3 ms·

No, it is not. It was a metaphor.

klibertp 8y ago
No, it was a groundless inflammatory comment. It's not ok. It's not "a metaphor". It's needlessly offensive and very harmful to Nim and its community. Your comment is currently at the top of a thread, with a very heavy accusation towards the community - tolerating hate speech of any kind is basically as bad as it can be for a community. Even on HN, there will be many people who won't read your further comments, won't know that it's "just a metaphor", and will believe it. Then, when I try to invite them to some Nim conference, they'll tell me that "Oh, Nim... Would be good, but the community is so hostile, so I'll pass". Please, at least realize what you have done, and don't do it again. Please.
nudpiedo 8y ago
@klibertp I disagree with you. Everyone here is a grown up and "hate speech" cannot be directed against an algorithmic abstraction or a way to organize code. Criticism is a valid form of opinion, including criticism on informal elites in online communities, especially within opinions which by definition are subjective. If you feel my metaphor is hurting that's because you feel targeted there in some way, but here everyone is adult enough to build their own opinions and look by themselves there. If my comment made it to the top it is because it was upvoted in spite of having the way of use the language I have and the way my opinions are. That wasn’t the first comment when I wrote it. I hope you realize what you are doing censoring people's opinions based on your subjective judgement of everyone else’s possible reactions, discarding people’s own judgement. Saying that a community could die because of a negative opinion online is senseless, precisely because truly injust opinions positively reinforce groups by creating a feeling of resistance and victim identification. But my opinion was honest and metaphors are just a way of using language. Anyway, I respect mostly all opinions but censorship. And in regard on whether somethign is hate speech or not... really, criticize an abstraction, not even an object, who could take that sentence in a literal way and interpret it by the word? You are drowning in a glass of water (yes, that's another metaphor, just in case).
- klibertp 8y ago
  The majority of your posts here got heavily downvoted if I go by their color. One got flagged (not by me or anything). There's probably some meaning in that.
  - nudpiedo 8y ago
    You are going here totally ad-hominem here. Do you mean about the three posts where I speak about what a metaphor is? isn't the usage of the language a complete subjective opinion and cultural aspect? the main post is still upvoted (an opinion comment) and as I said earlier here no ones wants to score anything... except the several lobbies that want to promote their solutions in order to sell them to the Hacker News audience. And about the votes; not sure how you deal with it, but I take it easy with the downvotes, I won't censore my opinions because of them; and at the end of the day not really much people cares about other's opinions let alone votes, karma or reputation in an anonymous forum. If someone was decided to use nim they will give it a try by themselves anyway.
    - klibertp 8y ago
      > You are going here totally ad-hominem here. Wait, how? I just stated the fact as I perceived it - most of your posts were in various shades of gray. That's it. I didn't say anything about you, personally, which is what 'ad-hominem' would be. > lobbies that want to promote their solutions in order to sell them to the Hacker News audience. I'm not involved in any way with any of such lobbies in general, nor with the Nim community in particular. What I'm interested in is the quality of the debate on HN. > I won't censore my opinions because of them I can't understand why do you insist that I wanted to censor your opinion. I object to one particularly stupid way of phrasing that opinion. Had you written something like "some members of the [Nim] community seemed to be dismissive or even hostile to the ideas of functional programming" - I wouldn't have said anything! It's the same opinion, and it would cost you nothing to think for a bit and consider your phrasing a bit more carefully. I would even give you a benefit of a doubt if you used quotes around "hate speech", giving a hint that it's a metaphor - but you didn't, you played it straight, and I don't understand why. Is inserting quotation marks that much of a hassle to you? Is it that you don't understand, or perceive, the difference between 'hate speech' and '"hate speech"'? As for the "usage of language" being subjective - sure it is. While they are subjective, there are norms and rules to follow, depending on the time and place. Imagine yourself farting loudly on a family gathering, then insisting that you're entitled to do just that because it's the way you express yourself and not doing it would be censorship. Yeah, you would be right, actually, but do you honestly expect people around you to just accept the stench? I would like to ask to simply refrain from such farting, metaphorically speaking. As I already said, accusing a community of tolerating hate speech of any kind is a very serious thing and shouldn't be done lightly. It's similar in weight to saying that someone is a Nazi, or racist, or misogynist, or a terrorist. Would you like to be called a terrorist, even if it was said metaphorically? To summarize: I'm not talking about the content of your opinions - arguing with them is a separate matter - only about the way you phrased them. I don't want to censor your opinions. I do want to censor the "usage" of the language which is harmful to the quality of debate (and, potentially, to the community in question). I believe you that you didn't intend to use the language in such a way, but you did. Be it sloppiness, dyslexia, or whatever that caused it - you crossed the line and I reacted to that. Your phrasing could result in the damage to the community, but honestly, I'm not that interested in that; on the other hand, your phrasing did influence the quality of the discussion negatively, which is what interests me much more. Hence the reaction. What I'm wondering about is why do you defend your "usage of language" so much. Is it really the only way you can express yourself? Is it really impossible for you to use the language in a better way? If you are handicapped somehow and really can't perceive the difference between "censore" and "censor", then I'm sorry, I won't say a word. On the other hand, if you are capable of that, then I honestly can't understand why do you insist on writing comments as sloppy as yours.

No, it was a groundless inflammatory comment. It's not ok. It's not "a metaphor". It's needlessly offensive and very harmful to Nim and its community. Your comment is currently at the top of a thread, with a very heavy accusation towards the community - tolerating hate speech of any kind is basically as bad as it can be for a community. Even on HN, there will be many people who won't read your further comments, won't know that it's "just a metaphor", and will believe it. Then, when I try to invite them to some Nim conference, they'll tell me that "Oh, Nim... Would be good, but the community is so hostile, so I'll pass". Please, at least realize what you have done, and don't do it again. Please.

nudpiedo 8y ago

@klibertp I disagree with you. Everyone here is a grown up and "hate speech" cannot be directed against an algorithmic abstraction or a way to organize code. Criticism is a valid form of opinion, including criticism on informal elites in online communities, especially within opinions which by definition are subjective. If you feel my metaphor is hurting that's because you feel targeted there in some way, but here everyone is adult enough to build their own opinions and look by themselves there. If my comment made it to the top it is because it was upvoted in spite of having the way of use the language I have and the way my opinions are. That wasn’t the first comment when I wrote it. I hope you realize what you are doing censoring people's opinions based on your subjective judgement of everyone else’s possible reactions, discarding people’s own judgement. Saying that a community could die because of a negative opinion online is senseless, precisely because truly injust opinions positively reinforce groups by creating a feeling of resistance and victim identification. But my opinion was honest and metaphors are just a way of using language. Anyway, I respect mostly all opinions but censorship. And in regard on whether somethign is hate speech or not... really, criticize an abstraction, not even an object, who could take that sentence in a literal way and interpret it by the word? You are drowning in a glass of water (yes, that's another metaphor, just in case).

klibertp 8y ago
The majority of your posts here got heavily downvoted if I go by their color. One got flagged (not by me or anything). There's probably some meaning in that.
- nudpiedo 8y ago
  You are going here totally ad-hominem here. Do you mean about the three posts where I speak about what a metaphor is? isn't the usage of the language a complete subjective opinion and cultural aspect? the main post is still upvoted (an opinion comment) and as I said earlier here no ones wants to score anything... except the several lobbies that want to promote their solutions in order to sell them to the Hacker News audience. And about the votes; not sure how you deal with it, but I take it easy with the downvotes, I won't censore my opinions because of them; and at the end of the day not really much people cares about other's opinions let alone votes, karma or reputation in an anonymous forum. If someone was decided to use nim they will give it a try by themselves anyway.
  - klibertp 8y ago
    > You are going here totally ad-hominem here. Wait, how? I just stated the fact as I perceived it - most of your posts were in various shades of gray. That's it. I didn't say anything about you, personally, which is what 'ad-hominem' would be. > lobbies that want to promote their solutions in order to sell them to the Hacker News audience. I'm not involved in any way with any of such lobbies in general, nor with the Nim community in particular. What I'm interested in is the quality of the debate on HN. > I won't censore my opinions because of them I can't understand why do you insist that I wanted to censor your opinion. I object to one particularly stupid way of phrasing that opinion. Had you written something like "some members of the [Nim] community seemed to be dismissive or even hostile to the ideas of functional programming" - I wouldn't have said anything! It's the same opinion, and it would cost you nothing to think for a bit and consider your phrasing a bit more carefully. I would even give you a benefit of a doubt if you used quotes around "hate speech", giving a hint that it's a metaphor - but you didn't, you played it straight, and I don't understand why. Is inserting quotation marks that much of a hassle to you? Is it that you don't understand, or perceive, the difference between 'hate speech' and '"hate speech"'? As for the "usage of language" being subjective - sure it is. While they are subjective, there are norms and rules to follow, depending on the time and place. Imagine yourself farting loudly on a family gathering, then insisting that you're entitled to do just that because it's the way you express yourself and not doing it would be censorship. Yeah, you would be right, actually, but do you honestly expect people around you to just accept the stench? I would like to ask to simply refrain from such farting, metaphorically speaking. As I already said, accusing a community of tolerating hate speech of any kind is a very serious thing and shouldn't be done lightly. It's similar in weight to saying that someone is a Nazi, or racist, or misogynist, or a terrorist. Would you like to be called a terrorist, even if it was said metaphorically? To summarize: I'm not talking about the content of your opinions - arguing with them is a separate matter - only about the way you phrased them. I don't want to censor your opinions. I do want to censor the "usage" of the language which is harmful to the quality of debate (and, potentially, to the community in question). I believe you that you didn't intend to use the language in such a way, but you did. Be it sloppiness, dyslexia, or whatever that caused it - you crossed the line and I reacted to that. Your phrasing could result in the damage to the community, but honestly, I'm not that interested in that; on the other hand, your phrasing did influence the quality of the discussion negatively, which is what interests me much more. Hence the reaction. What I'm wondering about is why do you defend your "usage of language" so much. Is it really the only way you can express yourself? Is it really impossible for you to use the language in a better way? If you are handicapped somehow and really can't perceive the difference between "censore" and "censor", then I'm sorry, I won't say a word. On the other hand, if you are capable of that, then I honestly can't understand why do you insist on writing comments as sloppy as yours.