4 ms·

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 us

by 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.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
- ALittleLight 7y ago
  I don't think the expectation that you not use race and gender as a pejorative is setting a terribly high bar. If I observed that comments like yours were "often written by <non-male gender> <non-white race/ethnicity>" I think it would be more obvious to you that your language was problematic. Why not extend to everyone the courtesies you expect to be extended to some? Laughing at people "chasing you to downvote you" strikes me as the same kind of cynicism and hostility that encouraged people to downvote you before. One possibility is that the voters of hackernews are too fragile to handle your potent truths. Another is that you are making banal observations in a hostile way and people are simply downvoting you to signal that such comments aren't appreciated.
  - throwlaplace 7y ago
    >I don't think the expectation that you not use race and gender as a pejorative is setting a terribly high bar I already responded to this accusation. I asked you in particular to point out where I used race and gender problematically. here it in the first response to you: >>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). You have not but you continue to claim I have. That's very convenient isn't it? just to recapitulate: this is the only place i've mentioned race and class and gender: > smart privileged person (usually elite educated white guy) decides to pontificate what exactly about this is unacceptable in the least? To bring up that race and gender and class inform biases of an author is not pejorative unless you have a vested interest in protecting that bias. I am cynical because I write very precisely and very clearly and do not use "purple" language and yet the supposedly astute readers of hn still react viscerally rather than dispassionately. How can you blame me? These kinds of conversations tacitly verboten on hn because they are heavily censured.
    - ALittleLight 7y ago
      Writing precisely and being regularly misinterpreted are incongruous and should produce cognitive dissonance which would let you realize that one of your assumptions is in error. If I said that comments like yours are frequently written by Jewish transsexuals, you might object to that. You might, at the very least, think it's a weird thing I believe, to ascribe patterns of thinking and writing based on gender or ethnicity. You might also think, even if you couldn't exactly pin down how this belief of mine was problematic, that it represented a kind of belief that would be better off not shared. "Hey, I'm not saying anything bad about Jewish transsexuals, just observing that they regularly write comments like this and get defensive when I point it out!" If I replied like that, you might think I was just gaslighting you rather than having a genuine discussion. Regarding how I can blame you - I have already made this clear. You (negatively) characterize people based on their race and gender and ascribe properties to them. The central idea of your comment, that not everyone is in a position to choose what to work on, is very obvious and you deliver it with hostility and cynicism as if you were sharing verboten secrets.
      - throwlaplace 7y ago
        This is how I'm precise where you're not: I'm literally quoting you and myself and you're just further adducing strange comparisons. So again I challenge you directly quote my value judgments of the author. You can't though. Because none were made because my only point is that advice is facile for whom it is relevant and impractical for everyone else. >Hey, I'm not saying anything bad about Jewish transsexuals... I have no idea where you pulled this one from but let's run with it: if I saw comments and articles being written by Jewish Israelis about the impossibility for various reasons of the two state solution I would absolutely point that out without a shred of shame or cognitive dissonance. >You (negatively) characterize people based on their race and gender and ascribe properties to them. Show me where I ascribe a single negative property to the author? I explicitly said many many many times that the article is what I'm impugning. I said the writing is self-indulgent and the writing is self-aggrandizing. You can come to his defense all you want but he's not under attack - the facile categorical imperatives are. Even if I weren't crystal clear in the initial comment every single one afterwards has underscored that I'm talking about the article. But you (and everyone that downvotes) willfully misconstrues in order to reaffirm their own allergy. >very obvious and you deliver it with hostility and cynicism as if you were sharing verboten secrets. I'll say it again: if that were obvious this post wouldn't have gotten traction. Edit: you know what's beyond aggravating about having these meta-debates with people like you? The complete and utter lack of empathy on your part for anyone but this supposedly aggrieved/offended person. Do you understand how obnoxious it is to come to hn and be ambushed by this kind of humble-brag jibbering? We don't all live in this world and it is all kinds of disappointing to read this constantly. I choose to avoid it on every other media channel (I don't use fb or ig etc).I don't understand why this stuff gets posted here under the guise of "startup culture". It's personal brand building! It belongs in an issue of people magazine rather than a tech site (there's nary a technical issue raised in the entire 1000 words). I say ambushed because I confused this person with Jeremy Kuhn and figured the article was going to be about np approximations.
  - bsanr2 7y ago
    He's describing a class, which he defines in part by race, but that he also qualifies outside race. I agree that this sort of first-world, upper-class (and yes, to a large extent, white) navel-gazing can seem offensively trite to people who might not have so many options, especially when the systems that produced each's circumstance are one and the same. >One possibility is that the voters of hackernews are too fragile to handle your potent truths. This is it, honestly.

by vntx 7y ago

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.

deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
ALittleLight 7y ago
I don't think the expectation that you not use race and gender as a pejorative is setting a terribly high bar. If I observed that comments like yours were "often written by <non-male gender> <non-white race/ethnicity>" I think it would be more obvious to you that your language was problematic. Why not extend to everyone the courtesies you expect to be extended to some? Laughing at people "chasing you to downvote you" strikes me as the same kind of cynicism and hostility that encouraged people to downvote you before. One possibility is that the voters of hackernews are too fragile to handle your potent truths. Another is that you are making banal observations in a hostile way and people are simply downvoting you to signal that such comments aren't appreciated.
- throwlaplace 7y ago
  >I don't think the expectation that you not use race and gender as a pejorative is setting a terribly high bar I already responded to this accusation. I asked you in particular to point out where I used race and gender problematically. here it in the first response to you: >>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). You have not but you continue to claim I have. That's very convenient isn't it? just to recapitulate: this is the only place i've mentioned race and class and gender: > smart privileged person (usually elite educated white guy) decides to pontificate what exactly about this is unacceptable in the least? To bring up that race and gender and class inform biases of an author is not pejorative unless you have a vested interest in protecting that bias. I am cynical because I write very precisely and very clearly and do not use "purple" language and yet the supposedly astute readers of hn still react viscerally rather than dispassionately. How can you blame me? These kinds of conversations tacitly verboten on hn because they are heavily censured.
  - ALittleLight 7y ago
    Writing precisely and being regularly misinterpreted are incongruous and should produce cognitive dissonance which would let you realize that one of your assumptions is in error. If I said that comments like yours are frequently written by Jewish transsexuals, you might object to that. You might, at the very least, think it's a weird thing I believe, to ascribe patterns of thinking and writing based on gender or ethnicity. You might also think, even if you couldn't exactly pin down how this belief of mine was problematic, that it represented a kind of belief that would be better off not shared. "Hey, I'm not saying anything bad about Jewish transsexuals, just observing that they regularly write comments like this and get defensive when I point it out!" If I replied like that, you might think I was just gaslighting you rather than having a genuine discussion. Regarding how I can blame you - I have already made this clear. You (negatively) characterize people based on their race and gender and ascribe properties to them. The central idea of your comment, that not everyone is in a position to choose what to work on, is very obvious and you deliver it with hostility and cynicism as if you were sharing verboten secrets.
    - throwlaplace 7y ago
      This is how I'm precise where you're not: I'm literally quoting you and myself and you're just further adducing strange comparisons. So again I challenge you directly quote my value judgments of the author. You can't though. Because none were made because my only point is that advice is facile for whom it is relevant and impractical for everyone else. >Hey, I'm not saying anything bad about Jewish transsexuals... I have no idea where you pulled this one from but let's run with it: if I saw comments and articles being written by Jewish Israelis about the impossibility for various reasons of the two state solution I would absolutely point that out without a shred of shame or cognitive dissonance. >You (negatively) characterize people based on their race and gender and ascribe properties to them. Show me where I ascribe a single negative property to the author? I explicitly said many many many times that the article is what I'm impugning. I said the writing is self-indulgent and the writing is self-aggrandizing. You can come to his defense all you want but he's not under attack - the facile categorical imperatives are. Even if I weren't crystal clear in the initial comment every single one afterwards has underscored that I'm talking about the article. But you (and everyone that downvotes) willfully misconstrues in order to reaffirm their own allergy. >very obvious and you deliver it with hostility and cynicism as if you were sharing verboten secrets. I'll say it again: if that were obvious this post wouldn't have gotten traction. Edit: you know what's beyond aggravating about having these meta-debates with people like you? The complete and utter lack of empathy on your part for anyone but this supposedly aggrieved/offended person. Do you understand how obnoxious it is to come to hn and be ambushed by this kind of humble-brag jibbering? We don't all live in this world and it is all kinds of disappointing to read this constantly. I choose to avoid it on every other media channel (I don't use fb or ig etc).I don't understand why this stuff gets posted here under the guise of "startup culture". It's personal brand building! It belongs in an issue of people magazine rather than a tech site (there's nary a technical issue raised in the entire 1000 words). I say ambushed because I confused this person with Jeremy Kuhn and figured the article was going to be about np approximations.
- bsanr2 7y ago
  He's describing a class, which he defines in part by race, but that he also qualifies outside race. I agree that this sort of first-world, upper-class (and yes, to a large extent, white) navel-gazing can seem offensively trite to people who might not have so many options, especially when the systems that produced each's circumstance are one and the same. >One possibility is that the voters of hackernews are too fragile to handle your potent truths. This is it, honestly.