10 ms·

>Are you willing to pay 50-100 euros/dollars per year to keep MDN afloat? Yes, as long as there is a guarantee that my money will go towards actually paying pe

>Are you willing to pay 50-100 euros/dollars per year to keep MDN afloat? Yes, as long as there is a guarantee that my money will go towards actually paying people who update the documentation rather than CEO salary, degenerate activism or doomed web startups. >Create an independent entity like Fronteers, but then international, get members to pay 50-100 euros/dollars per year, and use that money to fund MDN or its successor. Sounds like a decent idea, but a Patreon-style funding with different tiers will probably yield even better results.

artificial 6y ago
If it were to be obeyed, a slider like the Humble Bundle where the allocation to the charity, game provider, and HB are manipulatable would be fantastic.
- jjordan 6y ago
  Fantastic idea. I'd be much more likely to donate to Mozilla if I could specifically allocate it to dev tools or MDN.
nix23 6y ago
>rather than CEO salary, degenerate activism or doomed web startups. Boom you hit the exact right spot!! Love it!
bloat 6y ago
Do you have these standards with all companies you pay for services? Seems like it might limit you somewhat...
- z3ncyberpunk 6y ago
  That's the problem. People like you don't care about standards so companies run amuck while you just accept it and degrade the ecosystem.
- giancarlostoro 6y ago
  Paying for services is different from donating to a large entity where you have no guarantee of where your money goes. Paying Microsoft for Office products for example I know I'm getting Office, aka what I'm paying for. In the case of tech based non-profits you have no idea where your money ends up. Unless you're a billionaire funding a new "part" of a non-profit or donating specifically to MDN, other people who can only donate say $50 might not be so lucky. Edit: This also makes me wonder if there's non-profits that work on tech that aren't throwing their money away beyond the scope of the project. The moment non-profits are doing more than just paying engineers and other essential employees / volunteers I begin to worry a bit.
- derivagral 6y ago
  Buying a service is quite different from an actual donation.
- luckylion 6y ago
  Don't you? If e.g. Verizon spent plenty of money lobbying for murdering Kittens and beating puppies, would you choose to spend your money with Verizon instead of a competitor? Why, the quality of their product isn't impacted by their lobbying campaigns.
learc83 6y ago
>degenerate activism What is degenerate activism?
- th0ma5 6y ago
  That's a kind of far right virtue signalling as far as I can tell. In my opinion, it is wild projection, but it seems to try to label any progressive ideal as regression.
  - outime 6y ago
    I'm not OP but I think you're reading between the lines. I feel OP though - I'd donate to a cause if my money doesn't go towards political alignments of any kind. I'm tired of NGOs or similar entities taking stances over stuff I didn't ask for. I just want them to do one thing, who gave you permission to use my donation to do a completely different thing, even if well intentioned?
    - CarelessExpert 6y ago
      > I'd donate to a cause if my money doesn't go towards political alignments of any kind. That's... well, naive, I guess? Every single NGO picks an issue, and that issue has a political angle to it. Not only do I think it's unreasonable to expect an NGO to be apolitical, I think it's flat out impossible. I would ask you: Do you really want NGOs to be apolitical? Or do you want them to share your political alignment, and in that way be non-controversial?
      - outime 6y ago
        There are NGOs that don't take public stances, you just have to look out for them (depends on your country as well I guess?). It's fine if you want to accept everyone is corrupt and will have hidden causes ("that's naive") but I don't and other people share this. >Or do you want them to share your political alignment, and in that way be non-controversial? Please stop these kind of assumptions - it just feels childish. I don't want political stances of any kind from an organization that's getting my money to make a specific thing better. If I was to donate to MDN to make docs better, I don't want stances on far-right or far-left. I want my money to be used to produce better documentation, period.
CarelessExpert 6y ago
> Yes, as long as there is a guarantee that my money will go towards actually paying people who update the documentation rather than CEO salary, degenerate activism or doomed web startups. Interestingly, this same sentiment is a huge part of why charitable giving runs into problems. A lot of people are willing to give, so long as they get to decide what is done with their funds. Of course, these same people have no idea what it actually takes to run a charity; they have no idea what on-the-ground problems need to be solved day-to-day; they have absolutely zero understanding of the organizational supports needed to make any organization function. They're basically in the worst possible position to decide how best to use those funds. But they still want to decide how they're used. This despite the fact that they're ostensibly donating to a charitable organization specifically because that organization possesses all that expertise; expertise that costs real money to attract and retain, since they're ultimately competing against the private sector. It's one of the reasons why, when I donate to a charity, I never specify how I want those funds to be used; I recognize that the charity is in a far better position to make that decision than I am. I feel like there's a connection to Dunning-Kreuger in here somewhere...
- avasthe 6y ago
  It need not take such high salaried non-technical CEO, degenerate activism or doomed web startups to run something like Mozilla.
  - kevingadd 6y ago
    A lot of what Mozilla did/does is functionally activism, "degenerate" is mostly a matter of personal opinion. For example things like fighting against EME and H264 on the web were both absolutely, objectively activism: Entirely based on moral/ethical grounds, not anything to do with the actual customer experience. The average person used Chrome or Safari to watch EME-encrypted H264 streaming video on sites like Netflix and did not give a shit, only Degenerate Activists like Mozilla employees & community gecko contributors actually cared. And they lost. Much of what the Firefox and Safari teams do on standards committees is activism as well: fighting against useful standards from the big player because they believe the standards are bad for users. I generally agree, but it's impossible to claim that it's anything other than activism (pro-privacy, etc) when the average Chrome user just goes 'cool, I can use my midi keyboard and bluetooth headset with my web browser'. Mozilla was a doomed web startup up until the point where Firefox finally succeeded. Now they're doomed again. I won't even claim that's false - I think it's probably true - but it's a fact that the effort was hopeless early on too. This is my perspective as someone who previously got paid to work on Firefox, then later got paid to work on Chrome, and had an offer to get paid to work on Safari. I think people who complain about Firefox often don't understand what the web actually is and what Mozilla actually does. To be fair, Mozilla is poor at educating people about it.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
nightski 6y ago
I'd donate it (or hell even double that) and honestly I don't care what it goes towards as long as MDN stays afloat and/or the future of Firefox is guaranteed.
jmull 6y ago
> Yes, as long as there is a guarantee that my money will go towards actually paying people who update the documentation rather than CEO salary, degenerate activism or doomed web startups. In other words, “No.” Not that it’s good that Mozilla spends money on that stuff. But for $50-$100/year you want not just a web reference, but significant control over the company that produces it. That’s just not going to happen, so you might as well just say, “No.”
- wsc981 6y ago
  Not really a donation (more a purchase), but what I like with Humble Bundle [0] is that I can choose what percentage of money I want to give to which organisation. Usually there are 3 options: - The developers of the software in the bundle - Humble Bundle organisation - Charities Usually I send 90% of my "donation" to the developers of the software and 10% to the Humble Bundle organisation. Perhaps charities should have a similar donation mechanism where one can choose what percentage of ones' donation should be spent on: - Management - Marketing - Field workers - Charity itself - Other ...? Given such options, I might choose to spend 5% on Management, 10% on field workers and remaining 85% on the charity itself. --- [0]: https://www.humblebundle.com https://www.humblebundle.com
Frondo 6y ago
Degenerate activism? Come on.
JaggedJax 6y ago
It looks like MDN has its own donation option separate from the Mozilla Foundation. They are pretty clear that the donations go towards MDN specifically. I suppose if this had been more well known about and supported the team may have survived, but supporting them directly could help grow that again. https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/payments/ https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/payments/ edit: Looking into this further, I cannot figure out how to actually donate. It looks like they killed this donation program, maybe they should bring it back now.
- hvis 6y ago
  "You will be MDN member number 45" I wonder if the number is such because they killed off the active subscription, or the program was only this "successful" to begin with.
koolba 6y ago
I don’t really care much about the CEO salary either. Turning a technical writing project into a political crusade or flushing funds down the toilet of terrible unrelated startup ideas are both much worse than the overhead from an overpaid CEO.
nwsm 6y ago
>degenerate activism What's this in reference to, specifically?
- 542458 6y ago
  Feels like a dogwhistle to me, although I hope it is just an unfortunate choice of words. Describing causes as degenerate has a pretty sordid history, with the “degeneracy” in question usually being human rights.
- Goronmon 6y ago
  Privacy concerns maybe?
- NationalPark 6y ago
  It's a culture war thing, it usually refers to LGBT or non-trad people/ideas/relationships. It's definitely pejorative.
- shirakawasuna 6y ago
  Bigoted dog whistle borrowed from literal Nazis. Edit: interesting that there are so many downvotes. Consider yourself lucky that this seems absurd to you, because it's borrowed directly from Nazi "degenerate art" and "degenerate music" and used like this almost exclusively in modern alt-right contexts to mean those falling outside of their ideal (bigoted) worldview.
  - dang 6y ago
    I used the word "degenerate" myself the other day (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24041589 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24041589) and assure you it wasn't any kind of dog whistle. Obviously the GP should have ommitted that flamebait (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24160738 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24160738), but a comment like yours also breaks the site guidelines—specifically this one: "Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize. Assume good faith." Going straight to Nazis is one habit that rule is intended to check. It leads to extremely predictable discussion that inevitably gets nasty because that's the only way for it not to be boring (https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&sort=byDate&type=comment&query=mind%20amuse%20by:dang https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&sor...). https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
cmrdporcupine 6y ago
"degenerate activism" -- really? You could have just stopped with the other two.
- tdeck 6y ago
  It's odd to see people unselfconsciously use the term "degenerate" these days. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Degenerate_art https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Degenerate_art
  - Fauntleroy 6y ago
    I guess we're far enough away from WWII for people to actually start romanticizing Nazis. Guess there's always a cutoff point for that kind of thing, but I thought it'd be at least 100 years.
  - thomasz 6y ago
    This was a dogwhistle, not unselfconscious use of a loaded term.
    - cmrdporcupine 6y ago
      Ah well, I'm a proud degenerate. Better that than a deplorable, I guess.
    - dang 6y ago
      "Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize. Assume good faith." More here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24160874 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24160874 https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
      - hansjorg 6y ago
        You routinely seem to allow (as in it not even warranting a comment) straight up dehumanizing language from many participants in here. I realize this kind of behaviour has been normalized by the president over the last four years, but I thought HN was better than this.
westoque 6y ago
> >Are you willing to pay 50-100 euros/dollars per year to keep MDN afloat? Yes as well. I consider myself pretty conservative with my spending but with regards to free things that benefit me, I am thankful, so I donate. I believe people should do more.
dang 6y ago
> degenerate That breaks the site guidelines against flamebait calling names in arguments. Casual bomb-throwing leads to flamewars, and you started numerous flames with just that one word. We're trying to avoid that here, so please don't. You don't need that to make your point, so please stick to the rules. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- monksy 6y ago
  I completely agree where you're coming from however, in the case of Mozilla I believe that the reference is relevant. If you see that the company is producing a good product that you're donating to support. Would the "customers" (supporters) want to support the time and cost associated with kicking out the CEO over personal+(believed to be) private activities? (Context: Brandon Eich donated 1k of his personal money to a conservative/anti-gay org, and an activist within mozilla found+escalated this and claimed hostile work environment, eventually got him removed) If I was donating, I would be pissed to know that valuable time was wasted about that and the loss of talent of personal politics and disagreement.
  - dang 6y ago
    I'm responding to the word "degenerate", which was name-calling and flamebait. I don't see any problem with the comment otherwise. I've taken out the word "activism" in my GP comment to make that clearer. Edit: "don't see any problem" does not mean I agree with the comment. It means I don't see any other place that it broke the site guidelines.
  - micv 6y ago
    What part of being heavily opposed to homophobic organisation is degenerate in your opinion?
    - dang 6y ago
      Please don't start this again. HN is a site for curiosity, not repetition (https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&sort=byDate&type=comment&query=curiosity%20repetition%20by:dang https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&so...) and particularly not flamewars (https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html), which are the most destructive form of repetition. The GP should not have posted flamebait, and the repliers should not have taken the bait.
cultus 6y ago
Please keep your disgusting far-right dog-whistles off HN.

artificial 6y ago

If it were to be obeyed, a slider like the Humble Bundle where the allocation to the charity, game provider, and HB are manipulatable would be fantastic.

jjordan 6y ago
Fantastic idea. I'd be much more likely to donate to Mozilla if I could specifically allocate it to dev tools or MDN.

nix23 6y ago

>rather than CEO salary, degenerate activism or doomed web startups. Boom you hit the exact right spot!! Love it!

bloat 6y ago

Do you have these standards with all companies you pay for services? Seems like it might limit you somewhat...

z3ncyberpunk 6y ago
That's the problem. People like you don't care about standards so companies run amuck while you just accept it and degrade the ecosystem.
giancarlostoro 6y ago
Paying for services is different from donating to a large entity where you have no guarantee of where your money goes. Paying Microsoft for Office products for example I know I'm getting Office, aka what I'm paying for. In the case of tech based non-profits you have no idea where your money ends up. Unless you're a billionaire funding a new "part" of a non-profit or donating specifically to MDN, other people who can only donate say $50 might not be so lucky. Edit: This also makes me wonder if there's non-profits that work on tech that aren't throwing their money away beyond the scope of the project. The moment non-profits are doing more than just paying engineers and other essential employees / volunteers I begin to worry a bit.
derivagral 6y ago
Buying a service is quite different from an actual donation.
luckylion 6y ago
Don't you? If e.g. Verizon spent plenty of money lobbying for murdering Kittens and beating puppies, would you choose to spend your money with Verizon instead of a competitor? Why, the quality of their product isn't impacted by their lobbying campaigns.

learc83 6y ago

>degenerate activism What is degenerate activism?

th0ma5 6y ago
That's a kind of far right virtue signalling as far as I can tell. In my opinion, it is wild projection, but it seems to try to label any progressive ideal as regression.
- outime 6y ago
  I'm not OP but I think you're reading between the lines. I feel OP though - I'd donate to a cause if my money doesn't go towards political alignments of any kind. I'm tired of NGOs or similar entities taking stances over stuff I didn't ask for. I just want them to do one thing, who gave you permission to use my donation to do a completely different thing, even if well intentioned?
  - CarelessExpert 6y ago
    > I'd donate to a cause if my money doesn't go towards political alignments of any kind. That's... well, naive, I guess? Every single NGO picks an issue, and that issue has a political angle to it. Not only do I think it's unreasonable to expect an NGO to be apolitical, I think it's flat out impossible. I would ask you: Do you really want NGOs to be apolitical? Or do you want them to share your political alignment, and in that way be non-controversial?
    - outime 6y ago
      There are NGOs that don't take public stances, you just have to look out for them (depends on your country as well I guess?). It's fine if you want to accept everyone is corrupt and will have hidden causes ("that's naive") but I don't and other people share this. >Or do you want them to share your political alignment, and in that way be non-controversial? Please stop these kind of assumptions - it just feels childish. I don't want political stances of any kind from an organization that's getting my money to make a specific thing better. If I was to donate to MDN to make docs better, I don't want stances on far-right or far-left. I want my money to be used to produce better documentation, period.

CarelessExpert 6y ago

> Yes, as long as there is a guarantee that my money will go towards actually paying people who update the documentation rather than CEO salary, degenerate activism or doomed web startups. Interestingly, this same sentiment is a huge part of why charitable giving runs into problems. A lot of people are willing to give, so long as they get to decide what is done with their funds. Of course, these same people have no idea what it actually takes to run a charity; they have no idea what on-the-ground problems need to be solved day-to-day; they have absolutely zero understanding of the organizational supports needed to make any organization function. They're basically in the worst possible position to decide how best to use those funds. But they still want to decide how they're used. This despite the fact that they're ostensibly donating to a charitable organization specifically because that organization possesses all that expertise; expertise that costs real money to attract and retain, since they're ultimately competing against the private sector. It's one of the reasons why, when I donate to a charity, I never specify how I want those funds to be used; I recognize that the charity is in a far better position to make that decision than I am. I feel like there's a connection to Dunning-Kreuger in here somewhere...

avasthe 6y ago
It need not take such high salaried non-technical CEO, degenerate activism or doomed web startups to run something like Mozilla.
- kevingadd 6y ago
  A lot of what Mozilla did/does is functionally activism, "degenerate" is mostly a matter of personal opinion. For example things like fighting against EME and H264 on the web were both absolutely, objectively activism: Entirely based on moral/ethical grounds, not anything to do with the actual customer experience. The average person used Chrome or Safari to watch EME-encrypted H264 streaming video on sites like Netflix and did not give a shit, only Degenerate Activists like Mozilla employees & community gecko contributors actually cared. And they lost. Much of what the Firefox and Safari teams do on standards committees is activism as well: fighting against useful standards from the big player because they believe the standards are bad for users. I generally agree, but it's impossible to claim that it's anything other than activism (pro-privacy, etc) when the average Chrome user just goes 'cool, I can use my midi keyboard and bluetooth headset with my web browser'. Mozilla was a doomed web startup up until the point where Firefox finally succeeded. Now they're doomed again. I won't even claim that's false - I think it's probably true - but it's a fact that the effort was hopeless early on too. This is my perspective as someone who previously got paid to work on Firefox, then later got paid to work on Chrome, and had an offer to get paid to work on Safari. I think people who complain about Firefox often don't understand what the web actually is and what Mozilla actually does. To be fair, Mozilla is poor at educating people about it.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

nightski 6y ago

I'd donate it (or hell even double that) and honestly I don't care what it goes towards as long as MDN stays afloat and/or the future of Firefox is guaranteed.

jmull 6y ago

> Yes, as long as there is a guarantee that my money will go towards actually paying people who update the documentation rather than CEO salary, degenerate activism or doomed web startups. In other words, “No.” Not that it’s good that Mozilla spends money on that stuff. But for $50-$100/year you want not just a web reference, but significant control over the company that produces it. That’s just not going to happen, so you might as well just say, “No.”

wsc981 6y ago
Not really a donation (more a purchase), but what I like with Humble Bundle [0] is that I can choose what percentage of money I want to give to which organisation. Usually there are 3 options: - The developers of the software in the bundle - Humble Bundle organisation - Charities Usually I send 90% of my "donation" to the developers of the software and 10% to the Humble Bundle organisation. Perhaps charities should have a similar donation mechanism where one can choose what percentage of ones' donation should be spent on: - Management - Marketing - Field workers - Charity itself - Other ...? Given such options, I might choose to spend 5% on Management, 10% on field workers and remaining 85% on the charity itself. --- [0]: https://www.humblebundle.com https://www.humblebundle.com

Frondo 6y ago

Degenerate activism? Come on.

JaggedJax 6y ago

It looks like MDN has its own donation option separate from the Mozilla Foundation. They are pretty clear that the donations go towards MDN specifically. I suppose if this had been more well known about and supported the team may have survived, but supporting them directly could help grow that again. https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/payments/ https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/payments/ edit: Looking into this further, I cannot figure out how to actually donate. It looks like they killed this donation program, maybe they should bring it back now.

hvis 6y ago
"You will be MDN member number 45" I wonder if the number is such because they killed off the active subscription, or the program was only this "successful" to begin with.

koolba 6y ago

I don’t really care much about the CEO salary either. Turning a technical writing project into a political crusade or flushing funds down the toilet of terrible unrelated startup ideas are both much worse than the overhead from an overpaid CEO.

nwsm 6y ago

>degenerate activism What's this in reference to, specifically?

542458 6y ago
Feels like a dogwhistle to me, although I hope it is just an unfortunate choice of words. Describing causes as degenerate has a pretty sordid history, with the “degeneracy” in question usually being human rights.
Goronmon 6y ago
Privacy concerns maybe?
NationalPark 6y ago
It's a culture war thing, it usually refers to LGBT or non-trad people/ideas/relationships. It's definitely pejorative.
shirakawasuna 6y ago
Bigoted dog whistle borrowed from literal Nazis. Edit: interesting that there are so many downvotes. Consider yourself lucky that this seems absurd to you, because it's borrowed directly from Nazi "degenerate art" and "degenerate music" and used like this almost exclusively in modern alt-right contexts to mean those falling outside of their ideal (bigoted) worldview.
- dang 6y ago
  I used the word "degenerate" myself the other day (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24041589 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24041589) and assure you it wasn't any kind of dog whistle. Obviously the GP should have ommitted that flamebait (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24160738 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24160738), but a comment like yours also breaks the site guidelines—specifically this one: "Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize. Assume good faith." Going straight to Nazis is one habit that rule is intended to check. It leads to extremely predictable discussion that inevitably gets nasty because that's the only way for it not to be boring (https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&sort=byDate&type=comment&query=mind%20amuse%20by:dang https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&sor...). https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

cmrdporcupine 6y ago

"degenerate activism" -- really? You could have just stopped with the other two.

tdeck 6y ago
It's odd to see people unselfconsciously use the term "degenerate" these days. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Degenerate_art https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Degenerate_art
- Fauntleroy 6y ago
  I guess we're far enough away from WWII for people to actually start romanticizing Nazis. Guess there's always a cutoff point for that kind of thing, but I thought it'd be at least 100 years.
- thomasz 6y ago
  This was a dogwhistle, not unselfconscious use of a loaded term.
  - cmrdporcupine 6y ago
    Ah well, I'm a proud degenerate. Better that than a deplorable, I guess.
  - dang 6y ago
    "Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize. Assume good faith." More here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24160874 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24160874 https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
    - hansjorg 6y ago
      You routinely seem to allow (as in it not even warranting a comment) straight up dehumanizing language from many participants in here. I realize this kind of behaviour has been normalized by the president over the last four years, but I thought HN was better than this.

westoque 6y ago

> >Are you willing to pay 50-100 euros/dollars per year to keep MDN afloat? Yes as well. I consider myself pretty conservative with my spending but with regards to free things that benefit me, I am thankful, so I donate. I believe people should do more.

dang 6y ago

> degenerate That breaks the site guidelines against flamebait calling names in arguments. Casual bomb-throwing leads to flamewars, and you started numerous flames with just that one word. We're trying to avoid that here, so please don't. You don't need that to make your point, so please stick to the rules. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

monksy 6y ago
I completely agree where you're coming from however, in the case of Mozilla I believe that the reference is relevant. If you see that the company is producing a good product that you're donating to support. Would the "customers" (supporters) want to support the time and cost associated with kicking out the CEO over personal+(believed to be) private activities? (Context: Brandon Eich donated 1k of his personal money to a conservative/anti-gay org, and an activist within mozilla found+escalated this and claimed hostile work environment, eventually got him removed) If I was donating, I would be pissed to know that valuable time was wasted about that and the loss of talent of personal politics and disagreement.
- dang 6y ago
  I'm responding to the word "degenerate", which was name-calling and flamebait. I don't see any problem with the comment otherwise. I've taken out the word "activism" in my GP comment to make that clearer. Edit: "don't see any problem" does not mean I agree with the comment. It means I don't see any other place that it broke the site guidelines.
- micv 6y ago
  What part of being heavily opposed to homophobic organisation is degenerate in your opinion?
  - dang 6y ago
    Please don't start this again. HN is a site for curiosity, not repetition (https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&sort=byDate&type=comment&query=curiosity%20repetition%20by:dang https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&so...) and particularly not flamewars (https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html), which are the most destructive form of repetition. The GP should not have posted flamebait, and the repliers should not have taken the bait.

cultus 6y ago

Please keep your disgusting far-right dog-whistles off HN.