3 ms·
>GP didn't do so in a way that demeans anybody, but you did. umm how about this from GP? >This is the opposite of that, with random crud scattered around a cr
by mlevental 8y ago
>GP didn't do so in a way that demeans anybody, but you did.
umm how about this from GP?
>This is the opposite of that, with random crud scattered around a cramped terminal window. That would make me feel like a poser wannabe geek.
but re:
>Please pick your words with a little less irony next time.
i think too many people get away with being mean under the guise of being critical when there's actually no value to their criticism (since as i pointed out the particular criticism of use value of this tool was already anticipated by the author). i think it's valuable to point out that these people are simply being mean so that someone that suspects that's the case doesn't doubt themselves.
>Also bear in mind that just because something isn't positive, that doesn't mean it's a negative worth silencing. An opinion is an opinion, and people are allowed to express them
there are many things we're not allowed to express on hn (jokes and etc. for example). GP didn't contribute anything to any discussion. so while some negative claims are valuable ("x thing doesn't have y feature") and shouldn't be dismissed purely because they're not positive GP's is not and should be pruned so as to prevent having threads turn into "negative feedback loops" (note the double quotes and the colloquial use of "negative feedback loop").
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- hirundo 8y ago> GP didn't contribute anything to any discussion. I believe I did and was not attempting to be mean. You are being mean in assuming that I was trying to be mean, so nanner nanner. My non-mean point is that to me geekness is the opposite of pretending and pretension. It means being reality adjacent to the point of social opprobrium. Maybe that definition is too idiosyncratic for you. But consider that if it is true, that sentence is self contradictory. Does a discussion about what it means to be a geek add nothing? It seems to me that this terminal is an art project worthy of inspiring such a question.
- mlevental 8y agoeveryone always comes back with the articulate and sophisticated expression of some kind of abstraction of the particular mean comment after the fact. >Does a discussion about what it means to be a geek add nothing? if that was your intent you should've said that instead of using the language that you did (words like "random crud" and "poser wannabe").
- hirundo 8y agoAnd now you're tone policing. I said just what it makes me feel like. You interpret that as a baseless attack on the author. I interpret it as honest feedback, how I feel about my inner geek. You are projecting your malice on me. If an artist told me "tell me what you think, but please keep your language moderate because I'm sensitive", I'd think they were doing themselves a disservice. You're clearly willing to not do that disservice to me. Thanks for that. Why shouldn't we give the artist behind this project the same privilege?
- mlevental 8y agoI'm not tone policing - I'm pointing out your tone.
- edoceo 8y agoMy office mates and I have taken to a habit of calling out what we labeled "low effort criticism". Like when the criticizer uses in-specific language ("crud") or or points at obvious issues (UI on internal tool, rev 0.1). Months later we can mock our old selves, but getting called on it still stings. Sharpen the discourse skills
- FakeComments 8y agoI too read your comment as uselessly mean, and not at all an opening to discuss what it meant to be geeky.
- zapzupnz 8y agoI read all of that, but in no part did I find any justification for your direct and scathing ad hominem attack on the GP’s character. > are you like totally in capable of experience Joy/having fun?