3 ms·

Please don't post unsubstantive comments here.

dang 7y ago
You're right, of course, but the system doesn't regulate itself without moderation comments and unfortunately my job involves posting them. They're a necessary evil, in the same way that some medicines are toxic: one uses them when the alternative is worse. If it helps at all, such comments are even more tedious to write than to read. https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&query=by%3Adang%20tedious%20write%20read&sort=byDate&type=comment https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...
- petecox 7y ago
  No, you are completely out of line. The coal industry needs to be shut down. The IPCC first convened three decades ago and yet batshit crazy denialist fuckers in Queensland are still proposing new coal mines to gift their mates billions of dollars in government subsidies and money laundering. 'orderly transition' is a complete lie. They've had 30 years of doing nothing. Sorry for the strong language but your heavy handed moderation reads like shilling for the fossil fuel industry.
  - dang 7y ago
    Empty comments saying nothing more than "yay side" or "boo side" are unsubstantive regardless of how good and right their cause might be. On HN, we're trying to optimize for intellectual curiosity, which is definitely not served when people repeat talking points. https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&query=by%3Adang%20curiosity%20optimiz&sort=byDate&type=comment https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que... It's not possible to have a site both for curiosity and for battle. In battle, repetition is critical: you have to hammer the same points over and over until you win. That affects curiosity the way that a tank battalion affects a park. Since we can't have both, we have to pick one; the one we pick here is curiosity. This implies nothing about any specific battle. It's simply the type of forum this is.
    - petecox 7y ago
      There is no intellectual curiosity in climate change denial. Don't editorialise.

dang 7y ago

You're right, of course, but the system doesn't regulate itself without moderation comments and unfortunately my job involves posting them. They're a necessary evil, in the same way that some medicines are toxic: one uses them when the alternative is worse. If it helps at all, such comments are even more tedious to write than to read. https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&query=by%3Adang%20tedious%20write%20read&sort=byDate&type=comment https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...

petecox 7y ago
No, you are completely out of line. The coal industry needs to be shut down. The IPCC first convened three decades ago and yet batshit crazy denialist fuckers in Queensland are still proposing new coal mines to gift their mates billions of dollars in government subsidies and money laundering. 'orderly transition' is a complete lie. They've had 30 years of doing nothing. Sorry for the strong language but your heavy handed moderation reads like shilling for the fossil fuel industry.
- dang 7y ago
  Empty comments saying nothing more than "yay side" or "boo side" are unsubstantive regardless of how good and right their cause might be. On HN, we're trying to optimize for intellectual curiosity, which is definitely not served when people repeat talking points. https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&query=by%3Adang%20curiosity%20optimiz&sort=byDate&type=comment https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que... It's not possible to have a site both for curiosity and for battle. In battle, repetition is critical: you have to hammer the same points over and over until you win. That affects curiosity the way that a tank battalion affects a park. Since we can't have both, we have to pick one; the one we pick here is curiosity. This implies nothing about any specific battle. It's simply the type of forum this is.
  - petecox 7y ago
    There is no intellectual curiosity in climate change denial. Don't editorialise.