> Your hundreds of comments on this ... You know, starting out with a wild exaggeration, an "alternative fact," undermines your otherwise meritorious point. >

> Your hundreds of comments on this ... You know, starting out with a wild exaggeration, an "alternative fact," undermines your otherwise meritorious point. > ... I need to ask you to stop using HN this way. In what way -- conversations about psychology? On what basis? HN regulars often post links to psychology articles -- people don't complain about that (and IMHO they shouldn't, because most are newsworthy). And by definition, comments about those articles are as topical as the articles themselves. Also, I never originate exchanges about psychology, I only respond to threads introduced/posted by others. If psychology were never an established topic here, I would never address it. This means you're objecting to a particular viewpoint on the topic, not the topic itself. > We all respect your fabulous software work, but HN threads are for conversation. Indeed they are. Case in point -- this conversation. Solely for balance you might consider objecting to the large number of psychology articles posted here. I'm not recommending this -- I only say this to try to get you to examine your position.