3 ms·

I'm not sure how this is off-topic, and I don't believe my statements were partisan. I think any rational person would make the same observation. The topic is

• dang 10y ago
  I tried to explain, but let me try again. The further discussions go into partisan hell, the more off topic they get. The thread was bad enough already, but yours upped the ante—if it had any mooring to content that wasn't just political battle (e.g. the infosec aspects), you unmoored it. Please don't do that. The way to be a good contributor here is to help threads go away from that end-state, not get further into it. Generic 'electoral college vs. popular vote' arguments, let alone 'no the Clinton staffer didn't say he would die of climate change yes he did', exemplify what we don't want here. Edit: you edited your comment to something considerably different after I posted this. That's not a courteous way to react to what someone says. Instead, please post a reply, or somehow demark what you've changed in response to new information.
  • downandout 10y ago
    I only added that it wasn't intended to be partisan either, since you either edited your comment (without demarcation) or I didn't see the "partisan battle/hell" comment you made. I disagree that this made it "considerably different" since the other wording and theme of my reply was exactly the same. If minor clarifications that barely alter the wording, let alone the theme of the comment, now require demarcation, HN comments sections will get very long and confusing.