3 ms·
> I think you are aware but irrationally refusing to accept that HTTP is public and anonymous by default. That has literally no bearing whatsoever on the moral
by eridius 8y ago
> I think you are aware but irrationally refusing to accept that HTTP is public and anonymous by default.
That has literally no bearing whatsoever on the morality of pretending to be someone else in order to get access to IP that you don't have the right to access. This is the second time you're calling me irrational, and it's not acceptable.
- austincheney 8y agoI am not pretending to be anybody. I am anonymous. This is how HTTP works. That is why you should either be asking your users who they are or stop pretending to care that it is important. Rationality - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rationality https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rationality I used the word irrational in the context (both times) of commitment. This is an accepted description in behavioral health literature and does not address you as a person. It is also not polite to accuse people of tricky (fraud) when there is no evidence of such.
- dang 8y agoPlease don't do tedious tit-for-tats on HN.
- dang 8y agoPlease don't do tedious tit-for-tats on HN.
- eridius 8y agoPlease don't paint both parties to an argument with the same brush. I was on my best behavior for this argument and did not engage in a "tit-for-tat". I do not appreciate being officially reprimanded and having my comments flagged when I did nothing wrong. I'm not expecting a response (heck, I'm expecting this comment to be flagged for arguing with a moderator), I'm just hoping you'll pause for a moment and realize that heavy-handed moderation is counterproductive; if I'm punished for being on my best behavior, what incentive is there for me to care about my behavior at all?
- dang 8y agoWhenever we get one of these snippy exchanges going far to the right on the page, circulating uselessly and boring everybody else, both parties are to blame for keeping it going. Any time you find yourself writing things like "This is the second time you're calling me irrational, and it's not acceptable," you've passed the kind of discussion we want on HN. Even if it's true that the other person was behaving as badly or worse. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- eridius 8y agoThe point of that comment was to signal that the discussion was over. I agree that the discussion had passed a line; that's precisely why I wrote the comment, and why I ignored the reply. I was self-moderating. It seems both ironic and counter-productive for a moderator to yell at me for ending the discussion, with the explanation that the discussion should be ended. But really, it's not the fact that this comment was flagged that bothers me (though being accused of "tit-for-tat" behavior still rankles). What really gets me is my previous comment (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18604446 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18604446) is flagged as well, for no reason I can see. As before, I'm not actually expecting a reply. I know you want this whole discussion to be over, and I'm fine with that. I just want you to spend a few seconds thinking about what I'm saying here.
- dang 8y agoOk, I've unflagged that comment.