Don't get me wrong. I love the SGU and everyone associated with you! And I know everyone is approachable during the conferences. You guys are great, and I'm sorry I singled you out. However, I do have a problem with the "Class System" that is inherent in American Skepticism.
-
-
Replying to @SkepticalDDS @SkepticsGuide and
I still disagree. There is nothing different about skepticism than any other social group. And there is no "class" system - people who's work has value tend to get recognized. Yes, there are self-promoters, like everywhere.
4 replies 1 retweet 2 likes -
Replying to @stevennovella @SkepticalDDS and
I have disagree that there is no class system in skepticism. I only started to appreciate that there is one several years ago, after I started to ascend into its upper 50th percentile. As you say, skepticism is like any other human social group.
1 reply 2 retweets 5 likes -
Replying to @gorskon @stevennovella and
This should be a longer conversation. Twitter is limited. I object to referring to this as a "class" system. It has much more to do with just being familiar with people you work with.
2 replies 1 retweet 3 likes -
Replying to @SkepticsGuide @stevennovella and
Maybe "class system" doesn't quite convey the idea. Maybe "celebrity system" is a better term. Or maybe a bit of a hybrid. As for the rest, Twitter is Twitter. I used say Twitter is limited too, but discovered it's possible to have surprisingly in depth discussions on Twitter.
2 replies 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @gorskon @SkepticsGuide and
You're right, "class system" is unfair, and brevity forces me to over-generalize in the hopes that people understand the overarching meaning of my concerns, not that I'm being precise in my definitions and classifications.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @SkepticalDDS @SkepticsGuide and
On 2nd thought, "class system" implies privilege related solely to the family, caste, etc. you're born to. Maybe "celebrity system"? There are celebrities, most of whom deserve to be celebrities, but there are lots of skeptics who work just as hard but never become famous.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @gorskon @SkepticsGuide and
That could be better. But it might be an and/also, not an either/or. Celebrity, socio-economic situation, etc. Basically affordability/accessibility plus celebrity.
4 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @SkepticalDDS @SkepticsGuide and
I'm not sure how you get around this, though. Skeptic conferences cost a lot of money to put on, and the organizers have to recoup their costs somehow. Travel/lodging is inherently expensive, and there's no getting around that. OTOH, conferences aren't the be-all and end-all.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @gorskon @SkepticalDDS and
FYI - NECSS is break even at best. We're just trying to cover costs. Keep in mind - we give away the vast majority of our content for free, but there has to be some business model to make it all work.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes
I know that, which is why I made my comment about how I don't know how to get around the cost issue for conferences. I don't know how conference organizers manage to stay in the black (or at least out of the red), to be honest.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.