4 ms·

I think you missed the point. Graham is explicitly not using hater to disqualify genuine criticism but to identify people whose hate is irrational, who can't be

by Zanni 7y ago

I think you missed the point. Graham is explicitly not using hater to disqualify genuine criticism but to identify people whose hate is irrational, who can't be reasoned with. Obviously it's a risk that someone can dismiss genuine criticism as hate (and people do this all the time), but that's not what Graham's advocating here.

aguyfromnb 7y ago
Who decides what is "genuine criticism" and what is "hate"? To the person receiving criticism, everything is hate. Look at pg's twitter on Tesla: doesn't understand the hate. Has he read the criticism and refuted it? No, he dismisses it.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
- phoe-krk 7y ago
  > To the person receiving criticism, everything is hate. That's some immature criticism-receiver that you are describing here. You have just implied that it is impossible to receive criticism without thinking of it as hate, which I find to be false.
  - aguyfromnb 7y ago
    I agree, it's immature. But I'm not the one who wrote an article calling critics haters and losers. I mean, the article literally says the calling card of a hater is the use of the word "fraud". Meanwhile, we see actual fraud in Silicon Valley (and beyond, of course) all the time. God forbid it gets called out. I'm old enough to remember the flak people took on these very forums for calling Theranos a fraud: thoughtful people obviously did due diligence on the company, critics (losers?) couldn't stand seeing a woman be so successful.
- SpicyLemonZest 7y ago
  It’s often a hard call, and we should certainly not uncritically accept a claim that everyone who disagrees with me is a hater. But I don’t think that’s what he’s doing here. More importantly, it’s a call we have to be willing to make, because some people really are just bullies setting out to drag others down.

4 ms·

I think you missed the point. Graham is explicitly not using hater to disqualify genuine criticism but to identify people whose hate is irrational, who can't be

by Zanni 7y ago

aguyfromnb 7y ago
Who decides what is "genuine criticism" and what is "hate"? To the person receiving criticism, everything is hate. Look at pg's twitter on Tesla: doesn't understand the hate. Has he read the criticism and refuted it? No, he dismisses it.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
- phoe-krk 7y ago
  > To the person receiving criticism, everything is hate. That's some immature criticism-receiver that you are describing here. You have just implied that it is impossible to receive criticism without thinking of it as hate, which I find to be false.
  - aguyfromnb 7y ago
    I agree, it's immature. But I'm not the one who wrote an article calling critics haters and losers. I mean, the article literally says the calling card of a hater is the use of the word "fraud". Meanwhile, we see actual fraud in Silicon Valley (and beyond, of course) all the time. God forbid it gets called out. I'm old enough to remember the flak people took on these very forums for calling Theranos a fraud: thoughtful people obviously did due diligence on the company, critics (losers?) couldn't stand seeing a woman be so successful.
- SpicyLemonZest 7y ago
  It’s often a hard call, and we should certainly not uncritically accept a claim that everyone who disagrees with me is a hater. But I don’t think that’s what he’s doing here. More importantly, it’s a call we have to be willing to make, because some people really are just bullies setting out to drag others down.