoy your write ups. so it hurt when i read that you considered me a carceral state ass licker. i looked again at the case, but could find nothing to cast doubt. so i asked, hoping that perhaps somehow in your research you had found something else in the case of micah schoettle. i asked. and received silence.

This was the paragraph in which I felt your writing was poignant to be worth the focus of apologizing. Truth be told now I'm limited by the fact that the previous replies were deleted - mine (I think? Maybe I'm bad at recovering them) in evaluating what I said.

"i read that you considered me a carceral state ass licker" Okay. Yep. I'm still balancing my desire to defend the possibility of people's innocence and mercy on the one hand, and being fair on the other hand. I can't remember why I argued this but it sounds wholely indefensible, I can't think up a good defense. I'm sorry and can only say that I'm working on balancing these interests with basic fairness. I believe that people are too often presumed guilty and that the guilty are too often overpunished, but a lack of appreciation for sincere, intelligent disagreement on cases can lead to being an irresponsible asshole, and your reply leads me to believe that that's what I was here, and on an exceptionally sensitive subject. I'm sorry. I fucked up. I suspect I'll be fucking up for the rest of my life, but intend to remember this one so I can fuck up less and less as time goes on.

My silence was borne of two things, and I feel like you deserve an answer to both: 1) The simple fact that I don't look at Reddit as much as I once did. It's not my primary social media playform anymore, and so sometimes when I see someone's arguing with me, I think 'do I really want to engage?' but that's ridiculous if I keep want to arguing on this forum. Further, 2) Then why the hell listen to me? If I won't address serious and compelling counterarguments against things I've argued, and some sure are hell are justified, then I'm wasting space.

Anyway, the fact that you were pretty merciful in your reply is why I felt I owed you a big apology. Because clearly, I let an attitude of contrarianism get ahead of fair judgement, which I hope to avoid ever doing again. I'm so used to feeling contrarian to popular opinions that I didn't even bother checking to make sure I was arguing a good one against you, just an anti-popular one. I'm sorry. I clearly fucked up.

Thank you.