4 ms·

All right, but the smoking point is not really relevant and the rest of your comment is just emotionalism and insults. If you can't make an actual argument, an

by javert 11y ago

All right, but the smoking point is not really relevant and the rest of your comment is just emotionalism and insults. If you can't make an actual argument, and all you can do is whine, you are just showing that you don't have a rational argument.

rodgerd 11y ago
> the rest of your comment is just emotionalism and insults. > Stupid people do stupid things and the more you try to support them, the more they do it. You're a hypocrite.
- javert 11y ago
  No, I'm not. I put forward arguments and observations. "Stupid" is an observation, a correct observation, and it is not targeted at a HN user, and it is not supposed to motivate an argument by itself. In contrast, the comment that insults me does not put forth correct observations; rather, it puts forth an "argument" that is motivated by being insulting (i.e., is not even a valid argument). Please double check before you call someone on HN a hypocrite. Unfortunately it's a very serious allegation and it's not OK to make that allegation casually and be wrong about it. Technically, you owe me an apology, though I'm not holding my breath.
- javert 11y ago
  I hate to see a discussion become a degraded flame war but I am the one who was attacked and who called it out, not the one who started it.
  - Mz 11y ago
    This is the first comment I saw, as I spend a good bit of time on the new comments page. I used to get attacked a lot on HN, so I came here intending to be supportive. Unfortunately, unless I missed something, you were not personally attacked. Your comment was critiqued, and accurately so. If you do not want people to describe your comments as nasty and judgemental, it helps to make sure they aren't. So I will suggest that rather than defending your right to making sweeping judgements, you try to up your game. And, for now, walk away from this one and let it go. Sometimes, not digging your grave deeper is as good as it gets. /wisdom from the school of hard knocks
    - deleted 11y ago
      [deleted]
    - javert 11y ago
      I was attacked. The following comment: > You're a hypocrite. (-rogered) I responded to that comment twice. First, defending myself as not having made hypocritical comments. Then, somewhat "regretting" that, I made a second comment pointing out that I regretted flaming but that I had been attacked and was merely defending myself. So at the point of making that second comment, where I said I was attacked, I was actually referring to the immediate parent, the one I quote above, not the original comments by DanBC. At least, I think that's right. Anyway, I appreciate the advice, and I did indeed walk away (actually, I did it before your comment---I made a comment stating as much). I comment less and less on HN. edit: This conversation has been disconnected by the mods from the original thread, otherwise I wouldn't be willing to clutter up the thread with this mess. Also, that I'm still getting downvoted on a thread that is disconnected perhaps supports my slight suspicion that I get auto-downvoted by a bot whenever I post. --- edit: here is my response to the below comment which I found, only after writing it, I could not post, due to being rate limited. I'm pretty surprised by your comment here. I wasn't crabbing at you or trying to argue. You said I hadn't been attacked, which was mistaken (an entire comment only consistent of "You are a hypocrite,") and I poited out your mistake. I told you I appreciated your advice. I pointed out that this kind of meta-conversation is only acceptable to me because it has been disconnected from the main thread, and by that I was trying to demonstrate that I am trying to behave ethically. In other words, I'm trying to say "I don't want to keep flaiming the issue, but I think it's OK to have this out-of-band conversaiton." So what is your problem? > "I don't agree but I am not going to argue it" instead of deleting your comment is still arguing it. I don't agree with this. The comment I was responding to said: > Your "rational argument" amounted to "people are stupid, fuck 'em." And that is a malignant distortion of what I said. I think it's fine for me to state that, while I'm not going to offer a rebuttal, I don't agree that it is accurate. tl;dr your aggression here is unwarranted. You come in supposedly offering "wisdom" and trying to help and you just become aggressive when I take you up on that and actually try to talk to you. Giving you the benefit of the doubt, I guess the sentiment of what I was saying to you didn't come across.
PhasmaFelis 11y ago
Your "rational argument" amounted to "people are stupid, fuck 'em."
- javert 11y ago
  edit: I do not agree with that, but I've decided to stop arguing because this has become a pointless flame war. I've removed my rebuttal.

by javert 11y ago

rodgerd 11y ago

> the rest of your comment is just emotionalism and insults. > Stupid people do stupid things and the more you try to support them, the more they do it. You're a hypocrite.

javert 11y ago
No, I'm not. I put forward arguments and observations. "Stupid" is an observation, a correct observation, and it is not targeted at a HN user, and it is not supposed to motivate an argument by itself. In contrast, the comment that insults me does not put forth correct observations; rather, it puts forth an "argument" that is motivated by being insulting (i.e., is not even a valid argument). Please double check before you call someone on HN a hypocrite. Unfortunately it's a very serious allegation and it's not OK to make that allegation casually and be wrong about it. Technically, you owe me an apology, though I'm not holding my breath.
javert 11y ago
I hate to see a discussion become a degraded flame war but I am the one who was attacked and who called it out, not the one who started it.
- Mz 11y ago
  This is the first comment I saw, as I spend a good bit of time on the new comments page. I used to get attacked a lot on HN, so I came here intending to be supportive. Unfortunately, unless I missed something, you were not personally attacked. Your comment was critiqued, and accurately so. If you do not want people to describe your comments as nasty and judgemental, it helps to make sure they aren't. So I will suggest that rather than defending your right to making sweeping judgements, you try to up your game. And, for now, walk away from this one and let it go. Sometimes, not digging your grave deeper is as good as it gets. /wisdom from the school of hard knocks
  - deleted 11y ago
    [deleted]
  - javert 11y ago
    I was attacked. The following comment: > You're a hypocrite. (-rogered) I responded to that comment twice. First, defending myself as not having made hypocritical comments. Then, somewhat "regretting" that, I made a second comment pointing out that I regretted flaming but that I had been attacked and was merely defending myself. So at the point of making that second comment, where I said I was attacked, I was actually referring to the immediate parent, the one I quote above, not the original comments by DanBC. At least, I think that's right. Anyway, I appreciate the advice, and I did indeed walk away (actually, I did it before your comment---I made a comment stating as much). I comment less and less on HN. edit: This conversation has been disconnected by the mods from the original thread, otherwise I wouldn't be willing to clutter up the thread with this mess. Also, that I'm still getting downvoted on a thread that is disconnected perhaps supports my slight suspicion that I get auto-downvoted by a bot whenever I post. --- edit: here is my response to the below comment which I found, only after writing it, I could not post, due to being rate limited. I'm pretty surprised by your comment here. I wasn't crabbing at you or trying to argue. You said I hadn't been attacked, which was mistaken (an entire comment only consistent of "You are a hypocrite,") and I poited out your mistake. I told you I appreciated your advice. I pointed out that this kind of meta-conversation is only acceptable to me because it has been disconnected from the main thread, and by that I was trying to demonstrate that I am trying to behave ethically. In other words, I'm trying to say "I don't want to keep flaiming the issue, but I think it's OK to have this out-of-band conversaiton." So what is your problem? > "I don't agree but I am not going to argue it" instead of deleting your comment is still arguing it. I don't agree with this. The comment I was responding to said: > Your "rational argument" amounted to "people are stupid, fuck 'em." And that is a malignant distortion of what I said. I think it's fine for me to state that, while I'm not going to offer a rebuttal, I don't agree that it is accurate. tl;dr your aggression here is unwarranted. You come in supposedly offering "wisdom" and trying to help and you just become aggressive when I take you up on that and actually try to talk to you. Giving you the benefit of the doubt, I guess the sentiment of what I was saying to you didn't come across.

PhasmaFelis 11y ago

Your "rational argument" amounted to "people are stupid, fuck 'em."

javert 11y ago
edit: I do not agree with that, but I've decided to stop arguing because this has become a pointless flame war. I've removed my rebuttal.