3 ms·

The parenting analogy is good, except ... we tolerate our children because they are our own. I'm a parent myself and I have infinite patience with my son. But

The parenting analogy is good, except ... we tolerate our children because they are our own. I'm a parent myself and I have infinite patience with my son. But few people have the energy and patience to tolerate and educate other people's children and those that do usually work in education. I can't stand other people's children running amok in restaurants for example. And I won't try to educate them, after all, I'm there to eat and maybe have a nice conversation with people I care about. I also won't try to educate their parents either. If they left their kids to run amok in that restaurant, then they are probably beyond educating. What I will do instead is to complain to the waiter. And then leave without leaving a tip if s/he does nothing about it. Because unless you have a big sign on your door that suggests "screaming children are welcome", then having other people's children screaming in my ear and running between the tables while I'm eating is not OK and I couldn't give a damn about the context that made that happen. Not my problem. And so it is with online communities in general ;-) If you're the educator type, good for you, I'm very grateful that such people exist. Other people are not and think they have better things to do.

DoreenMichele 9y ago
On HN, the mods do a lot of the educating. You can do your part by just following the guidelines, which already admonish us to not engage in personal attacks and to just not reply to ugly comments instead of putting out the fire with gasoline. Following the guidelines yourself so as to leave room for other people to do some educating is sufficient. It isn't necessary for every single member to proactively educate newcomers. (In fact, that can go bad places. It can lead to newcomers being obnoxiously swamped with nitpicky "advice" every time they open their mouth, which is the opposite of welcoming and kind.) I will note that I didn't tolerate my kids. I adored them. I thought they were cute and funny and interesting and cuddly. But, boy, did they have a lot to learn about how life worked. I was happy to talk at them about life, the universe and everything while they soaked it up like little sponges.
- bad_user 9y ago
  HN is the perfect example of a community that is being defended. My account is almost ten years old and I've seen countless of comments and articles being censored and accounts being banned or soft-banned. And before that the community itself is pretty ruthless in downvoting any dissenting opinion. It actually gets pretty bad sometimes, because it encourages the hive mind effect, but if the alternative is the aggressiveness of Reddit, then I'm fine with how things are, because I still keep coming to HN, having given up on Reddit. > I will note that I didn't tolerate my kids. I adored them. It's pretty bad if you don't tolerate your own children. Yes, I know what you mean, any sane parent should adore their children, but note that I was talking of behavior when they do mistakes, not feelings. Invoking feelings in this conversation is eliciting an emotional response that detracts from the purpose of the conversation. The point was that really few people tolerate other people's children. That people don't say anything has to do with politeness, fear of repercussions or simply because they've got children of their own doing the same things. But even so, the sociological effect is pretty clear, it's for example the number one reason for why people that don't have small children stop hanging out with those that do.
  - CraigJPerry 9y ago
    > I will note that I didn't tolerate my kids. I adored them. > It's pretty bad if you don't tolerate your own children. This was a good tolerant reply. The “i adore them” comment reads as a cheap snipe, whether it was actually designed to be or the author was just tone deaf is another matter. On balance, i find it was a calculated remark. An example of toxic commentary yet entirely within the rules because the problem was not the words but the implication. And yet the reply didnt antogonise the situation further. A catalog of examples like this could be a useful reference in moderation.
  - TheSpiceIsLife 9y ago
    > The point was that really few people tolerate other people's children. That people don't say anything has to do with politeness, fear of repercussions or simply because they've got children of their own doing the same things. This is the very definition of tolerate: allow the existence, occurrence, or practice of (something that one dislikes or disagrees with) without interference

DoreenMichele 9y ago

On HN, the mods do a lot of the educating. You can do your part by just following the guidelines, which already admonish us to not engage in personal attacks and to just not reply to ugly comments instead of putting out the fire with gasoline. Following the guidelines yourself so as to leave room for other people to do some educating is sufficient. It isn't necessary for every single member to proactively educate newcomers. (In fact, that can go bad places. It can lead to newcomers being obnoxiously swamped with nitpicky "advice" every time they open their mouth, which is the opposite of welcoming and kind.) I will note that I didn't tolerate my kids. I adored them. I thought they were cute and funny and interesting and cuddly. But, boy, did they have a lot to learn about how life worked. I was happy to talk at them about life, the universe and everything while they soaked it up like little sponges.

bad_user 9y ago
HN is the perfect example of a community that is being defended. My account is almost ten years old and I've seen countless of comments and articles being censored and accounts being banned or soft-banned. And before that the community itself is pretty ruthless in downvoting any dissenting opinion. It actually gets pretty bad sometimes, because it encourages the hive mind effect, but if the alternative is the aggressiveness of Reddit, then I'm fine with how things are, because I still keep coming to HN, having given up on Reddit. > I will note that I didn't tolerate my kids. I adored them. It's pretty bad if you don't tolerate your own children. Yes, I know what you mean, any sane parent should adore their children, but note that I was talking of behavior when they do mistakes, not feelings. Invoking feelings in this conversation is eliciting an emotional response that detracts from the purpose of the conversation. The point was that really few people tolerate other people's children. That people don't say anything has to do with politeness, fear of repercussions or simply because they've got children of their own doing the same things. But even so, the sociological effect is pretty clear, it's for example the number one reason for why people that don't have small children stop hanging out with those that do.
- CraigJPerry 9y ago
  > I will note that I didn't tolerate my kids. I adored them. > It's pretty bad if you don't tolerate your own children. This was a good tolerant reply. The “i adore them” comment reads as a cheap snipe, whether it was actually designed to be or the author was just tone deaf is another matter. On balance, i find it was a calculated remark. An example of toxic commentary yet entirely within the rules because the problem was not the words but the implication. And yet the reply didnt antogonise the situation further. A catalog of examples like this could be a useful reference in moderation.
- TheSpiceIsLife 9y ago
  > The point was that really few people tolerate other people's children. That people don't say anything has to do with politeness, fear of repercussions or simply because they've got children of their own doing the same things. This is the very definition of tolerate: allow the existence, occurrence, or practice of (something that one dislikes or disagrees with) without interference