3 ms·

Did you read my comment at all? I literally said Trump is not directly responsible for this. And no, I do not think any or even most programmers should be expe

Did you read my comment at all? I literally said Trump is not directly responsible for this. And no, I do not think any or even most programmers should be expected to know how to balance a binary tree on demand.

lacampbell 10y ago
> Did you read my comment at all? Yes, and I did us both the courtesy of not drawing attention to or responding to the cringiest parts of it. Others have provided stories of similar stuff happening under other presidents. Case closed.
- morgante 10y ago
  Literally my second sentence was "I don't think Trump is directly responsible for this" and then you go and accuse me of insinuating secret executive orders. You should be banned for an argument that disingenuous.
  - grzm 10y ago
    Very frustrating, indeed. I'm not sure if banning is appropriate. Refraining from engaging in the future would probably be more prudent.
    - morgante 10y ago
      It's probably time to revive my HN blocklist extension. [0] Banning is potentially going too far, but there are certain accounts which continue to not debate in good faith and contribute negatively to the discussion. [0] https://github.com/morgante/hn_blocklist https://github.com/morgante/hn_blocklist
- grzm 10y ago
  'morgante asked specifically for a reference and explicitly stated they didn't think Trump was responsible. You didn't provide a reference and asked if they were insinuating Trump was responsible. Why did you choose to (a) not provide a reference and (b) ignore the statement that Trump wasn't responsible? Why choose to comment at all in this case?
  - lacampbell 10y ago
    It was a loaded, disingenuous question. It was one already answered several times in this thread. The very premise of the question was ridiculous to start with. It also came attached to a left-wing conspiracy theory. I would have been better off not reply to such drivel - thank you for reminding me.
    - grzm 10y ago
      Other than the last bit where they express an opinion, I didn't take it that way at all, particularly as 'morgante specifically took care to include the statement regarding Trump not being responsible. There are quite a few people in this thread (myself included) who are not well-versed on a lot of the details that may go on during customs interviews. Having references (other than something someone said on some internet forum) is commendable—to me the antithesis of someone searching for a conspiracy. And if you thought it was disingenuous, and chose to answer anyway, don't make it worse: the goal should be to improve the conversation. Perhaps you thought they should have already known about such things, or that they should have looked them up on their own. You mention that it was answered elsewhere in the thread: you could have referenced those comments as well. but choosing to respond like you did does nothing to improve the discourse.

lacampbell 10y ago

> Did you read my comment at all? Yes, and I did us both the courtesy of not drawing attention to or responding to the cringiest parts of it. Others have provided stories of similar stuff happening under other presidents. Case closed.

morgante 10y ago
Literally my second sentence was "I don't think Trump is directly responsible for this" and then you go and accuse me of insinuating secret executive orders. You should be banned for an argument that disingenuous.
- grzm 10y ago
  Very frustrating, indeed. I'm not sure if banning is appropriate. Refraining from engaging in the future would probably be more prudent.
  - morgante 10y ago
    It's probably time to revive my HN blocklist extension. [0] Banning is potentially going too far, but there are certain accounts which continue to not debate in good faith and contribute negatively to the discussion. [0] https://github.com/morgante/hn_blocklist https://github.com/morgante/hn_blocklist
grzm 10y ago
'morgante asked specifically for a reference and explicitly stated they didn't think Trump was responsible. You didn't provide a reference and asked if they were insinuating Trump was responsible. Why did you choose to (a) not provide a reference and (b) ignore the statement that Trump wasn't responsible? Why choose to comment at all in this case?
- lacampbell 10y ago
  It was a loaded, disingenuous question. It was one already answered several times in this thread. The very premise of the question was ridiculous to start with. It also came attached to a left-wing conspiracy theory. I would have been better off not reply to such drivel - thank you for reminding me.
  - grzm 10y ago
    Other than the last bit where they express an opinion, I didn't take it that way at all, particularly as 'morgante specifically took care to include the statement regarding Trump not being responsible. There are quite a few people in this thread (myself included) who are not well-versed on a lot of the details that may go on during customs interviews. Having references (other than something someone said on some internet forum) is commendable—to me the antithesis of someone searching for a conspiracy. And if you thought it was disingenuous, and chose to answer anyway, don't make it worse: the goal should be to improve the conversation. Perhaps you thought they should have already known about such things, or that they should have looked them up on their own. You mention that it was answered elsewhere in the thread: you could have referenced those comments as well. but choosing to respond like you did does nothing to improve the discourse.