4 ms·

If you have data on your side, let's see it.

DannyBee 11y ago
Errr, i already said it's from talking to many people (~100-200 over the course of the year) who have lived there a very long time (in most cases, 30+ years). Given i stated an aggregation of what their responses were, that's valid data. Not sure what more you want here. It seems you just violently disagree, but that doesn't make you right. It just makes you a data point in the other direction.
- waterlesscloud 11y ago
  So you don't actually have data, just anecdotes you've selectively remembered. Noted. Side note- Nice work attempting to attach the pejorative term "violently" to my position. Not that it makes your side any more convincing, but it's smart in terms of contemporary rhetoric.
  - tptacek 11y ago
    This comment is pretty rude.
    - waterlesscloud 11y ago
      Which part was so rude you felt it necessary to make this comment?
      - tptacek 11y ago
        Sure, I'll answer that. First, you assumptively respond as if 'DannyBee doesn't have any data, because you dispute the provenance of his data. But there's a difference between "I agree with the validity of your data" and "you knowingly are arguing without evidence". Then, you pointlessly barb him about the selectivity of his memory. Finally, you deploy the classic message-board-jerk "nice work" rhetoric, which exists solely in order to inform the person you're talking to that you don't respect what they're writing. That's a lot of rudeness to pack into such a lightweight comment. A writer with exactly the same information trying to persuade people of the exact same position could accomplish what you've accomplished so far with just the words: "I don't agree with you".
        waterlesscloud 11y ago
        No, I do not respect the rhetorical tactic attempting to paint my opinion with the the pejorative "violently." It's a cheap dishonest trick, and I will treat it as it deserves to be treated. There's nothing pointless or "barbing" (another word attempting to rhetorically paint my position) about my selective memory comment. I simply do not believe he talked to 200 people who all said SF sucked in the past. I truly think that he's leaving out people who believe otherwise. And it's not a controversial or "rude" opinion to say anecdotes are not data.
        tptacek 11y ago
        I saw this comment because I read all of DannyBee's comments, because they are frequently pretty great. That's a big part of how I read HN. Another person I read religious is 'dang, whose comments are the informal moderator log of HN. And why I'm saying this to you is, pretty much everyone that gets called out for incivility on HN deploys the argument you just did: "my incivility was justified by the comment that preceded it". I'm not persuaded. You asked!
        waterlesscloud 11y ago
        And I mostly recognize your name from comments I find to be rude. So here we are. :-)
        tptacek 11y ago
        If you see another of those, please do call me out. You'd be doing me a favor. Rudeness is a tendency I have to fight hard to try to suppress.
        waterlesscloud 11y ago
        Honestly, I think I'm a little different from your average HN'er on this. And from dang as well. I don't care if you're "rude", I just care if you're right. I just don't place that high a value on civility, though I do understand that others do. Truth be told, I kinda see that to my advantage, since I like to think it lets me see truths others miss when they're expressed in an uncivil manner. Anyway, the other reason I know your id is that you're working to transform the very broken world of tech hiring, and I most sincerely wish you the best there.

Errr, i already said it's from talking to many people (~100-200 over the course of the year) who have lived there a very long time (in most cases, 30+ years). Given i stated an aggregation of what their responses were, that's valid data. Not sure what more you want here. It seems you just violently disagree, but that doesn't make you right. It just makes you a data point in the other direction.

waterlesscloud 11y ago
So you don't actually have data, just anecdotes you've selectively remembered. Noted. Side note- Nice work attempting to attach the pejorative term "violently" to my position. Not that it makes your side any more convincing, but it's smart in terms of contemporary rhetoric.
- tptacek 11y ago
  This comment is pretty rude.
  - waterlesscloud 11y ago
    Which part was so rude you felt it necessary to make this comment?
    - tptacek 11y ago
      Sure, I'll answer that. First, you assumptively respond as if 'DannyBee doesn't have any data, because you dispute the provenance of his data. But there's a difference between "I agree with the validity of your data" and "you knowingly are arguing without evidence". Then, you pointlessly barb him about the selectivity of his memory. Finally, you deploy the classic message-board-jerk "nice work" rhetoric, which exists solely in order to inform the person you're talking to that you don't respect what they're writing. That's a lot of rudeness to pack into such a lightweight comment. A writer with exactly the same information trying to persuade people of the exact same position could accomplish what you've accomplished so far with just the words: "I don't agree with you".
      - waterlesscloud 11y ago
        No, I do not respect the rhetorical tactic attempting to paint my opinion with the the pejorative "violently." It's a cheap dishonest trick, and I will treat it as it deserves to be treated. There's nothing pointless or "barbing" (another word attempting to rhetorically paint my position) about my selective memory comment. I simply do not believe he talked to 200 people who all said SF sucked in the past. I truly think that he's leaving out people who believe otherwise. And it's not a controversial or "rude" opinion to say anecdotes are not data.
        tptacek 11y ago
        I saw this comment because I read all of DannyBee's comments, because they are frequently pretty great. That's a big part of how I read HN. Another person I read religious is 'dang, whose comments are the informal moderator log of HN. And why I'm saying this to you is, pretty much everyone that gets called out for incivility on HN deploys the argument you just did: "my incivility was justified by the comment that preceded it". I'm not persuaded. You asked!
        waterlesscloud 11y ago
        And I mostly recognize your name from comments I find to be rude. So here we are. :-)
        tptacek 11y ago
        If you see another of those, please do call me out. You'd be doing me a favor. Rudeness is a tendency I have to fight hard to try to suppress.
        waterlesscloud 11y ago
        Honestly, I think I'm a little different from your average HN'er on this. And from dang as well. I don't care if you're "rude", I just care if you're right. I just don't place that high a value on civility, though I do understand that others do. Truth be told, I kinda see that to my advantage, since I like to think it lets me see truths others miss when they're expressed in an uncivil manner. Anyway, the other reason I know your id is that you're working to transform the very broken world of tech hiring, and I most sincerely wish you the best there.