> I'm pretty sure that if you re-read your comment after some time has gone by, you'll see that it wasn't just "bringing objectivity to the conversation". Perh

> I'm pretty sure that if you re-read your comment after some time has gone by, you'll see that it wasn't just "bringing objectivity to the conversation". Perhaps objectivity may not be the most precise word. Maybe "another point of view". Or better yet, the middle ground. I was trying to counter her extremism the best I could. > It's easy to understand how DoreenMichele's post could have triggered a defensive/offensive response. Because it was flamebait. It was intentionally divisive and toxic extremism. It's no different than what racists, chauvanists and all kinds of extremists do. By now, it's obvious to most people who aren't ideologically blind. Replace "men" with "women" in her comment and you'd spot the hateful sexism right away. I'm sure of it. > The difference with DoreenMichele's comment is that she was speaking about her personal experience. No. It's not. There was no personal anecdote, no mention of personal event. Just generalizations like "if you are a woman ... " and some bizarre projection about "what men think". That's the point. It's an obvious exaggeration. The easy tell is that she ended her diatribe with a defensive "No, I am not exaggerating.". Even if her experience were real, her sexist comment is clearly not what HN is about. If you are truly sincere, would you allow people who had negative experiences with "jews", "chinese", "blacks", "gays" or "women" to freely express their views here? Can someone take their personal negative experience and then extrapolate that to most jews, most chinese, most blacks, most gays or most women? Of course not. It would be insane to paint millions or billions of people with the same brush. > You've unfortunately been making a habit of posting in the flamewar style and/or including harsh swipes in your HN comments: Yes, I made a mistake here or there, but then again, it was mostly in response to flamebait from an obvious bigot and trolling throwaways. I've never went out of my way to attack a certain gender, race, religion, etc like DoreenMichele. > ...and we already asked you to stop doing this. That's why my reply to you used stronger language this time. And it's why my response to DoreenMichele was far tamer than my response to the throwaway. And it may be personal bias, but the more I read her comment and mine, the more it feels like hers is extremely biased and hateful while mine is relatively benign. > That is in all of our interests. Fair moderation. That's all I ask for. I know it's a tough job but honestly, if I felt that the commenter would have been admonished, I wouldn't have wasted my time responding to her in the first place. Because her comment is like all hate speech - they all follow the same pattern and hit the same beats. It's boring. But if left unchecked it'll fester and grow. Still shocked she hasn't been reprimanded and her hateful comment hasn't been flagged. But I'll try do better and I'm sure you will try to do better and hopefully DoreenMichele comes to terms with her hate and has a better life both on and off the internet.