4 ms·
While your points are sound, and I can't argue on that basis, I would hold up another "noble experiment" which, for being too forceful in its idealism, lost the
by existencebox 9y ago
While your points are sound, and I can't argue on that basis, I would hold up another "noble experiment" which, for being too forceful in its idealism, lost the ability to change with the times when such changes were necessary to maintain power and relevance. (Yes I realize I'm making a HUGE jump here by bringing prohibition into the discussion, it's a rather handwavy/subjective argument, and as such I can't really expect a change from it, but it's still one that weighs on my mind) Simply put, I worry about the pitfalls of idealistic purity and isolation.
Your statement of "can't give the community capacities it doesn't have" is fair, if disappointing. Perhaps I'd take a slightly more optimistic spin, that even during the "week politics experiment" I _did_ see corners of good discussion even if the net did devolve, and I might have a more holistic view of trying to encourage those discussions for key issues, but that's not my role at this point.
I mostly argue this for that I would be _embarrassed_ for the tech community if we were not both informed and active within the political climate that so spawns all this trouble. I understand this may not be HNs place, and perhaps my desperation comes from not knowing what another place would be. We escape from normal media to come here; but do we run the risk of creating our own bubble, removing ourselves from being active participants opposing even the most egregious shifts of principle?
At this point I'm just waxing philosophical. I don't expect you to change your policies, and I'm frankly content/thankful that you even took the time to justify yourself rationally.