3 ms·
The arguments get very tiresome quickly. There are a million other places online to beat the same dead horse of 'what is evidence, etc'. Keep it out of HN.
by hueving 10y ago
The arguments get very tiresome quickly. There are a million other places online to beat the same dead horse of 'what is evidence, etc'. Keep it out of HN.
- humanrebar 10y agoEqually tiresome political issues are on here all the time. There are also fairly regular (and equally redundant) back-and-forths about programming languages.
- steve-howard 10y agoAt the very least, the political issues and programming language fads have changed in the last few centuries.
- humanrebar 10y agoAs have particular religious movements, but most people don't know about that because they are considered off topic in the news, at work, and in polite company.
- sievebrain 10y agoAnd yet this entire subthread is about a proposal to create a social network "designed from the ground up to be a public square for civic discussion between people who disagree" that has "mechanisms to agree on facts, and tools to create arguments supported by those facts". Isn't HN supposed to be a place for civil discussion between people who disagree? If you write off arguments you disagree with as "tiresome" and "beating a dead horse", especially on something as basic as "what is evidence", then you're providing a strong negative counterpoint to the original proposal - do people even want a place where people can agree on facts and then disagree on the results of interpretations of those facts? Or do they want, as you seem to want, to retreat into their comfortable social network of people who all agree on the same unwritten body of pseudo-facts?