3 ms·

Attacking someone's tone, ignoring their substance and walking away is usually what I do when I lose an argument as well so at least in that we agree. Taking a

by wfo 11y ago

Attacking someone's tone, ignoring their substance and walking away is usually what I do when I lose an argument as well so at least in that we agree. Taking a position like yours which is so fundamentalist and extreme and simultaneously divorced from reality is admirable in that it is Socratic: you take an absurd position and push others until they realize their own contradictions. But you can't be upset about blowback when you do this since it is intentionally obnoxious; Socrates was executed for being so horribly difficult, all you received was one snarky line in an otherwise long, respectful and thoughtful comment addressing only the substance of your argument, which is honestly far above the par for the course when it comes to average HN comments. I'll agree this conversation should end.

burntsushi 11y ago
> ignoring their substance I explained our disagreement over terms and suggested a path forward. Instead of responding to that, you ignored it and proceeded to lecture me on how "intentionally obnoxious" I was being. You even went out of your way to trivialize my experience; at least I'm not being executed! > But you can't be upset about blowback And you can't be upset when people react negatively to comments dripped with condescension and subtle insults. Do you really think that is an effective way to engage another human? I don't. This isn't me "attacking your tone." This is me saying, "I'm not longer comfortable speaking to you because I believe you've lost the assumption of good faith." Say what you want about me, but at least I didn't stoop to your level.