3 ms·
I don't understand this game of linking to one reply in the middle of a thread and claiming "this is what HN thinks." The actual top comment on that article say
by nothrabannosir 10y ago
I don't understand this game of linking to one reply in the middle of a thread and claiming "this is what HN thinks." The actual top comment on that article says "damn that's evil." Doesn't that count?
Hnwatch, which should be a good thing (why not keep a sanity check on things?), does the same. What point are you trying to make? "Someone said something!" ???
- inimino 10y agoPretty sure the point is the double standard. Plenty of people are fine with Facebook doing it, but where are those same people standing up for Wechat's right to do whatever they want in their private walled garden?
- nothrabannosir 10y agoThe crucial missing word is "some". "Some HN users thought lalala." It dilutes the sentence appropriately and shows how meaningless it truly is. Some HN users think chemtrails are real. I saw one of those comments. So what?
- est 10y agoI am sorry for making you feel strange by linking to a similar story earlier.
- inimino 10y agoObviously not every HN user has the same perspective, but there are broad tendencies. HN is not a random sampling of mankind. If product A is praised for doing something while product B is unanimously condemned for doing the exact same thing in another country, it is reasonable to point that out. Plenty of people were eager to point out that Facebook censoring fake news wouldn't really be censorship, because it is not being done by the government but by a private company. Of course, that's exactly how it works in China. So where are all of those people on this story, pointing out that what Wechat does isn't really censorship and that this really isn't really a free speech issue?
- est 10y ago> because it is not being done by the government but by a private company. Well there's term for that: self-censorship.