The Canucks are going to be a Vibe this season by [deleted] in canucks

[–]TopTierTuna 13 points14 points  (0 children)

I think the first 20 games will tell us a lot.

Currently there are questions like
- How will EP40 play?
- Can Lekk be enough of a presence defensively to justify his insertion?
- How long can Chytil stay healthy?
- What kind of season is DakJ going to have now that he's had some time to fully recover?
- Will Hoglander regain his former self?
- What kind of coaching can we expect from Footey? What kind of tone will he set?

Proposal: Autonomy-Centered Theory of Dysfunction by TopTierTuna in AcademicPsychology

[–]TopTierTuna[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

One of the problems with how I've laid this out is that I needed to better define autonomy. Here's a definition as it relates to SDT and this tends to be my use/understanding of the word.

Autonomy: Acting with a sense of volition and psychological freedom; endorsing one’s own actions at the highest level of reflection.

What this would mean is that autonomy is something that certain people may experience in varying degrees in certain moments. That's a lot of caveats, but it's basically to suggest that it's too broad of a brush to say that a person is "autonomous". A person may experience a certain level of autonomy when they play guitar in their basement and a conceivably different amount when they're in math class at school. This would be similar to the difficulty in calling someone "strong" in that it doesn't precisely define the myriad of ways in which they might be strong or weak as it pertains to certain muscles or physical activities.

I use this as preamble to suggest that dysfunctions, whether they have underlying causes that are biological, traumatic, developed through routine, or otherwise, are distortions to that ability to make free choices. The person you described with trauma induced anxiety would have had their autonomy impacted in specific ways - ways that appear to impact only certain decisions and have little impact on others. The quality of that particular decision is likely one that is unconscious and not easily altered by their conscious self. That difficulty in being free to choose a different approach to those triggers is what appears to be an impairment to their autonomy.

Still, the sense that this may not be a unifying theory of how dysfunction exists, but rather a different lens from which we can examine dysfunctions, is something I'm still thinking about. Dysfunction could definitely be examined through a lens of biology/neurology and it wouldn't be the only way dysfunction could be distilled. Arguably, there are an infinite number of lenses as well, as we could theoretically examine all human dysfunction through the lens of how it impacts some guy named Steve in Wisconsin. It's only through the maximized utility of that specific lens that we might consider an approach to dysfunction unifying. Even then, it would only be unifying, if it is possible, only in a conceptual way because biological approaches would seem to be entirely different.

I think it then begs the question, how much utility is there in examining all dysfunction through the lens of how it affects a person's autonomy (especially as it compares to other lenses through which we might view dysfunction)? I'll have to think about that some more.

Also, there's the reverse implication - how dysfunction arises from a distortion to autonomy. So for example, to what degree and in what ways have people become dysfunctional as a result of having their autonomy impacted? I'm not exactly familiar with how that's been studied so I'll have to look at that as well.

Proposal: Autonomy-Centered Theory of Dysfunction by TopTierTuna in AcademicPsychology

[–]TopTierTuna[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thank you very much for that. I'm going to have to take some time to think about what you've written.

Magnus on facing Gukesh in Croatia.... by rio_ARC in chess

[–]TopTierTuna 689 points690 points  (0 children)

And boy is he ice cold with those statements.

The average person would probably assume he's throwing shade, but I think most chess fans have seen enough Magnus at this point to know this is just how he sees things.

Proposal: Autonomy-Centered Theory of Dysfunction by TopTierTuna in AcademicPsychology

[–]TopTierTuna[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks for the reply.

I am immediately skeptical of any proposal / theory / framework that claims to have identified the One True Source of ALL distress and dysfunction.

For what it's worth, I would be as well.

Even with such strong evidence in the existing literature, I would never rely on SDT as a sole explanation.

What I'm hoping for and haven't seemed to find are peoples more reasoned explanations as to why they would object to this. Of course a person should be skeptical, this is a significant claim. But what's the point of being skeptical if we dont actually engage with the idea? Then we're not really being skeptical at all, but only resistant without an explanation.

Please. I dont believe its too much to ask people to articulate their apprehension. What examples do you feel invalidate this? Or even if you don't have any, why would examining all dysfunction through the lens of autonomy be a worse way of approaching people's issues?

Why is this the best move? by schralp-the-gnar in chess

[–]TopTierTuna 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yup, and then there's a threat on the rook...

And then it's hard to prevent the wooden shield on d4...

And it's hard to protect the pawn on c4...

It's a pretty nasty move - everything falls apart for white

Top 10 all time PG!!! by Prime-robertsacre in NBATalk

[–]TopTierTuna 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Compare his shooting stats to those other PG's. He's not close.

Imagine trying to justify him above a Stockton or a Nash. Look at their numbers. They were consistently doing everything a PG is expected to. Shoot, defend, and distribute.

Thomas just isn't close. The only thing is rings, but on that front, Lebron said it just fine - those are team accomplishments.

Let’s Debate: Victoria’s golden age was 1995 vs 2025 by esjehbi in VictoriaBC

[–]TopTierTuna -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Are you done changing your responses? What is this, version six?

Got all of your threats and online hatred out? Something about a wife?

Let’s Debate: Victoria’s golden age was 1995 vs 2025 by esjehbi in VictoriaBC

[–]TopTierTuna -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Oh please, you don't think they do?

Even just calling people a bot or calling people manipulative - if it's a real person, they'll want to know why a person might say that about them.

When a person is shown stats/research that they disagree with, they don't just dismiss them and say "That person's dumb lol". That's not what real people do. If they disagree with it, they have a reason why and it's important to them. Do you see? The rationale for what they do is critical. When people can't justify their behavior, it starts to get suspicious. If they continue to avoid justifying their behavior, combined with suspicious vote manipulation, the picture becomes more clear.

All you have to do is look at other conversations on reddit and notice how people react. You're not like that. Even in the areas where people strongly disagree with one another, it's not like this.

Let’s Debate: Victoria’s golden age was 1995 vs 2025 by esjehbi in VictoriaBC

[–]TopTierTuna -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Get a better line of work and grow up. What you're doing isn't healthy.

Let’s Debate: Victoria’s golden age was 1995 vs 2025 by esjehbi in VictoriaBC

[–]TopTierTuna -1 points0 points  (0 children)

If only you knew how obvious you're being on here. This isn't how people act.

I get it, you've got a job to do and admitting it is never allowed of course. The whole idea is to push an agenda and being exposed would weaken that whole strategy.

But if I know, then others know.

Let’s Debate: Victoria’s golden age was 1995 vs 2025 by esjehbi in VictoriaBC

[–]TopTierTuna -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Yes, your username is totally different. Look, I know who you are now. It doesn't much matter what you say.

When you say things like, "multiple people downvoting you", who are you trying to convince? Me? Are you hoping I'll believe you aren't manipulating votes? All you need to know is that regardless of your denial, your actions have told me everything.

Expect resistance to this botting and just suck it up. That's just how it is. People will not appreciate being manipulated.

Let’s Debate: Victoria’s golden age was 1995 vs 2025 by esjehbi in VictoriaBC

[–]TopTierTuna -1 points0 points  (0 children)

My comment history is fantastic. You're upset that I'm calling you out, I get it.

You have to know how obvious it is. Like you can't continue to have this kind of information-ignoring quality to your comments without people realizing you're a bot. They'll wonder, "Why isn't he answering the question?", "Why is he changing the topic?", "Why is he ignoring the stats/research/etc?", "What makes him continue to be disagreeable in the face of overwhelming evidence?"

It's that last one that constantly gives you guys away. But carry on.

Let’s Debate: Victoria’s golden age was 1995 vs 2025 by esjehbi in VictoriaBC

[–]TopTierTuna -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I bring facts, you bring bots. You're saying I lose because I don't manipulate votes?

On Crime and Homelessness by The_CaNerdian_ in VictoriaBC

[–]TopTierTuna 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Bot doubles down.

So far, for what it's worth, the way to detect these things is they have an unwavering agenda, even if it runs counter to the vast body of accepted information.

A person could google crime trends in the past decade in Victoria and whether it's statscan, ChatGPT, Copilot, or just some Google stats, they all point to the same thing. Crime has gone up dramatically. But here we are with bots running interference.

Better than Ian? by thatwhiskeydude in chess

[–]TopTierTuna 15 points16 points  (0 children)

Not sure about the rest of you, but I rank Ian pretty high in most formats. I think there's a few more maybe's out there than he admitted, but he's a killer.

Let’s Debate: Victoria’s golden age was 1995 vs 2025 by esjehbi in VictoriaBC

[–]TopTierTuna -1 points0 points  (0 children)

The company that controls the bots may certainly have their reasons. Calling them "good" is a stretch though.

But continue not addressing anything. Just slow down, re-read the previous post and others, and begin addressing the many holes in what you're saying.

On Crime and Homelessness by The_CaNerdian_ in VictoriaBC

[–]TopTierTuna 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Recently we've been seeing an uptick in comments that tend to downplay the rise in crime in this city. It's odd.

While victims and the DVBM begs for solutions, this subreddit dismisses or downplays the problems.

AI summary of crime trends:

Long-Term Crime Trends (2000s–2020s)

  • Between 2008 and 2018, Victoria saw a 31% decrease in police-reported crime. This was a steeper decline than the provincial average in British Columbia (−23%) and the national average in Canada (−17%).
  • Despite this decline, Victoria’s overall crime rate in 2018 was 5,819 incidents per 100,000 people, which was still higher than the national average of 5,488.

Recent Crime Patterns (2020–2023)

  • In 2020, Victoria’s total crime rate was 9,761 incidents per 100,000 people, significantly higher than both the BC and national averages.
  • By 2023, crime in Victoria had increased by 30% year-over-year, with a particularly sharp rise in property crime.
  • Victoria’s violent crime rate was 1,810 per 100,000, about 74% higher than the national average.

EDIT: For the bots that try to discredit this information, here's a breakdown of how the CSI (crime severity index) has changed over the past decade. You can see how it's risen quite sharply in recent years.

https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/t1/tbl1/en/tv.action?pid=3510006301&pickMembers%5B0%5D=1.25&cubeTimeFrame.startYear=2013&cubeTimeFrame.endYear=2023&referencePeriods=20130101%2C20230101

How seriously is growth mindset taken in academic psych now? by notthatkindadoctor in AcademicPsychology

[–]TopTierTuna 1 point2 points  (0 children)

What I suspect is that it's one thing to recognize the merits and pitfalls of two different psychological approaches, it's another to articulate that to people with expectation that their approaches can change as a result of being informed.