4 ms·

If you find yourself thinking "I'll surely be down voted for this" you could use the chance to ask yourself if what you want to say is worth saying and if it is

If you find yourself thinking "I'll surely be down voted for this" you could use the chance to ask yourself if what you want to say is worth saying and if it is, consider how you could get the worthwhile ideas across without being objectionable. In this case, for example, it seems like you're partly upset by the author's race and gender. Judging people for that, or holding it against them, strikes me as objectionable. You're right that not everyone has the opportunity to pick what they want to work on, but that's a rather trivial observation and not one really worth making in my view. If someone wrote about performance bicycles, would you scold them for worrying about such irrelevant machines while subsistence farmers struggled to eat, or people in Asia battled the coronavirus? Must all conversations and topics be about the people in the worst position? Your comment, since you seem to want a reply and not just downvotes, is needlessly antagonistic and doesn't offer any useful insight. You complain about the race and gender of others, startups you don't like, hackernews, startups, and the idea of extracting value. Your core point is obvious to all readers.

throwlaplace 7y ago
>In this case, for example, it seems like you're partly upset by the author's race and gender I'm not at all upset by either. I'm upset by the narcissism and the perpetuation of it (visavis the traction this post got). >Judging people for that, or holding it against them, strikes me as objectionable. Just to be precise I'd like for you to point out to me where I made a value judgment of the author (rather than the article). >If someone wrote about performance bicycles, would you scold them for worrying about such irrelevant machines while subsistence farmers struggled to eat, or people in Asia battled the coronavirus? The linked article is advice on how one should live their life. I have engaged directly with the premise and pointed out that "should" is directly a function of "could". >Your comment, since you seem to want a reply and not just downvotes, I bring it up only because it's strictly against the rules to use downvote in disagreement. I haven't insulted or inflamed anyone and yet people's reactions are to be offended. >Your core point is obvious to all readers. Precisely my challenge is that it is not.
- bsanr2 7y ago
  If you would, please repost your original comment a a reply to this one. Someone has flagged it, but I would like to read it.
  - throwlaplace 7y ago
    I'll surely get sure get downvoted but these kinds of paeans are so self-indulgent: smart privileged person (usually elite educated white guy) decides to pontificate on what makes for a gratifying life, what's important, what's valuable (or whatever other good mouth feel word they've chosen to use for their self-aggrandizing that day). and then follows a list of all of their accomplishments that aren't sufficient anymore according to their new measure. but of course now they're working on some nonsense startup that is sufficient. What kind of echo chamber of privilege is hn where this kind of advice passes for insightful? It's basically like this: guys if you have a million dollars you shouldn't spend it on ABC you should spend it on XYZ. Well I've got news for you: most people don't have a choice about what they do so whether they want hard problems or not is completely moot. They do the job that pays them to eat and have shelter and build a family. And yes I'm talking even about software engineers. You should instead be writing about how grateful you are that you've had all the opportunity you've had and how you're actively working to empower others to have just as much (and not with some bs startup that extracts value).
    - vntx 7y ago
      I don’t see why you would get downvoted for this. Your statement sounds reasonable to me. I think you offended someone. HN really needs to show the flaggers username so there can be more checks and balances against this kind of emotional censoring. As for the blog, the guy does sound self-indulgent but he still makes a reasonable point.
      - throwlaplace 7y ago
        edit: haha someone chased this all the way down the chain just to downvote me here. >I don’t see why you would get downvoted for this. Your statement sounds reasonable to me. Because hn is very fragile and sensitive about words like "white", "male", "privilege", "elite", "ivy league". Time and Time again I've been downvoted for mentioning these things when they are germaine irrespective of anything in the content of my comments.

throwlaplace 7y ago

>In this case, for example, it seems like you're partly upset by the author's race and gender I'm not at all upset by either. I'm upset by the narcissism and the perpetuation of it (visavis the traction this post got). >Judging people for that, or holding it against them, strikes me as objectionable. Just to be precise I'd like for you to point out to me where I made a value judgment of the author (rather than the article). >If someone wrote about performance bicycles, would you scold them for worrying about such irrelevant machines while subsistence farmers struggled to eat, or people in Asia battled the coronavirus? The linked article is advice on how one should live their life. I have engaged directly with the premise and pointed out that "should" is directly a function of "could". >Your comment, since you seem to want a reply and not just downvotes, I bring it up only because it's strictly against the rules to use downvote in disagreement. I haven't insulted or inflamed anyone and yet people's reactions are to be offended. >Your core point is obvious to all readers. Precisely my challenge is that it is not.

bsanr2 7y ago
If you would, please repost your original comment a a reply to this one. Someone has flagged it, but I would like to read it.
- throwlaplace 7y ago
  I'll surely get sure get downvoted but these kinds of paeans are so self-indulgent: smart privileged person (usually elite educated white guy) decides to pontificate on what makes for a gratifying life, what's important, what's valuable (or whatever other good mouth feel word they've chosen to use for their self-aggrandizing that day). and then follows a list of all of their accomplishments that aren't sufficient anymore according to their new measure. but of course now they're working on some nonsense startup that is sufficient. What kind of echo chamber of privilege is hn where this kind of advice passes for insightful? It's basically like this: guys if you have a million dollars you shouldn't spend it on ABC you should spend it on XYZ. Well I've got news for you: most people don't have a choice about what they do so whether they want hard problems or not is completely moot. They do the job that pays them to eat and have shelter and build a family. And yes I'm talking even about software engineers. You should instead be writing about how grateful you are that you've had all the opportunity you've had and how you're actively working to empower others to have just as much (and not with some bs startup that extracts value).
  - vntx 7y ago
    I don’t see why you would get downvoted for this. Your statement sounds reasonable to me. I think you offended someone. HN really needs to show the flaggers username so there can be more checks and balances against this kind of emotional censoring. As for the blog, the guy does sound self-indulgent but he still makes a reasonable point.
    - throwlaplace 7y ago
      edit: haha someone chased this all the way down the chain just to downvote me here. >I don’t see why you would get downvoted for this. Your statement sounds reasonable to me. Because hn is very fragile and sensitive about words like "white", "male", "privilege", "elite", "ivy league". Time and Time again I've been downvoted for mentioning these things when they are germaine irrespective of anything in the content of my comments.