3 ms·

I'm pretty sure that attitude is called "paternalism". Self-regulation works better when it's self-directed, as opposed to other-directed (as in, someone else d

by pfooti 11y ago

I'm pretty sure that attitude is called "paternalism". Self-regulation works better when it's self-directed, as opposed to other-directed (as in, someone else doing the regulation). `I shouldn't do ${foo} because people will make fun of me` is a horrible attitude to foist on anyone else, and anyone who tries to propagate that attitude isn't helping the community at all.

TickleSteve 11y ago
'self' here is the wider HN community... hence the 'self' regulation.
- pfooti 11y ago
  I kind of disagree with your central claim that this is going on. But that's my sociologist head rearing up. There is, of course, a "wider HN community", but that's probably the community of people talking about the appropriate use of downvote as disagree, or whether we should have a blackband for so-and-so reason. Communities are defined by shared experience, values, and goals. The community in question here is much more of a javascript dev community, and we can see the culture clash between them and the java, c, python communities throughout all these left-pad threads. So, I maintain: this is an attempt at other-regulation, namely people who are by-and-large not active parts of the javascript dev community making fun of the punchbag-of-the-week. I'm just cautious any time someone frames an outright attack (and make no mistake, these are attacks) as "for your own good". It rarely is.
TeMPOraL 11y ago
> `I shouldn't do ${foo} because people will make fun of me...` `... but why are they laughing from ${foo} in the first place? They're smart people, so there might be a reason. Let me research it more first...`. This is how self-regulation works.
- pfooti 11y ago
  I think there's a fundamental difference between, say [0] (thoughtful, nuanced), and [1] (just plain silly). The initial posts are all worthwhile and interesting, with the latter clearly being satire. It would be even funnier if the OP exposed a more robust string-handling library from ruby or python to the javascript runtime in node by way of a native lib binding. [2] is kind of just elitist, "get off my lawn" yelling, which misses the point fundamentally in this problem. There are different flavors of comments on these threads. Some are pretty cogent and thoughtful. Others aren't. A "sky is falling augh, isArray is one line, javascript devs are teh worst" misses the underlying problem of javascript being addressed (interpreter fragmentation, not having a reliable way to test if something is an array on older platforms). I'd argue it doesn't contribute at all to the improvement (metacognitive or otherwise) of any javascript dev, but instead serves to harden people's opinions on one side or another of a mythical line. The difference is whether the goal is to contribute to the discourse or just go for the shallow laughs. It's an important difference, because the former does lead to improvement all around, whereas the latter leads to high-fives and community decay. 0: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11352704 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11352704 1: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11350651 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11350651 2: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11348798 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11348798
  - pdkl95 11y ago
    There is another aspect that is worth considering: when someone is doing something particularly "stupid", this "stupidity" often isn't seen by the actor. Their self analysis can sometimes correct itself over time, but the usual biases can interfere. The point is it is far too easy to fall into really bad habits while blind to just how bad everyone else sees those habits. While I'm speaking about a somewhat more general pattern of behavior, a very closely related phenomena is the "normalization of deviance"[1]. Part of the problem is that without an outside assessment, the actor isn't really working with accurate information. Criticism can be a way of giving that data. Quality "constructive criticism" is great, but the message is sometimes ignored or avoided. In those cases, a harsher criticism - and possibly a bit insulting - is necessary to convey both the severity of the situation and to get the recipients attention. This is where some of what you cal "'get off my lawn' yelling" is about. Sometimes we've seen these mistakes before, and we've tried being patient and nice; when that didn't work, the occasional "get off my lawn" may be appropriate. As others have said, this how a community self-corrects; when someone is being "stupid", they need to know that. They certainly aren't going to change without this necessary information. Now I'll certainly agree that there is a very fine line here, and as long as fallible humans are involved mistakes will be made. I've certainly made mistakes in this area in the past. However, avoiding problems is not the answer, as unfixed small problems tend to become larger problems in the future. [1] http://www.rapp.org/archives/2015/12/normalization-of-deviance/ http://www.rapp.org/archives/2015/12/normalization-of-devian...

by pfooti 11y ago

TickleSteve 11y ago

'self' here is the wider HN community... hence the 'self' regulation.

pfooti 11y ago
I kind of disagree with your central claim that this is going on. But that's my sociologist head rearing up. There is, of course, a "wider HN community", but that's probably the community of people talking about the appropriate use of downvote as disagree, or whether we should have a blackband for so-and-so reason. Communities are defined by shared experience, values, and goals. The community in question here is much more of a javascript dev community, and we can see the culture clash between them and the java, c, python communities throughout all these left-pad threads. So, I maintain: this is an attempt at other-regulation, namely people who are by-and-large not active parts of the javascript dev community making fun of the punchbag-of-the-week. I'm just cautious any time someone frames an outright attack (and make no mistake, these are attacks) as "for your own good". It rarely is.

TeMPOraL 11y ago

> `I shouldn't do ${foo} because people will make fun of me...` `... but why are they laughing from ${foo} in the first place? They're smart people, so there might be a reason. Let me research it more first...`. This is how self-regulation works.

pfooti 11y ago
I think there's a fundamental difference between, say [0] (thoughtful, nuanced), and [1] (just plain silly). The initial posts are all worthwhile and interesting, with the latter clearly being satire. It would be even funnier if the OP exposed a more robust string-handling library from ruby or python to the javascript runtime in node by way of a native lib binding. [2] is kind of just elitist, "get off my lawn" yelling, which misses the point fundamentally in this problem. There are different flavors of comments on these threads. Some are pretty cogent and thoughtful. Others aren't. A "sky is falling augh, isArray is one line, javascript devs are teh worst" misses the underlying problem of javascript being addressed (interpreter fragmentation, not having a reliable way to test if something is an array on older platforms). I'd argue it doesn't contribute at all to the improvement (metacognitive or otherwise) of any javascript dev, but instead serves to harden people's opinions on one side or another of a mythical line. The difference is whether the goal is to contribute to the discourse or just go for the shallow laughs. It's an important difference, because the former does lead to improvement all around, whereas the latter leads to high-fives and community decay. 0: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11352704 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11352704 1: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11350651 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11350651 2: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11348798 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11348798
- pdkl95 11y ago
  There is another aspect that is worth considering: when someone is doing something particularly "stupid", this "stupidity" often isn't seen by the actor. Their self analysis can sometimes correct itself over time, but the usual biases can interfere. The point is it is far too easy to fall into really bad habits while blind to just how bad everyone else sees those habits. While I'm speaking about a somewhat more general pattern of behavior, a very closely related phenomena is the "normalization of deviance"[1]. Part of the problem is that without an outside assessment, the actor isn't really working with accurate information. Criticism can be a way of giving that data. Quality "constructive criticism" is great, but the message is sometimes ignored or avoided. In those cases, a harsher criticism - and possibly a bit insulting - is necessary to convey both the severity of the situation and to get the recipients attention. This is where some of what you cal "'get off my lawn' yelling" is about. Sometimes we've seen these mistakes before, and we've tried being patient and nice; when that didn't work, the occasional "get off my lawn" may be appropriate. As others have said, this how a community self-corrects; when someone is being "stupid", they need to know that. They certainly aren't going to change without this necessary information. Now I'll certainly agree that there is a very fine line here, and as long as fallible humans are involved mistakes will be made. I've certainly made mistakes in this area in the past. However, avoiding problems is not the answer, as unfixed small problems tend to become larger problems in the future. [1] http://www.rapp.org/archives/2015/12/normalization-of-deviance/ http://www.rapp.org/archives/2015/12/normalization-of-devian...