3 ms·

I don't really understand why it's so hard for some "internet skeptics" to understand Monsanto is an awful corporation. Every single time there's someone "relu

I don't really understand why it's so hard for some "internet skeptics" to understand Monsanto is an awful corporation. Every single time there's someone "reluctantly" doing overtime in their defense.

tptacek 9y ago
That's easy: the track record of claims against Monsanto is not great. When people proclaim very strong opinions about Monsanto, it's been a pretty reliable signal to me that they're basing their opinions off questionable sourcing.
- plaguuuuuu 9y ago
  It makes me wonder whether a lot of the more ridiculous arguments against Monsanto are actually just memes spread by Monsanto itself in order to discredit detractors.
- Retric 9y ago
  Monsanto Manufactured both PCBs and DDT well after the point they where known to be harmful. So, they had a negative reputation well before getting into biotechnology. Though with constant spinoffs and acquisitions it's arguable how consistent their corporate culture really is.
  - tptacek 9y ago
    Totally fair point! I'm only familiar with the Internet era of Monsanto complaints. I'm sure Monsanto is not a great company.
    - mmjaa 9y ago
      The question I have for you, is why do you always pop up to defend Monsanto, no matter what, every single time? Its so obvious you are a supporter of the company, because every single time there is the word "Monsanto" on the HN front page, I can come to the article and search "tptacek" and see you defending the company, diverting the discussion, using a whole suite of tactics to avoid letting anyone make the conclusion that Monsanto is up to something nefarious. You've been called a shill for Monsanto before. I'm just curious why you seem to be so energetic about defending this particular company? I do understand: you like science. You like real science, real good. But at some point you have to look at your own track record and wonder if, perhaps, a scientific perspective wouldn't lead someone to conclude that you are, in fact, a Monsanto shill. I mean, there is a lot of data to support this fact, scientifically.
      - jnordwick 9y ago
        Questioning people's motives is a big no-no on HN. We try to keep the place free of that.
        mmjaa 9y ago
        We'll .. I looked in the guidelines but didn't see any reference to this no-no. If its a big no-no, it should be in the guidelines, no? Is this something I should just know by experience by now, or am I overlooking this point from the guidelines? https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html I'm seriously asking, not because I want to cause trouble, but because I don't see this guideline being enforced at all except in this particular case with tptacek. Are you defending him?
        dang 9y ago
        It's covered by the guideline that says "Be civil". Insinuating that someone else is a shill (i.e. lying for money) is deeply uncivil. It's impossible to make a list of all proscribed behaviors and if we tried, people would take it as a license to do anything not on the list. So that's not the way it works. As for whether the 'don't insinuate astroturfing/shillage' bit is enforced, try scrolling through https://hn.algolia.com/?sort=byDate&prefix=true&page=0&dateRange=all&type=comment&query=by:dang%20astroturfing https://hn.algolia.com/?sort=byDate&prefix=true&page=0&dateR... and you'll find dozens if not hundreds of cases. Actually I've posted so many of these that my body rejects writing them and I have to trick myself into doing it.
        tptacek 9y ago
        I have a suggestion: write it one more time, in the site guidelines. :)
      - tptacek 9y ago
        https://hn.algolia.com/?query=author:dang%20shill&sort=byDate&prefix&page=0&dateRange=all&type=comment https://hn.algolia.com/?query=author:dang%20shill&sort=byDat...

tptacek 9y ago

That's easy: the track record of claims against Monsanto is not great. When people proclaim very strong opinions about Monsanto, it's been a pretty reliable signal to me that they're basing their opinions off questionable sourcing.

plaguuuuuu 9y ago
It makes me wonder whether a lot of the more ridiculous arguments against Monsanto are actually just memes spread by Monsanto itself in order to discredit detractors.
Retric 9y ago
Monsanto Manufactured both PCBs and DDT well after the point they where known to be harmful. So, they had a negative reputation well before getting into biotechnology. Though with constant spinoffs and acquisitions it's arguable how consistent their corporate culture really is.
- tptacek 9y ago
  Totally fair point! I'm only familiar with the Internet era of Monsanto complaints. I'm sure Monsanto is not a great company.
  - mmjaa 9y ago
    The question I have for you, is why do you always pop up to defend Monsanto, no matter what, every single time? Its so obvious you are a supporter of the company, because every single time there is the word "Monsanto" on the HN front page, I can come to the article and search "tptacek" and see you defending the company, diverting the discussion, using a whole suite of tactics to avoid letting anyone make the conclusion that Monsanto is up to something nefarious. You've been called a shill for Monsanto before. I'm just curious why you seem to be so energetic about defending this particular company? I do understand: you like science. You like real science, real good. But at some point you have to look at your own track record and wonder if, perhaps, a scientific perspective wouldn't lead someone to conclude that you are, in fact, a Monsanto shill. I mean, there is a lot of data to support this fact, scientifically.
    - jnordwick 9y ago
      Questioning people's motives is a big no-no on HN. We try to keep the place free of that.
      - mmjaa 9y ago
        We'll .. I looked in the guidelines but didn't see any reference to this no-no. If its a big no-no, it should be in the guidelines, no? Is this something I should just know by experience by now, or am I overlooking this point from the guidelines? https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html I'm seriously asking, not because I want to cause trouble, but because I don't see this guideline being enforced at all except in this particular case with tptacek. Are you defending him?
        dang 9y ago
        It's covered by the guideline that says "Be civil". Insinuating that someone else is a shill (i.e. lying for money) is deeply uncivil. It's impossible to make a list of all proscribed behaviors and if we tried, people would take it as a license to do anything not on the list. So that's not the way it works. As for whether the 'don't insinuate astroturfing/shillage' bit is enforced, try scrolling through https://hn.algolia.com/?sort=byDate&prefix=true&page=0&dateRange=all&type=comment&query=by:dang%20astroturfing https://hn.algolia.com/?sort=byDate&prefix=true&page=0&dateR... and you'll find dozens if not hundreds of cases. Actually I've posted so many of these that my body rejects writing them and I have to trick myself into doing it.
        tptacek 9y ago
        I have a suggestion: write it one more time, in the site guidelines. :)
    - tptacek 9y ago
      https://hn.algolia.com/?query=author:dang%20shill&sort=byDate&prefix&page=0&dateRange=all&type=comment https://hn.algolia.com/?query=author:dang%20shill&sort=byDat...