2018 AO Men's QF: Chung v Sandgren

[Denis]

Tennys 'super size me' Sandgren v Djokovic jr.

Chung won their only encounter earlier this year in Auckland in three competitive sets. Who've you got?

http://www.stevegtennis.com/head-to-head/men/Hyeon_Chung/Tennys_Sandgren/

 

[Denis]

I'm going with Chung in 4!

edit: saw some highlights from the Sandgren Thiem match. Sandgren is playing great, aggressive tennis. He's on a great streak. Chung should be careful not to get in the clouds with his head this Wednesday.

 

[Denis]

Apparently Sandgren is of South African heritage and follows white supremacists on social media, stating he just follows them out of interest or something.

 

[mrzz]

Apparently Sandgren is of South African heritage and follows white supremacists on social media, stating he just follows them out of interest or something.

I saw some comments too (that he should be banned from ATP for being a racist), and out of sheer curiosity tried to find the facts behind it. All I found was a twitter exchange between him and James Blake, were while they disagreed he was far from being racist. Quite balanced, in fact (even if you don't agree with his point). Honestly, to tag someone as racist has become way too easy to me.

 

[Denis]

I saw some comments too (that he should be banned from ATP for being a racist), and out of sheer curiosity tried to find the facts behind it. All I found was a twitter exchange between him and James Blake, were while they disagreed he was far from being racist. Quite balanced, in fact (even if you don't agree with his point). Honestly, to tag someone as racist has become way too easy to me.

I don't like identity politics either and I am certainly not calling for a ban. But I don't like it. You would be cool with Federer following some white supremecists on twitter 'out of interest'? Ha, it would be kind of funny as the guy is major politically correct, but no, not cool.

 

[mrzz]

I don't like identity politics either and I am certainly not calling for a ban. But I don't like it. You would be cool with Federer following some white supremecists on twitter 'out of interest'? Ha, it would be kind of funny as the guy is major politically correct, but no, not cool.

Well, I am no Twitter user, so I really cannot gauge what following someone on Twitter tells about one's personality. So, yes, I would be cool with anyone following anyone. I may not be cool with the things people actually say, write, or help spreading (by "re-tweeting", for example).

I mentioned the ban to show how far these things can go, and it all starts with a single comment. The snowball effects just builds from there.

 

[Denis]

Well, I am no Twitter user, so I really cannot gauge what following someone on Twitter tells about one's personality. So, yes, I would be cool with anyone following anyone. I may not be cool with the things people actually say, write, or help spreading (by "re-tweeting", for example).

I mentioned the ban to show how far these things can go, and it all starts with a single comment. The snowball effects just builds from there.

It's poor form. No need to engage with those people. He is clearly 'interested' for a reason, and I doubt its because he is an antropologist.

 

[britbox]

It's pretty pathetic he's being judged on who he follows on Twitter.

 

[Denis]

It's pretty pathetic he's being judged on who he follows on Twitter.

Not really. Dude, you judge people for pulling their pants on a a tennis court. Get real. Obviously people are going to judge you for taking an active interest in what white supremecists have to say on social media.

 

[britbox]

Not really. Dude, you judge people for pulling their pants on a a tennis court. Get real. Obviously people are going to judge you for taking an active interest in what white supremecists have to say on social media.

So anyone loosely labelled "alt-right" is now by definition a "white supremacist"? Tommy Robinson (not his real name btw) isn't a white supremacist - he's against radical islam for sure.

I used to follow a wide range of people on Twitter when I used it... including people with political views across the spectrum and whose views I didn't agree with... it's kind of as stupid as saying you're a Federer man because you interact with fans of him on here.

 

[Denis]

So anyone loosely labelled "alt-right" is now by definition a "white supremacist"? Tommy Robinson (not his real name btw) isn't a white supremacist - he's against radical islam for sure.

I used to follow a wide range of people on Twitter when I used it... including people with political views across the spectrum and whose views I didn't agree with... it's kind of as stupid as saying you're a Federer man because you interact with fans of him on here.

Not sure it's the same. I am also not following Federer on social media.

Don't get me wrong, he is entitled to his opinion, but don't expect it to go unnoticed or unchallenged. People will ask questions. He seems to distance himself from it when said questions were asked.

 

[mrzz]

It's poor form. No need to engage with those people. He is clearly 'interested' for a reason, and I doubt its because he is an antropologist.

Well, my dear fellow poster, here we disagree. First, I was going to ask exactly who he follows on Twitter (something your link on the other thread answered, and BB gave a good comment regarding that above). Second, who else does he follow? What if he follows also people with exactly the opposite views?

I mean, c'mon. We are living on complex, divisive times. All political movements and wings have extremists who say a lot of shit. People follow each other on social media in large numbers, if you look it closely everyone will be guilty of something by association. I guess that you kind of jokingly described the guy as a "white supremacist" in the other thread, and that is exactly the problem for me. It is easy to start a fire. A lot of hard questions to answer and the guy is not expected to dissect the racial problem in USA in a press room after a match. He was civil and balanced in his exchanges with Blake and that is good enough for me. Putting a tag on people based on such little grounds is a big problem to my eyes, and believe me when I say that I despise racist assholes as much as anyone.

 

[Denis]

Well, my dear fellow poster, here we disagree. First, I was going to ask exactly who he follows on Twitter (something your link on the other thread answered, and BB gave a good comment regarding that above). Second, who else does he follow? What if he follows also people with exactly the opposite views?

I mean, c'mon. We are living on complex, divisive times. All political movements and wings have extremists who say a lot of shit. People follow each other on social media in large numbers, if you look it closely everyone will be guilty of something by association. I guess that you kind of jokingly described the guy as a "white supremacist" in the other thread, and that is exactly the problem for me. It is easy to start a fire. A lot of hard questions to answer and the guy is not expected to dissect the racial problem in USA in a press room after a match. He was civil and balanced in his exchanges with Blake and that is good enough for me. Putting a tag on people based on such little grounds is a big problem to my eyes, and believe me when I say that I despise racist assholes as much as anyone.

So if I understand you correctly you disagree with my assessment that its poor form to engage with those folks. So what is it then? Exemplary of a curious mind?

Again Im not saying the guy should be banned by any means, I am saying I find it poor form.

 

[isabelle]

Chung "ll beat the supremacist hopefully...

 

[britbox]

Engage? You should always engage people with completely different views... how would you ever persuade them to change their mind, provide counter-arguments or understand how they think? otherwise.

Give me that before the vaccuum of an echo chamber where everyone nods along to the same view any day.

By the way, I don't know this guy from Adam... he might be a white supremacist for all I know... but it's also a cheap label to give somebody purely on association of a Twitter follow.

 

[Federberg]

it's a tough one. It depends on the type of twitter user one is. For example with me it would be fairly obvious looking at who I follow to get a sense of my interests. Is everyone the same? I don't know. But I don't think it's unreasonable to wonder if someone follows alt right people actually has that view point. As for whether alt right people are also white supremacists, as BB says, they don't necessarily have to be. What was interesting in the article @Denis posted is the conversation he was having with James Blake. A lot of white Americans seem to want to absolve America of racism because Obama was elected twice. Obviously that's hopelessly naive. I wouldn't be shocked to hear this guy is a Trump supporter, but again that doesn't make him a nazi. Just someone who if it turned out they had nazi sympathies you wouldn't exactly be shocked

 

[mrzz]

So if I understand you correctly you disagree with my assessment that its poor form to engage with those folks. So what is it then? Exemplary of a curious mind?

Again Im not saying the guy should be banned by any means, I am saying I find it poor form.

Well, the "poor form" assessment is quite lighter than tag the guy a white-supremacist (as in other posts in this very thread). I would not have even replied to that...

..and it all depends on what "engage" is, because, in the end, it all depends on what the guy actually says or writes. If, for instance, you find that he in fact re-tweeted explicit racist content, than I instantly change sides. On the evidence I have now, it could be a lot of different things, a curious mind one of them.

 

[Denis]

Engage? You should always engage people with completely different views... how would you ever persuade them to change their mind, provide counter-arguments or understand how they think? otherwise.

Give me that before the vaccuum of an echo chamber where everyone nods along to the same view any day.

By the way, I don't know this guy from Adam... he might be a white supremacist for all I know... but it's also a cheap label to give somebody purely on association of a Twitter follow.

This I agree with.

You don't have to follow them though to do that. And I am doubtful Sandgren followed these folks to persuade them of his liberal views. I doubt that because of that tweet on the Clinton pizza story, which is kind of comical in itself.

Also, he is entitled to also support those views etc, but then I think of it as even poorer form. Just my opinion.

 

[mrzz]

Just someone who if it turned out they had nazi sympathies you wouldn't exactly be shocked

As, of course, you wouldn't be shocked to find out that every socialist loves Stalin... I agree with the rest of your post but this "guilty by association" thing gives me shivers...

 

[Federberg]

Let's just all agree that if you're a public figure having such an edgy portfolio of follows on twitter is pretty stupid