5 ms·
I think the first time I remember having argument on HN from which I learned nothing-- one of those nasty, legalistic types of arguments where the other guy is
by pg 16y ago
I think the first time I remember having argument on HN from which I learned nothing-- one of those nasty, legalistic types of arguments where the other guy is definitely not collaborating with you in a search for truth-- was when the site was about a year old. So it is not a new phenomenon. You just have to sense when a conversation is going down that sort of rathole, and not get drawn into it.
I still sometimes get drawn in, but not as easily as I was before I'd developed any resistance. As recently as a few years ago, I could still be fooled by deliberate trolls. Now I'm mostly only fooled by de facto ones.
- katovatzschyn 16y agoI would wager learning nothing is a trait of individuals and not settings.
- aniket_ray 16y agoI think you're right. You learn something every time. But it may not be the kind of thing you're out to learn. As pg writes he learned not to be part of such arguments. Although, an important lesson, I'm sure that's pg actually wanted to learn something more pertinent to the argument (that's why he joined in the argument in the first place). When we don't get to learn what we were seeking to learn, we feel disappointed.
- thaumaturgy 16y agoWith the implication that there's no such thing as a wasted argument? I prefer, "Never argue with a fool; onlookers may not be able to tell the difference." I'm still learning that one, though.