erin

University of Minnesota

usdakotawar.org

The 38 hangings were far from the worst of the Dakota genocide. Lincoln's role was one of reducing cruelty while still punishing those guilty of massacres of civilians. Originally, hundreds of men were going to be hanged, but Lincoln commuted the sentences of all but the worst offenders. Unfortunately, two of the hanged men were innocent, and it's unclear how the mistake was made. Far worse was the banning of Dakota people from Minnesota and the internment in camps, leading to widespread death by disease, though these were the actions of the Minnesota government.

There are very legitimate criticism to be had of Lincoln, like being the sitting president as one of the states committed genocide, or the appeasement tactics to slaveowners before civil war became inevitable. I do not think this one makes sense to be top of the list, as by all accounts Lincoln was attempting to reduce cruelty where possible and yet still punish mass murderers.

For a bit of additional background, the Dakota war, during the Dakota genocide, was an uprising of some Dakota, attacking anyone of white or "mixed-blood" descent. The state of Minnesota had broken numerous treaties and continued to seize land from the Dakota people, leading some to fight back. However, the massacring of civilians and anyone of non-pure blood is evil, and many Dakota who did not join the rebellion rescued hostages and helped resist wholesale slaughter. The Minnesota government is absolutely at fault for the conditions leading to and the execution of the Dakota genocide, but the rebels chose to commit racially motivated massacres of non-military targets. This does not make the later retaliation justified, but it does explain the hangings.

As for number two, I cannot speak to the other commenter's beliefs or intentions, though I do not believe women were combatants in the Dakota war.

Note: Some historians object to the term Dakota war, as only a small faction joined the conflict, while a much greater number did not. I'm using the term as the consensus name for the conflict, not out of belief that it is accurate.

I've used a variant of melatonin for my online handle in various spaces, your name threw me off for a second. Was like, I'm pretty damn sure I'm not melatonin here.

Jargon was an example from an analogous situation, that of someone knowledgeable explaining to a beginner. OP didn't understand you. My contribution explained it to them. You care more about pedantry than effective communication. I don't know what else to tell you. Seriously, find me anyone doing science communication that uses technical language rather than general. I'd love to provide as many counter examples as you need. My point is that your communication wasn't as effective as it could be, and rather than accepting a helpful addition to the conversation, you made it defensive. Again, I'm not suggesting you are using jargon. What you are doing, assuming meaning from a beginner's usage of general speech, is the same as an expert choosing jargon when interfacing with a member of the general public. In good communication, it just doesn't happen.

If the group chat thinks absolute specificity is more important than effective communication, that is, communication that the other party understands, then they can be wrong too. OP did not understand you. My followup with them confirms this. This is a waste of my time.

You're being deliberately obtuse, or trolling. Are you seriously trying to suggest that science educators use jargon? Watch a TED talk. Attend an open lecture. Open youtube or your preferred equivalent. You're so wrong it's funny. Good communicators reach their audience where they are.

Additionally, it's pedantry to the extreme to pretend that me saying "I use deepseek," referring to my self-hosted solution, is incorrect, when it absolutely is deepseek. Yes, you could be more specific, but it absolutely is correct to refer to deepseek in any of its forms as deepseek. Chat-GPT is Chat-GPT, regardless of version. You've made up rules you're expecting others to follow, and the rules themselves are inconsistent with how people speak.

You care so much about being right that you'll move any number of goalposts and define things any way you like just to be absolutely, technically correct. The idea of saying, "You know what, I didn't think about that. I could've been more nuanced," must be a nightmare to you.

Right, which is why science educators use all the most specific and correct terms rather than tailoring their speech to their audience. Don't be such a pedant and realize that the OP clearly didn't know the difference from the outset. You're so concerned about being correct that you fully missed being right.

Specificity is less important than effective communication. If you're sacrificing communication for the sake of being pedantic, what's the point? There's a reason experts don't use jargon when talking to novices, and this is exactly that situation. I really don't understand why you're so bent out of shape over a reasonable addition to the conversation, and one that was helpful to the OP.

I think you're assuming far too much of someone asking beginner questions, and you come off as a bit pretentious for it.

I should hope most people have a reading speed above 2 words per second

Hi! I'm gay and engaged to my long term friend. I recommend holding off on any serious expectations like marriage until you've lived together and shared a bed for a while, 6 months at least. You really don't know how a relationship will go until you're around each other ALL the time. You will see each other at your very best and very worst. You'll get in arguments about inconsequential stuff, because sometimes one of you is tired or cranky or had a bad day. You need to learn how you communicate and resolve conflicts as a couple, not just as friends. My fiancee is my best friend first, and always will be, but we had to learn how we work as partners.

I'm so so happy you've found love and with someone that you're already friends with, but I think you need to be very careful about putting too much pressure on this relationship. It will go better without the pressure, and you're less likely to run into disillusionment when things get harder, which they will. Give yourselves time to find out who you are together before making the lifelong commitment, even though that may be your goal the entire time. It certainly was for us.

Refer to my other comments above. Self-hosting it removes censorship and bias. It's only biased as long as it's on Chinese servers and therefore following Chinese law.

I suppose if that line is a catch-all, sure. Your message didn't make it clear that self-hosting removes Chinese bias and censorship. This is an important bit of information for OPs question, and what I get out of it is a valid and important addition to the conversation. I genuinely don't know why you're defensive. Being incorrect, or I suppose in this case, lacking nuance, isn't a character flaw. I do it all the time.

This is incorrect. This only applies if not hosted locally. I host it myself it has none of these restrictions. If you're using it from their app or website it's hosted in China and must follow Chinese law.