Hacker Read top | best | new | newcomments | leaders | about | bookmarklet login

That's a reasonable stance, though I don't agree in general.

But are you saying that's what the CDC is doing?



sort by: page size:

That's a very reasonable position to have! I am not confident that CDC holds that position, and if they do I am not confident that they will indefinitely.

even accepting that, that isn't sufficient for it to be the CDC's proper role to make such a dictate?

Possibly a long shot, but I was wondering if you knew of any sources of the CDC also taking this stance?

I have a vague memory that they also made similar statements, but I tried to find evidence of that recently and couldn’t find a source. I’d appreciate anybody that could link me to a source if they have it on hand / find one.


Sure it is. The caveat is that the CDC will only be providing information, rather than playing politics but the point is that this is not only ok, but desirable.

Let other departments spin the message. If the CDC doesn't stick to science and facts they'll undermine their own authority (which to a large degree they've already done).


I personally find these principles coming from CDC, against the backdrop of their actions lately, very hypocritical.

I don't necessarily disagree, but the CDC pushing this angle is a great way to further polarize people about this topic and move the conversation further away from reason.

That should be put in the “pro” column when judging the CDC’s actions then?

Not exactly good faith here....

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24293489 - my sibling comment to yours might clarify my opinion for you...

I actually suspect this role was thrust on the CDC because they are generally supported by everyone (everyone sane anyway). I'm not a fan of this having happened because they should be too important to get mixed into politically poisonous debates.


So you agree that the CDC was wrong? That was my entire point and what you challenged me on.

You seem to be trying to squirm out of your earlier statement.


I don't think that is how the CDC works...

They think it's for their own best interest, and who are you to say otherwise? You think the CDC is a trustworthy neutral third party in such matters?

I completely agree. There should be a government agency doing this. That agency should not be the CDC.

Sure, but that is less the remit of the CDC.

I don't have the expertise to make that call, and neither I suspect do you. I am comfortable with the CDC making that call.

Moderated positions should not be your priority. Rather factually correct and defensible positions should be.


Of course there's some nuance to the CDC's recommendation.

Just because the CDC/Government says to do something doesn't mean you do the opposite?

This was, and I think still is, CDC advice. (Personally, I disagree, but I'm not an expert.)

No need. All they have to do is remain neutral and avoid "moderating" at all.

Just because the CDC said something does not automatically make it true. It's a valuable authority but it's not the Ministry of Truth. People are allowed to question and contradict it.


That’s kind of wild. Is there any conceivable reason beyond the obvious that the CDC would do this? Seems asinine at best and pretty dark at worst.
next

Legal | privacy