4 ms·

You're right, I didn't try to address it. I also didn't make any assumptions of racism in my comment. However, generally speaking, I don't think one culture is

You're right, I didn't try to address it. I also didn't make any assumptions of racism in my comment. However, generally speaking, I don't think one culture is better than another either and discrimination based on culture is also a problem. (I understand that this is an opinion and many would disagree with me on that point.)

FakeComments 8y ago
It’s an absolute nonsense opinion, because there are obviously cultural beliefs that have an impact on work performance, particularly over a lifetime — eg, beliefs in honesty, hard work, and obtaining education. Different cultures place different values on these things, and it leads to different outcomes — even just looking at the impact of cultural drift over time, among a single people. I also find it absolutely abhorrent to claim there is no ethical difference in whether or not groups of humans cut the clitorises off young girls or own slaves, as you’ve done here. That’s what it means to say you don’t believe some cultures are better: that it’s just fine to mutilate children and own other humans, because hey, that’s just a cultural belief. You’re so woke, your brain broke.
- dang 8y ago
  If you keep doing ideological flamewars on HN we will ban you. Also, if you keep doing personal attacks on HN we will ban you. Please review https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and follow the rules when posting here from now on.
  - FakeComments 8y ago
    Again, I wish you would admit to ideological censorship: You’re simply using etiquette as a guise for people who don’t want to have an honest discussion about the relevant philosophy (or in this case, the actual logic involved in the inference) to shut it down in favor of group think. This problem is so widespread among the tech community, Congress is talking about it. Just look at how fast this was downvoted and flagged — the point is to silence wrongthink. Censorship for etiquette has always been used as a tool of political coercion — and I simply don’t take your vague claims I broke decorum, which always target one side of a sensitive issue, seriously. You can absolutely use your power in your fiefdom; but you can’t use it to make me not talk honestly about issues — only remove me. You’re just a political thug, who doesn’t like honest, blunt language. Show me. Ed: There’s hundreds of comments like this without a peep, because they’re rightthink: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19763553 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19763553
    - dang 8y ago
      "Censorshop for etiquette" is not even close to being the active ingredient here. I hear that it looks that way to you, but what's actually going on when we moderate threads is so different, that I wonder how to convey the difference. Any ideas? Let me put it this way: I wonder how to convince you how little we give a shit about decorum. What a miserable life it would be to spend one's days enforcing something that...limited. Such a concept appears nowhere in the site guidelines or in its moderation history. It's pretty striking to hear "You’re just a political thug", and I can certainly understand why your comments have so much force in them if you feel that way. When you say we "always target one side of a sensitive issue", though, that's so factually inaccurate that I'm not sure what else I can do that would help.

FakeComments 8y ago

It’s an absolute nonsense opinion, because there are obviously cultural beliefs that have an impact on work performance, particularly over a lifetime — eg, beliefs in honesty, hard work, and obtaining education. Different cultures place different values on these things, and it leads to different outcomes — even just looking at the impact of cultural drift over time, among a single people. I also find it absolutely abhorrent to claim there is no ethical difference in whether or not groups of humans cut the clitorises off young girls or own slaves, as you’ve done here. That’s what it means to say you don’t believe some cultures are better: that it’s just fine to mutilate children and own other humans, because hey, that’s just a cultural belief. You’re so woke, your brain broke.

dang 8y ago
If you keep doing ideological flamewars on HN we will ban you. Also, if you keep doing personal attacks on HN we will ban you. Please review https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and follow the rules when posting here from now on.
- FakeComments 8y ago
  Again, I wish you would admit to ideological censorship: You’re simply using etiquette as a guise for people who don’t want to have an honest discussion about the relevant philosophy (or in this case, the actual logic involved in the inference) to shut it down in favor of group think. This problem is so widespread among the tech community, Congress is talking about it. Just look at how fast this was downvoted and flagged — the point is to silence wrongthink. Censorship for etiquette has always been used as a tool of political coercion — and I simply don’t take your vague claims I broke decorum, which always target one side of a sensitive issue, seriously. You can absolutely use your power in your fiefdom; but you can’t use it to make me not talk honestly about issues — only remove me. You’re just a political thug, who doesn’t like honest, blunt language. Show me. Ed: There’s hundreds of comments like this without a peep, because they’re rightthink: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19763553 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19763553
  - dang 8y ago
    "Censorshop for etiquette" is not even close to being the active ingredient here. I hear that it looks that way to you, but what's actually going on when we moderate threads is so different, that I wonder how to convey the difference. Any ideas? Let me put it this way: I wonder how to convince you how little we give a shit about decorum. What a miserable life it would be to spend one's days enforcing something that...limited. Such a concept appears nowhere in the site guidelines or in its moderation history. It's pretty striking to hear "You’re just a political thug", and I can certainly understand why your comments have so much force in them if you feel that way. When you say we "always target one side of a sensitive issue", though, that's so factually inaccurate that I'm not sure what else I can do that would help.