3 ms·

Edit: Seems the parent comment has now reached net positive votes It's a really sad thing you're being downvoted, as I made a similar comment about a year ago

by alehul 8y ago

Edit: Seems the parent comment has now reached net positive votes It's a really sad thing you're being downvoted, as I made a similar comment about a year ago [1] in defense of WikiLeaks to over 30 upvotes. HN seems to be getting more and more active with their downvotes towards information that doesn't fit their current perspective. [1] = https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13816762 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13816762

wolfgke 8y ago
> It's a really sad thing you're being downvoted, as I made a similar comment about a year ago [1] in defense of WikiLeaks to over 30 upvotes. HN seems to be getting more and more active with their downvotes towards information that doesn't fit their current perspective. > [1] = https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13816762 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13816762 I don't see myself as a defender of WikiLeaks. It is, for example, hard not to admit that the Democratic National Committee email leak and the exchange between Donald Trump Jr. and WikiLeaks (at least to me) has some kind of "smell" [2]. My argument rather is: a) the position of WikiLeaks (if there exists one) is far more confusing and sometimes self-contradictory than it looks on the surface (in this sense, I am both somewhat sceptical of the "WikiLeaks defenders" and the "WikiLekas prosecutors"). b) do not trust any side as "authoritative". Consider multiple different sources - in particular the ones that do not agree with your personal opinion - and conceive an opinion on the whole story. [2] https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/11/the-secret-correspondence-between-donald-trump-jr-and-wikileaks/545738/ https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/11/the-sec...
- alehul 8y ago
  Completely agree with that. I just threw you into that category for the purpose of my comment as I believed it was a perceived defense of Wikileaks that you were being downvoted for, rather than something else regarding the content of your comment.

by alehul 8y ago

wolfgke 8y ago

> It's a really sad thing you're being downvoted, as I made a similar comment about a year ago [1] in defense of WikiLeaks to over 30 upvotes. HN seems to be getting more and more active with their downvotes towards information that doesn't fit their current perspective. > [1] = https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13816762 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13816762 I don't see myself as a defender of WikiLeaks. It is, for example, hard not to admit that the Democratic National Committee email leak and the exchange between Donald Trump Jr. and WikiLeaks (at least to me) has some kind of "smell" [2]. My argument rather is: a) the position of WikiLeaks (if there exists one) is far more confusing and sometimes self-contradictory than it looks on the surface (in this sense, I am both somewhat sceptical of the "WikiLeaks defenders" and the "WikiLekas prosecutors"). b) do not trust any side as "authoritative". Consider multiple different sources - in particular the ones that do not agree with your personal opinion - and conceive an opinion on the whole story. [2] https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/11/the-secret-correspondence-between-donald-trump-jr-and-wikileaks/545738/ https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/11/the-sec...

alehul 8y ago
Completely agree with that. I just threw you into that category for the purpose of my comment as I believed it was a perceived defense of Wikileaks that you were being downvoted for, rather than something else regarding the content of your comment.