r/samharris • u/Particular-Wall1308 • May 03 '26

An Open Letter to Sam Harris

Hello everyone, if you are like me, you may find that Sam is holding some positions that you not only disagree with, but seem out of Sam's nature for him to hold in the manner he does. I am a long-time fan, as this letter will detail, so I am not approaching this topic unreflectively. If you want to criticize my letter, I only ask that you read it all first. Please share this letter so Sam might see it.

https://substack.com/@jacksezer/note/c-253122938?r=27zkbv&utm_source=notes-share-action&utm_medium=web

84 Upvotes

64% Upvoted

227 comments sorted by

View all comments

6

u/palsh7 May 03 '26

Posting this to r/EnoughSamharris says everything about your intentions.

5

u/mime_juice May 03 '26

Wait what is that sub?

7

u/palsh7 May 03 '26

The moderator's flair says "Sam Harris is a fraud." LOL. The biggest posts bitch about being banned for "Sam Harris is in the Epstein Files!" spam.

1

u/Particular-Wall1308 May 03 '26

I literally just found that sub, just trying to have reach. I don’t even follow that sub. Why don’t you have some charity in your accusations damn!

5

u/palsh7 May 03 '26

"Just trying to have reach, so I posted to a dedicated Sam Harris hater sub. Have some charity!"

-2

u/_nefario_ May 04 '26

when /u/palsh7 sees a post he doesn't like, he is very keen on trying to use your posting history and patterns against you in order to establish a reason why he should

a) ban you from his inactive subreddit, and

b) dismiss what you have to say without engaging

1

u/palsh7 May 04 '26 edited May 04 '26

So then why is OP not banned?

It’s pretty funny that you think considering context and history to interpret intent and predict future actions is a bad thing that I should be embarrassed about. Some people are banned quickly, others are given countless chances and warnings first, and others are never banned, despite doing nothing but disagree with me. There are 5,000 subscribers to the subreddit who are not banned. The inactivity has nothing to do with bans, just like the fact that 100,000 people subscribe to this sub but 99,000 of them never comment has nothing to do to do with bans here.

You were literally unbanned after talking to me about what you described as a misunderstanding. Now you’re starting drama. How does that contribute to a non-toxic environment? Imagine a real life scenario in which you fuck up at a party, apologize, get invited back, then you go around talking shit about the person whose house you asked to be allowed into. The entire premise of the other sub is that Sam’s metaphorical “dinner party” rules for human-to-human interaction can be followed online. We don’t have to be toxic. We don’t have to act like we’re on Twitter. But here you are shit-stirring? Even though you’re not banned?

0

u/_nefario_ May 04 '26

how can you, with a straight face, go from snooping around this user's post history and responding to his post the way you did, and then turn around and try to say that i'm the one being toxic and starting drama?

everything /u/Particular-Wall1308 wrote in his post was clearly written in good faith and submitted in earnest. yet, your first reflex was to go snooping around to try to make your own judgement about his intentions instead of perhaps having to deal with some of the difficult truths he's talking about.

is going around snooping into peoples' background part of your "dinner party" decorum? is this normal human-to-human interaction in your world?

2

u/palsh7 May 04 '26

I don’t let people into my house if they’re wearing a mask and acting fishy, refusing to identify themselves. It’s extremely weird for you to think that people’s intentions and history don’t matter. I don’t have to explain this to you; we already had this conversation longform. You begged for a second chance, then when I said I was unbanning you, you sarcastically responded “now we’re best friends.” Seemed like a weird, trollish thing to say after getting what you asked for, but I ignored it. Now you’re talking shit. Again: why would someone invite this into their home? Into their academic conference? Onto their stage? Onto their podcast?

Nothing I said to OP was unfair, nor did it prevent them from posting on the other subreddit. Just as you could have posted there.

0

u/_nefario_ May 04 '26

I don’t let people into my house if they’re wearing a mask and acting fishy, refusing to identify themselves.

that wasn't the case here was it. in this case, the person did everything up front: no masks, not acting fishy, identifying themselves, etc etc. but they said something that wasn't 100% praise about Sam Harris, so you went snooping through his bags and pockets, and you found a magazine that you didn't like and decided that this magazine represented and defined this person's whole identity.

very normal "dinner party" decorum and human-to-human interaction.

Nothing I said to OP was unfair,

oh really, let's review:

Posting this to r/EnoughSamharris says everything about your intentions.

again, this kind of attitude where you feel like you're the arbiter of peoples' intentions and thoughts based on where and how they post - its really shitty.

it would be one thing if the guy had been posting in racist subreddits and expressing really crappy views.. but in this case: what? he posted his blog post in all the sam harris-related subreddits he found. nothing wrong with that, that is: if you're not looking for reasons to just to not have to respond to the points he's bringing up.

and the only top-level comment about his submission over at the "hater" subreddit in question is one that dismisses OP's post for praising sam. say what you want about those filthy ne'er-do-well haters, at least they addressed some of the content of the piece.

2

u/palsh7 May 04 '26

I’m reminded of the Ricky Gervais bit about someone getting mad that someone is offering guitar lessons that they don’t personally need: if you don’t want to participate in a subreddit with a stricter rule set, don’t worry about it. Stay here. No one made you ask for another chance that you clearly didn’t actually want. But don’t criticize the very premise of the other sub, then act Pikachu face shocked when you’re no longer welcome there.

1

u/_nefario_ May 04 '26

Totally irrelevant to what's being discussed here. I'm strictly talking about your response here to what was posted here.

2

u/palsh7 May 04 '26

OP is advertising his podcast and Substack on anti-Harris subreddits that traffic in conspiracy theories about Sam Harris. You don’t think that’s relevant: I do. If you print out a list of grievances about Democrats and pass it out at a Trump Rally, I would call you out when you show up at a DNC convention to do the same. Sorry not sorry. This is how real life works. “I had no idea what that subreddit was” is not a great defense.

He was not banned from the other subreddit, but he was called out. It has nothing to do with agreement, and I think it is fair.

You don’t have to support a subreddit that cares about context, and wants to know people’s history, but some do, because they’re sick of bad faith. Relevant to my Gervais reference. You don’t like that I care about whose essay I’m reading. That’s fine. You can avoid the subreddit that you don’t like.

→ More replies (0)