5 ms·

Easily the most controversial thing I've ever written, but I'll stand up and be accounted for in my errors. I write once daily, every day, and I write honestly.

Easily the most controversial thing I've ever written, but I'll stand up and be accounted for in my errors. I write once daily, every day, and I write honestly. Here, the mistake I made was not filtering my thought by another person who could feel ill because of it. I will explain my line of thinking, which does not excuse the large gaffe I made, but perhaps so people can understand my thinking. I've met a book editor, a literary agent, a prominent researcher, and other notable people through my writing on my site. I am four months into blogging, and getting the feel for what is right and good for decorum when discussing publicly with discussing others is tricky. I shared no information that wasn't public knowledge, I broke no confidence, and I shared what I was thinking, in a way I believed would be constructive. The community has mixed feelings over that. For the record, I did not expect the piece to be so popular, nor for it to have such a negative reaction. I misjudged. A prominent, very good member here and I shared a few emails when this was happening. He condemned me strongly, and I listen to that - random people saying hateful things I don't notice, but good arguments from good people I do. In the end, he recommended "One thing you could do is to email Paul Graham to ask him to kill your post, to explain why and then remove the article from your blog. I think the damage to your reputation would be minimized that way." I will not look to preserve my reputation here - I have presented what I thought, it was my honest and well-intentioned thought, but I did it carelessly. A few hours ago, I emailed patio and told him I would edit, delete, amend, or otherwise follow his instructions if he preferred. I still will; I will respect his wishes. John - I'm going to respect Patio's wishes, whatever he wishes, and try not to make this into a larger spectacle. We have had some (always civil) disagreements in the past, but I would ask you do the same. Going forwards, I will learn from this error, and be more cautious and tactful in the discussion of other people. For my part, I hold no ill will for people, even ones who said horrible things, and my door is still always open to people who need a hand. I'll lay low for a while, and be more tactful going forwards. If anyone feels harmed or like this is a less safe space for them, you have my apologies, and I will be more cautious and tactful going forwards.

swombat 16y ago
Relax. A month from now this will be forgotten. What am I saying, a month? A few days from now it will be forgotten. What scrolls off the front page scrolls out of the present into ancient history.
- kyro 16y ago
  I almost did up until this submission. Flagged, in any case.
  - sprout 16y ago
    While I agree that the post was inappropriate, I don't agree that the post was inappropriate by HN's standards. (And I think flagging based on personal standards rather than HN's standards is not the way to go.)
    - jacquesm 16y ago
      HN standards are the combined standards of all participants, if we had objective criteria for voting and flagging we wouldn't need those user interface components on all those pages, just a few would suffice. Everybody gets to apply their personal criteria moulded to whatever they think is best for HN, with the guidelines at the back of your mind. So, what I think is 'appropriate' for HN may be quite different from what you think is 'appropriate', if the moderator(s) agree what you flagged will be removed if not tough luck, maybe better next time.
lhorie 16y ago
Generally speaking, it's more agreeable to read about things the author has done than things they have no control over. It's a reason why I like patio11's writing style (and some others' as well).
acangiano 16y ago
There is a great quote that will serve you well when blogging: "Great minds discuss ideas, average minds discuss events, small minds discuss people." (attributed to Eleanor Roosevelt, but disputed).
edw519 16y ago
...it was my honest and well-intentioned thought... I know that. And I suspect that anyone who follows your writing here realizes that, too. I'll lay low for a while... Please don't. One of the memes constantly reinforced here at hn is pushing the envelope. How many times have we heard, "If you don't ruffle a few feathers, you're not pushing hard enough." You pushed. You ruffled. You learned. You stood up like a man. And we all survived. "Laying low" contradicts the expected behavior of so many outliers and achievers here. Respect.
- run4yourlives 16y ago
  Well said. This type of a reaction to making a mistake should be encouraged and emulated, not only on HN but beyond. I think Sebastian is handling this extremely well, and there is a lot to be learned from that.
- brendonjason 16y ago
  >> One of the memes constantly reinforced here at hn is pushing the envelope. edw519, this is not by any means a personal attack on you and I admire your appreciation for the general value that this place gives you. But I gotta call this one out - sorry. Reinforced. Really? How is this reinforced? In my experience pushing the envelope is barely tolerated, and then only if done superficially or regarding trivial issues. For example, as another incarnation (yamada) I countered one of pg's "go forth and conquer, there's no risk" assertions back in I think april/may 07 with a simple post that a variety of macro variables were purposely allowed to develop in such a way by the powers that be that would result in a not-too-distant economic malaise that would be not only much larger than any recession any HN'rs had ever experienced, but also of a fundamentally different nature and so not lending itself to the standard and known (and thus immediately applicable) cures. I even went out on a limb and said there was a very real possibility that the next 10 years or so for the U.S., once the S#$% hit the fan, may resemble Japan's lost decade (plus) since it fell apart in the 90s. I put forth some verifiable things that would not take a rocket science intellect to connect into a likely scenario. I got close to 100 karma points within hours (that being my first ever post) back when karma point accumulation algorithms didn't exist yet, only to watch all my karma magically disappear in tandem with pg issuing one-liner retorts to EACH and EVERY single comment I had made on any topic whatsoever on any day on any subject. They all disappeared. Pushing the envelope? Seriously? Seems obvious now, in retrospect. But keep in mind I put this all out there in spring of 2007 before anyone here even heard of mortgage backed securities or credit default swaps or what have you. I'd say that was pushing the envelope back in 07. You know, ahead of it actually happening. What was reinforced for me? Nothing - my account was deleted. All because I held conflicting (and eventually to be proven correct) economic views of the near future. Oh ... btw ... I won't name names but to the two gentlemen who referred to me as a "paranoid lunatic with baseless reasoning" and ... let's see ... what was it, a "quasi-logical conspiracy bot" ... how's the economy doing these days? Not so good? The government/industry rallying around to fix it? Ha! Told you so! Nya nya nya nya nya nya! Epic nya nya for me! Global, internationally-spanning nya nya for me! Worth more than all the karma points on HN combined!
sbierwagen 16y ago
I read the post. Thought it was pretty good. Don't see what the fuss is about. Compared to similar things I've said about people presenting public personas that were equally, if more, flawed; this was about as "hateful" as a kitten batting a bunny on the nose.
- jacquesm 16y ago
  If there is such a thing as 'damning with lots of praise' then then was it.
10ren 16y ago
Lionhearted, it has struck me how often you live up to your name; but on that one isolated occasion, you shamed it. I was thinking it would be hard for you to make amends. Removing the submission from HN is an excellent start, but it's still on your blog: http://www.sebastianmarshall.com/?p=251 http://www.sebastianmarshall.com/?p=251 I don't think Patrick should have to do or say a single thing in order for you do the right thing. If he asks you to restore it, then do so. This isn't about your reputation. EDIT like edw519, I (FWIW) also want you to stick around. It's OK to make mistakes, provided you fix them. So... fix it, quick! Of course I can't speak for Patrick, but remember what happened with _why.
- rwhitman 16y ago
  Agreed. The fact that its still up there, unedited, gathering link juice, says a lot about the motivations of the author.
- jacquesm 16y ago
  I fully agree with that, leaving it up only compounds the chances of damage and further indicates that this never really was about helping Patrick since it must be obvious by now that that is not the effect. It's like those open letters that are almost never intended for the addressee.
reduxredacted 16y ago
I read and enjoyed your original post from a purely analytical standpoint. Patio11 is a rather popular guy here and you rightly stated how brilliant his work has been. I cringed a little bit while reading the latter part of your post, but I still stuck with "never attribute to malice . . .". I've wondered why giving folks the benefit of the doubt wasn't in the In Comments section of the guidelines (http://ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html http://ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html). I'd like to print your response and frame it as an example of how to own up to a mistake. I don't know you, but you sound like a very decent human being and you have my respect for what it's worth.
specialist 16y ago
For what's its worth, I didn't read your criticism as a personal attack. More of an exhortation for bingo card guy to achieve his fullest potential. The mistake, as in navel gazing, is thinking that any one cares what you think of another person's life choices. Especially the object of your attention. Bingo card guy seems happy (enough) to me. Perhaps a better approach would have been to initiate a dialog, gently asking him for his input on some of your big sky ideas, subtly encouraging him to raise his aim. In the process, you'd maybe make a friend, and probably learn why he's made the choices he has. I know nothing about bingo card man, but imagine he's the primary care giver for a child or relative. Given a situation like that, I'd say he's a fucking genius for making some side money for comparatively little effort. In summation, chill dude. You spouted off. Wasn't personal. The haters will always be hating. So fuck 'em.
rabbithearted 16y ago
"I will explain my line of thinking, which does not excuse the large gaffe I made, but perhaps so people can understand my thinking. I've met a book editor, a literary agent, a prominent researcher, and other notable people through my writing on my site." I don't buy that. Your writing on your blog is juvenile, unorganized and generally a pain to read. Your style here is better. Nothing on your blog would attract a book editor or a literary agent. "For my part, I hold no ill will for people, even ones who said horrible things, and my door is still always open to people who need a hand." You are a narcissist of the worst kind. No one here wants or needs your hand. Stop writing from a position of imaginary superiority. How many titles do you need to prop up your self image anyway? From your meta tags: Sebastian Marshall: Strategist, scientist, entrepreneur, technologist, writer. Servant of the strong and virtuous, a visage of hell and misery to the rabidly mediocre. One title is lacking: Professional Blowhard.
deleted 16y ago
[deleted]

swombat 16y ago

Relax. A month from now this will be forgotten. What am I saying, a month? A few days from now it will be forgotten. What scrolls off the front page scrolls out of the present into ancient history.

kyro 16y ago
I almost did up until this submission. Flagged, in any case.
- sprout 16y ago
  While I agree that the post was inappropriate, I don't agree that the post was inappropriate by HN's standards. (And I think flagging based on personal standards rather than HN's standards is not the way to go.)
  - jacquesm 16y ago
    HN standards are the combined standards of all participants, if we had objective criteria for voting and flagging we wouldn't need those user interface components on all those pages, just a few would suffice. Everybody gets to apply their personal criteria moulded to whatever they think is best for HN, with the guidelines at the back of your mind. So, what I think is 'appropriate' for HN may be quite different from what you think is 'appropriate', if the moderator(s) agree what you flagged will be removed if not tough luck, maybe better next time.

lhorie 16y ago

Generally speaking, it's more agreeable to read about things the author has done than things they have no control over. It's a reason why I like patio11's writing style (and some others' as well).

acangiano 16y ago

There is a great quote that will serve you well when blogging: "Great minds discuss ideas, average minds discuss events, small minds discuss people." (attributed to Eleanor Roosevelt, but disputed).

edw519 16y ago

...it was my honest and well-intentioned thought... I know that. And I suspect that anyone who follows your writing here realizes that, too. I'll lay low for a while... Please don't. One of the memes constantly reinforced here at hn is pushing the envelope. How many times have we heard, "If you don't ruffle a few feathers, you're not pushing hard enough." You pushed. You ruffled. You learned. You stood up like a man. And we all survived. "Laying low" contradicts the expected behavior of so many outliers and achievers here. Respect.

run4yourlives 16y ago
Well said. This type of a reaction to making a mistake should be encouraged and emulated, not only on HN but beyond. I think Sebastian is handling this extremely well, and there is a lot to be learned from that.
brendonjason 16y ago
>> One of the memes constantly reinforced here at hn is pushing the envelope. edw519, this is not by any means a personal attack on you and I admire your appreciation for the general value that this place gives you. But I gotta call this one out - sorry. Reinforced. Really? How is this reinforced? In my experience pushing the envelope is barely tolerated, and then only if done superficially or regarding trivial issues. For example, as another incarnation (yamada) I countered one of pg's "go forth and conquer, there's no risk" assertions back in I think april/may 07 with a simple post that a variety of macro variables were purposely allowed to develop in such a way by the powers that be that would result in a not-too-distant economic malaise that would be not only much larger than any recession any HN'rs had ever experienced, but also of a fundamentally different nature and so not lending itself to the standard and known (and thus immediately applicable) cures. I even went out on a limb and said there was a very real possibility that the next 10 years or so for the U.S., once the S#$% hit the fan, may resemble Japan's lost decade (plus) since it fell apart in the 90s. I put forth some verifiable things that would not take a rocket science intellect to connect into a likely scenario. I got close to 100 karma points within hours (that being my first ever post) back when karma point accumulation algorithms didn't exist yet, only to watch all my karma magically disappear in tandem with pg issuing one-liner retorts to EACH and EVERY single comment I had made on any topic whatsoever on any day on any subject. They all disappeared. Pushing the envelope? Seriously? Seems obvious now, in retrospect. But keep in mind I put this all out there in spring of 2007 before anyone here even heard of mortgage backed securities or credit default swaps or what have you. I'd say that was pushing the envelope back in 07. You know, ahead of it actually happening. What was reinforced for me? Nothing - my account was deleted. All because I held conflicting (and eventually to be proven correct) economic views of the near future. Oh ... btw ... I won't name names but to the two gentlemen who referred to me as a "paranoid lunatic with baseless reasoning" and ... let's see ... what was it, a "quasi-logical conspiracy bot" ... how's the economy doing these days? Not so good? The government/industry rallying around to fix it? Ha! Told you so! Nya nya nya nya nya nya! Epic nya nya for me! Global, internationally-spanning nya nya for me! Worth more than all the karma points on HN combined!

sbierwagen 16y ago

I read the post. Thought it was pretty good. Don't see what the fuss is about. Compared to similar things I've said about people presenting public personas that were equally, if more, flawed; this was about as "hateful" as a kitten batting a bunny on the nose.

jacquesm 16y ago
If there is such a thing as 'damning with lots of praise' then then was it.

10ren 16y ago

Lionhearted, it has struck me how often you live up to your name; but on that one isolated occasion, you shamed it. I was thinking it would be hard for you to make amends. Removing the submission from HN is an excellent start, but it's still on your blog: http://www.sebastianmarshall.com/?p=251 http://www.sebastianmarshall.com/?p=251 I don't think Patrick should have to do or say a single thing in order for you do the right thing. If he asks you to restore it, then do so. This isn't about your reputation. EDIT like edw519, I (FWIW) also want you to stick around. It's OK to make mistakes, provided you fix them. So... fix it, quick! Of course I can't speak for Patrick, but remember what happened with _why.

rwhitman 16y ago
Agreed. The fact that its still up there, unedited, gathering link juice, says a lot about the motivations of the author.
jacquesm 16y ago
I fully agree with that, leaving it up only compounds the chances of damage and further indicates that this never really was about helping Patrick since it must be obvious by now that that is not the effect. It's like those open letters that are almost never intended for the addressee.

reduxredacted 16y ago

I read and enjoyed your original post from a purely analytical standpoint. Patio11 is a rather popular guy here and you rightly stated how brilliant his work has been. I cringed a little bit while reading the latter part of your post, but I still stuck with "never attribute to malice . . .". I've wondered why giving folks the benefit of the doubt wasn't in the In Comments section of the guidelines (http://ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html http://ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html). I'd like to print your response and frame it as an example of how to own up to a mistake. I don't know you, but you sound like a very decent human being and you have my respect for what it's worth.

specialist 16y ago

For what's its worth, I didn't read your criticism as a personal attack. More of an exhortation for bingo card guy to achieve his fullest potential. The mistake, as in navel gazing, is thinking that any one cares what you think of another person's life choices. Especially the object of your attention. Bingo card guy seems happy (enough) to me. Perhaps a better approach would have been to initiate a dialog, gently asking him for his input on some of your big sky ideas, subtly encouraging him to raise his aim. In the process, you'd maybe make a friend, and probably learn why he's made the choices he has. I know nothing about bingo card man, but imagine he's the primary care giver for a child or relative. Given a situation like that, I'd say he's a fucking genius for making some side money for comparatively little effort. In summation, chill dude. You spouted off. Wasn't personal. The haters will always be hating. So fuck 'em.

rabbithearted 16y ago

"I will explain my line of thinking, which does not excuse the large gaffe I made, but perhaps so people can understand my thinking. I've met a book editor, a literary agent, a prominent researcher, and other notable people through my writing on my site." I don't buy that. Your writing on your blog is juvenile, unorganized and generally a pain to read. Your style here is better. Nothing on your blog would attract a book editor or a literary agent. "For my part, I hold no ill will for people, even ones who said horrible things, and my door is still always open to people who need a hand." You are a narcissist of the worst kind. No one here wants or needs your hand. Stop writing from a position of imaginary superiority. How many titles do you need to prop up your self image anyway? From your meta tags: Sebastian Marshall: Strategist, scientist, entrepreneur, technologist, writer. Servant of the strong and virtuous, a visage of hell and misery to the rabidly mediocre. One title is lacking: Professional Blowhard.

deleted 16y ago

[deleted]