4 ms·

Shakna was attempting to use a common social cue, criticism, to prevent Steve from continuing to apply inappropriate social behavior, especially relevant given

Shakna was attempting to use a common social cue, criticism, to prevent Steve from continuing to apply inappropriate social behavior, especially relevant given that Shakna has a decade of experience in the nuances of social dynamics in the context of chronic illness. I interpreted Shakna's sharp rebuke as no different than any other expert informing someone that they're participating in highly ignorant behavior. By criticizing Shakna, you are also participating in a social cue to try and prevent Shakna from continuing to apply inappropriate social behavior (in this case, criticizing others unnecessarily). Does "It's the internet man. You're quite free to disregard Shakna's criticism." not apply also to you?

nate_meurer 8y ago
Participating in a social cue...? I just... I don't know. Don't get me wrong, I'm totally capable of being offended by inane low-content posts on the internet. But I also put some effort into filtering my responses in deference to the recognition of my own biases and insular perspective. I fail a lot, but I try. Shakna's response seemed to lack any such self awareness. Maybe I'm wrong; maybe i'm speaking from a bubble again. But I do know, and I hate to point out the obvious here, that this is HN -- pretty much the opposite of any sort of health-issue-specific forum. If you post a note regarding a health issue here, you will get advice, likely involving keto nowadays. I understand Shakna's desire to mold HN into a place better suited to the specific needs of folks like Shakna. Nothing wrong with that. But Shakna's "decade of experience in the nuances of social dynamics in the context of chronic illness" is a lot of weight to expect a random techy internet forum thread to bear, and politely hand-slapping a random dude in a forum replete with dedicated keto experimenters is... well... it clearly risks frustration, right?
- DanBC 8y ago
  But the ultracrepidarians need reminding that they don't know what they're talking about and that their well-meaning advice is not received as a freindly gesture, it's received as something that's fucking annoying.
  - nate_meurer 8y ago
    As someone who both bestows and lays claim to annoyance in generous measure, I won't dare to disagree.
- SolaceQuantum 8y ago
  > If you post a note regarding a health issue here, you will get advice, likely involving keto nowadays. Does this mean this behavior should be considered acceptable, or that criticizing such behavior should be considered above criticism? > is a lot of weight to expect a random techy internet forum thread to bear, It is also weight to engage in it by providing unsolicited advice. By choosing to engage with the heavy subject, people can choose to engage with their engagement. This is normal human interaction regardless of its weight. > it clearly risks frustration, right? Is that for you to decide? I like to believe Shakna is intelligent enough to choose to engage in what they please, even if they are frustrated by it. It isn't my place to judge or advise them, and I'm frankly entirely uninterested in engaging with them about how frustrated they're allowed to get. I'm more interested in engaging with you about how much you should get to tell Shakna how they should react while reacting yourself.
  - nate_meurer 8y ago
    > criticizing such behavior should be considered above criticism? Certainly not! It's critical that criticism not be criticized, however I assure you that your overly critical appraisal of my criticism will not be left uncritiqued. By me, right now. > It is also weight to engage in it by providing unsolicited advice. No it's not. That's the whole point. There's nothing weighty about Internet User Steve's unsolicited two cents. Shakna can take it or leave it. Or, he can complain about it, tell Steve he was wrong to open his mouth, and then meet the inevitable pushback with disgusted indignance while two other frisky threadmates get all meta in the corner. Personally, I'm left none the wiser for having witnessed Shakna's precipitated grievances, whereas I feel it would be a bit of a shame if Steve was made to curtail his freewheeling expression, which in this case included a link to a horrifying story about the NEJM (thanks for that BTW Steve). > I'm frankly entirely uninterested in engaging with them about how frustrated they're allowed to get. You're right, that would be bad! So don't do that. Instead, gently encourage Shakna to cut poor Steve a bit of slack. You can, without judgment, point out that Shakna's reflexes, gained through years of pain and frustration, are maybe not a productive criteria by which to interact with well-meaning random internet folk, and that some extra persistence in grace, instead of descending into remonstrance after a just one exchange, is far likelier to win converts to Shakna's way of thinking. Go ahead, try it. Let me know how it works out.
dang 8y ago
"Sharp rebukes" are exactly what the site guidelines ask users not to give each other, regardless of how wrong someone is or you feel they are. If another comment was somehow insensitive, it's fine to gently offer some information about that. It's not fine to blame one another or take a thread massively off topic. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

nate_meurer 8y ago

Participating in a social cue...? I just... I don't know. Don't get me wrong, I'm totally capable of being offended by inane low-content posts on the internet. But I also put some effort into filtering my responses in deference to the recognition of my own biases and insular perspective. I fail a lot, but I try. Shakna's response seemed to lack any such self awareness. Maybe I'm wrong; maybe i'm speaking from a bubble again. But I do know, and I hate to point out the obvious here, that this is HN -- pretty much the opposite of any sort of health-issue-specific forum. If you post a note regarding a health issue here, you will get advice, likely involving keto nowadays. I understand Shakna's desire to mold HN into a place better suited to the specific needs of folks like Shakna. Nothing wrong with that. But Shakna's "decade of experience in the nuances of social dynamics in the context of chronic illness" is a lot of weight to expect a random techy internet forum thread to bear, and politely hand-slapping a random dude in a forum replete with dedicated keto experimenters is... well... it clearly risks frustration, right?

DanBC 8y ago
But the ultracrepidarians need reminding that they don't know what they're talking about and that their well-meaning advice is not received as a freindly gesture, it's received as something that's fucking annoying.
- nate_meurer 8y ago
  As someone who both bestows and lays claim to annoyance in generous measure, I won't dare to disagree.
SolaceQuantum 8y ago
> If you post a note regarding a health issue here, you will get advice, likely involving keto nowadays. Does this mean this behavior should be considered acceptable, or that criticizing such behavior should be considered above criticism? > is a lot of weight to expect a random techy internet forum thread to bear, It is also weight to engage in it by providing unsolicited advice. By choosing to engage with the heavy subject, people can choose to engage with their engagement. This is normal human interaction regardless of its weight. > it clearly risks frustration, right? Is that for you to decide? I like to believe Shakna is intelligent enough to choose to engage in what they please, even if they are frustrated by it. It isn't my place to judge or advise them, and I'm frankly entirely uninterested in engaging with them about how frustrated they're allowed to get. I'm more interested in engaging with you about how much you should get to tell Shakna how they should react while reacting yourself.
- nate_meurer 8y ago
  > criticizing such behavior should be considered above criticism? Certainly not! It's critical that criticism not be criticized, however I assure you that your overly critical appraisal of my criticism will not be left uncritiqued. By me, right now. > It is also weight to engage in it by providing unsolicited advice. No it's not. That's the whole point. There's nothing weighty about Internet User Steve's unsolicited two cents. Shakna can take it or leave it. Or, he can complain about it, tell Steve he was wrong to open his mouth, and then meet the inevitable pushback with disgusted indignance while two other frisky threadmates get all meta in the corner. Personally, I'm left none the wiser for having witnessed Shakna's precipitated grievances, whereas I feel it would be a bit of a shame if Steve was made to curtail his freewheeling expression, which in this case included a link to a horrifying story about the NEJM (thanks for that BTW Steve). > I'm frankly entirely uninterested in engaging with them about how frustrated they're allowed to get. You're right, that would be bad! So don't do that. Instead, gently encourage Shakna to cut poor Steve a bit of slack. You can, without judgment, point out that Shakna's reflexes, gained through years of pain and frustration, are maybe not a productive criteria by which to interact with well-meaning random internet folk, and that some extra persistence in grace, instead of descending into remonstrance after a just one exchange, is far likelier to win converts to Shakna's way of thinking. Go ahead, try it. Let me know how it works out.

dang 8y ago

"Sharp rebukes" are exactly what the site guidelines ask users not to give each other, regardless of how wrong someone is or you feel they are. If another comment was somehow insensitive, it's fine to gently offer some information about that. It's not fine to blame one another or take a thread massively off topic. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html