4 ms·

Obviously Ian was not thinking rationally, which is precisely why his tweets needed -- and would have received -- attention. He was part of this community. He

Obviously Ian was not thinking rationally, which is precisely why his tweets needed -- and would have received -- attention. He was part of this community. He was in crisis and it was obvious. People would have wanted to help. You don't talk someone down from a ledge by turning your back on them. That's all I'll say on the matter.

jacquesm 11y ago
> Obviously Ian was not thinking rationally, which is precisely why the post about his tweets needed -- and would have received -- attention. You don't know that for sure so you can't make the link. All I note is that you didn't do anything when it mattered and now you're quick with the knife of blame. > He was part of this community. So are you, and yet, if you posted a bunch of stuff on Twitter about how you were going to kill yourself and ask for having that posted on HN it would neither be the appropriate venue nor would it be productive to have your inner mental health discussed ad nauseam by strangers. Trying to rebuild your reputation afterwards would have been a lot harder because those HN discussions tend to hang around just about forever, long after you came to your senses again. > He was in crisis and it was obvious. People would have wanted to help. So, who were those people that would have wanted to help? I don't see anybody here saying that if they had heard about this in time through HN they would have hopped over to Ians place to stop him from doing his deed. You really just keep on adding speculation and claiming it is factual. > You don't talk someone down from a ledge by turning your back on them. Well, you don't talk someone down from a ledge either by standing on the ground next to the fallen body and blaming random bystanders who - conveniently - decided to stop the public discussion of the persons mental state as though that is some kind of spectator sport. > That's all I'll say on the matter. You felt the need to start this subthread, it is interesting that you should choose to bow out of it now, it would have been better if you had not said anything at all. If the facts of the case interest you this zdnet article seems to be the most informed: http://www.zdnet.com/article/debian-linux-founder-ian-murdock-dies-at-42-cause-unknown/ http://www.zdnet.com/article/debian-linux-founder-ian-murdoc... It does not in any way shape or form list a lack of HN involvement as a contributing cause of death.
- stefantalpalaru 11y ago
  > nor would it be productive Not everything is about productivity.
- angelo 11y ago
  Cold as the Netherlands, bro. You're fucking up Ian in defense of Dan. Who runs this place?
  - jacquesm 11y ago
    I'm not 'fucking up' anybody. Get lost.
    - angelo 11y ago
      Nope. I was here first. You are a suit and this place is run by suits. A man is dead because a fucking PC techno-fascist censored a thread when a hacker desperately needed his community.
      - jacquesm 11y ago
        Suit : anybody I don't like. For the record: I've never in my life worn a suit and there is absolutely nobody dead because 'a fucking PC techno-facist censored a thread'. Just like edw519 isn't responsible for Aaron Swartz killing himself neither is DanG responsible for Ian Murdock. You and all the other backseat drivers in this thread that have never in their lives had a visible and public role should take a hike. Remember: it was precisely the sort of harrassment that Ian Murdock had to sustain that eventually caused him to flip, there is quite a bit of evidence that one of the catalysts in this whole saga is that someone kept on railing on debian. DanG has taken exceptional risk in being publicly visible as the moderator of HN, he does so in an incredibly transparent fashion, comments on when and why decisions of all kinds are made and is working extremely hard to make HN a better place. To see a bunch of assholes use any and all opportunity to second guess the decisions and to make personal attacks including yours is proof positive that no good deed will go unpunished. Your 'prior presence' does not excuse you from this deplorable behavior, you're just another lurker and an anonymous coward to me, your account creation date has fuck all to do with your degree of involvement in HN. And if you really believe this place is run by suits and techno facists then you probably don't want any part of this anyway.

jacquesm 11y ago

> Obviously Ian was not thinking rationally, which is precisely why the post about his tweets needed -- and would have received -- attention. You don't know that for sure so you can't make the link. All I note is that you didn't do anything when it mattered and now you're quick with the knife of blame. > He was part of this community. So are you, and yet, if you posted a bunch of stuff on Twitter about how you were going to kill yourself and ask for having that posted on HN it would neither be the appropriate venue nor would it be productive to have your inner mental health discussed ad nauseam by strangers. Trying to rebuild your reputation afterwards would have been a lot harder because those HN discussions tend to hang around just about forever, long after you came to your senses again. > He was in crisis and it was obvious. People would have wanted to help. So, who were those people that would have wanted to help? I don't see anybody here saying that if they had heard about this in time through HN they would have hopped over to Ians place to stop him from doing his deed. You really just keep on adding speculation and claiming it is factual. > You don't talk someone down from a ledge by turning your back on them. Well, you don't talk someone down from a ledge either by standing on the ground next to the fallen body and blaming random bystanders who - conveniently - decided to stop the public discussion of the persons mental state as though that is some kind of spectator sport. > That's all I'll say on the matter. You felt the need to start this subthread, it is interesting that you should choose to bow out of it now, it would have been better if you had not said anything at all. If the facts of the case interest you this zdnet article seems to be the most informed: http://www.zdnet.com/article/debian-linux-founder-ian-murdock-dies-at-42-cause-unknown/ http://www.zdnet.com/article/debian-linux-founder-ian-murdoc... It does not in any way shape or form list a lack of HN involvement as a contributing cause of death.

stefantalpalaru 11y ago
> nor would it be productive Not everything is about productivity.
angelo 11y ago
Cold as the Netherlands, bro. You're fucking up Ian in defense of Dan. Who runs this place?
- jacquesm 11y ago
  I'm not 'fucking up' anybody. Get lost.
  - angelo 11y ago
    Nope. I was here first. You are a suit and this place is run by suits. A man is dead because a fucking PC techno-fascist censored a thread when a hacker desperately needed his community.
    - jacquesm 11y ago
      Suit : anybody I don't like. For the record: I've never in my life worn a suit and there is absolutely nobody dead because 'a fucking PC techno-facist censored a thread'. Just like edw519 isn't responsible for Aaron Swartz killing himself neither is DanG responsible for Ian Murdock. You and all the other backseat drivers in this thread that have never in their lives had a visible and public role should take a hike. Remember: it was precisely the sort of harrassment that Ian Murdock had to sustain that eventually caused him to flip, there is quite a bit of evidence that one of the catalysts in this whole saga is that someone kept on railing on debian. DanG has taken exceptional risk in being publicly visible as the moderator of HN, he does so in an incredibly transparent fashion, comments on when and why decisions of all kinds are made and is working extremely hard to make HN a better place. To see a bunch of assholes use any and all opportunity to second guess the decisions and to make personal attacks including yours is proof positive that no good deed will go unpunished. Your 'prior presence' does not excuse you from this deplorable behavior, you're just another lurker and an anonymous coward to me, your account creation date has fuck all to do with your degree of involvement in HN. And if you really believe this place is run by suits and techno facists then you probably don't want any part of this anyway.