4 ms·

>What level of evidence is enough? Much more than what the author presented. >Why can we not accept what the author writes? Because when people make ugly acc

>What level of evidence is enough? Much more than what the author presented. >Why can we not accept what the author writes? Because when people make ugly accusations against others, they need to show evidence. >I have read and listened to far more from Kuhn than I have of you or the other commenters here on HN. Your perceived intimacy with the people in question does not work in your favor. On the contrary, it is more likely to make you biased.

eesmith 8y ago
"intimacy"? What a delightful word. I am intimate with my partner. I have intimate friends. This is the first time I've ever been told I'm intimate with someone who I've never met, who I only know about through public writings and talks, and to whom I've never communicated. My circle of intimacy instantly expanded as it now includes Richard Feynman, Freeman Dyson, Eugene Garfield, and Donald Knuth. Though to be fair, I have communicated with the latter two. And all those people who write critical biographies of dead people - surely we can't trust them now as they are too intimate to the person in question, and thus more likely to be biased. Indeed, the only people we can trust are those who know nothing at all.
- charmides 8y ago
  First, I am an ESL speaker. If you have nothing left to contribute except to nitpick my choice of words ('unfathomable' and 'pereived intimacy'), then you have obviously lost this debate. Second, I don't believe that you have never met those people. Based on your activity here and emotional investment, I find it more likely that you are affiliated with the charity or maybe even the author himself. Notice that there isn't a single other person in this comment section who is defending the author, but you are responding to everything.
  - eesmith 8y ago
    BWAHAHA! A conspiracy theory involving me! What a great ending for the week. Let me compliment you on your English. I speak three languages other than my native English, to different levels of proficiency. Even in my most proficient, I could not come close to constructing a sentence like "Without trivializing institutionalized sexism, the author's highly submissive (almost grovelling) attitude". I did more than nitpick. I questioned the strength of your basis for second guessing the author, and presented why I disagreed with your assessment. I asked "what scenario do you propose which is more reasonable than institutional sexism?" Now I'm pointing out that you have deflected the topic from my on-point question to an ad hominem attack. My account is 11 months old. There's plenty of my personal background in my comments. You'll see that it isn't aligned with Kuhn. For example, in https://hn.algolia.com/?query=eesmith%20florida&sort=byPopularity&prefix&page=0&dateRange=all&type=comment https://hn.algolia.com/?query=eesmith%20florida&sort=byPopul... you'll see several places where I mention that I grew up in Florida. Kuhn grew up in the north east, says his Wikipedia entry. In https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16638601#16651376 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16638601#16651376 I say I lived in Santa Fe, NM. As far as I can tell, Kuhn has never lived there. I'm obviously not Sander. I don't know who else works in the Conservancy, but it's laughable to think I'm one of them. 11 months is an awful long time to establish a cover story in the hopes that some day it might be used as astroturf. Whatever happened to calling people an SJW? Your account is 3 days old. How do I know that you are not the exec involved trying to defend yourself? You know HN has a reputation of being full of libertarian techbros, right? Yes, I have an emotional attachment towards comments which are based in the facts given, and not fantasy. You'll easily see that in my comment history. Got a problem with that?
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]

eesmith 8y ago

"intimacy"? What a delightful word. I am intimate with my partner. I have intimate friends. This is the first time I've ever been told I'm intimate with someone who I've never met, who I only know about through public writings and talks, and to whom I've never communicated. My circle of intimacy instantly expanded as it now includes Richard Feynman, Freeman Dyson, Eugene Garfield, and Donald Knuth. Though to be fair, I have communicated with the latter two. And all those people who write critical biographies of dead people - surely we can't trust them now as they are too intimate to the person in question, and thus more likely to be biased. Indeed, the only people we can trust are those who know nothing at all.

charmides 8y ago
First, I am an ESL speaker. If you have nothing left to contribute except to nitpick my choice of words ('unfathomable' and 'pereived intimacy'), then you have obviously lost this debate. Second, I don't believe that you have never met those people. Based on your activity here and emotional investment, I find it more likely that you are affiliated with the charity or maybe even the author himself. Notice that there isn't a single other person in this comment section who is defending the author, but you are responding to everything.
- eesmith 8y ago
  BWAHAHA! A conspiracy theory involving me! What a great ending for the week. Let me compliment you on your English. I speak three languages other than my native English, to different levels of proficiency. Even in my most proficient, I could not come close to constructing a sentence like "Without trivializing institutionalized sexism, the author's highly submissive (almost grovelling) attitude". I did more than nitpick. I questioned the strength of your basis for second guessing the author, and presented why I disagreed with your assessment. I asked "what scenario do you propose which is more reasonable than institutional sexism?" Now I'm pointing out that you have deflected the topic from my on-point question to an ad hominem attack. My account is 11 months old. There's plenty of my personal background in my comments. You'll see that it isn't aligned with Kuhn. For example, in https://hn.algolia.com/?query=eesmith%20florida&sort=byPopularity&prefix&page=0&dateRange=all&type=comment https://hn.algolia.com/?query=eesmith%20florida&sort=byPopul... you'll see several places where I mention that I grew up in Florida. Kuhn grew up in the north east, says his Wikipedia entry. In https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16638601#16651376 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16638601#16651376 I say I lived in Santa Fe, NM. As far as I can tell, Kuhn has never lived there. I'm obviously not Sander. I don't know who else works in the Conservancy, but it's laughable to think I'm one of them. 11 months is an awful long time to establish a cover story in the hopes that some day it might be used as astroturf. Whatever happened to calling people an SJW? Your account is 3 days old. How do I know that you are not the exec involved trying to defend yourself? You know HN has a reputation of being full of libertarian techbros, right? Yes, I have an emotional attachment towards comments which are based in the facts given, and not fantasy. You'll easily see that in my comment history. Got a problem with that?

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]