4 ms·
Instead of responding to the tone, let's concentrate on the merits. For most people, it is unacceptable to require both parties to be simultaneously online in a
by newjersey 10y ago
Instead of responding to the tone, let's concentrate on the merits. For most people, it is unacceptable to require both parties to be simultaneously online in a chat session.
I'm very interested in any potential implementation that allows asymmetric conversations without a dedicated third node (if we don't like the name server) somewhere in between.
- stouset 10y agoOf course tone is relevant. Tone is how one has a civil conversation with another person, even if they disagree.
- newjersey 10y agoAh, thanks for displaying your civility with a down vote, downvoter. Some people are rougher around the edges than others. I thought this place was a sjw heaven but clearly some people want this place to be a monoculture as well.
- sctb 10y ago> Please resist commenting about being downvoted. It never does any good, and it makes boring reading. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- dredmorbius 10y agoTone matters. It's not everything, but it matters. There are people, and/or messages, in which a lack of civility needn't warrant a complete dismissal. They're relatively rare. I'm willing to give a hearing here. Crypto is, for better or worse, an area in which there is a tendency toward both informed and abrasive contributions. I'm aware HN doesn't take well to that. I've been arguing the opposite strategy for the past few days with a friend (he likes tossing bollocks about, I prefer avoiding that). I'd advise ChoHag to tone it down (and reconsider their chosen handle), but contribute. I did consider vouching the flagged/dead comment, but decided against in this case.