3 ms·

This reads as the equivalent of an ad hominem argument - why not address your concerns with the merits of what was said, rather than just dismiss it as propagan

This reads as the equivalent of an ad hominem argument - why not address your concerns with the merits of what was said, rather than just dismiss it as propaganda?

f38zf5vdt 6y ago
The same link has been posted several times in this thread by several accounts, all in a similar manner. Several days ago there was another COVID19 posting with "FREE MICHIGAN" and similar bizarre, anti-intellectual ramblings. Unfortunately HackerNews/YCombinator is the one controlling the identities on this website, so without access to more information I'm unable to discern much about the authorship of these comments.
- roody15 6y ago
  I posted the link. I a system admin for a organization with 900 employees. Think using anti-intellectual rambling is unfair and overly simplistic. No problem if you disagree about best response to covid but leave room to hear some opposing viewpoints without labeling them bizarre or rants.
- dang 6y ago
  That's why the site guidelines specifically ask people not to post accusations of astroturfing or brigading without evidence: "Please don't post insinuations about astroturfing, shilling, brigading, foreign agents and the like. It degrades discussion and is usually mistaken. If you're worried about abuse, email hn@ycombinator.com and we'll look at the data." https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html Users are overwhelmingly (as in, thousands of times) too quick to assume organized malice as an explanation for material that they don't like appearing on the internet. This is a symptom of how divided society is on divisive topics. People disagree, but they don't believe that the disagreements are legitimate. For a site like HN, accusations like what you posted are much more toxic than the problem you're complaining about. There's tons of past explanation here: https://hn.algolia.com/?sort=byDate&dateRange=all&type=comment&storyText=false&prefix=true&page=0&query=by:dang%20astroturf https://hn.algolia.com/?sort=byDate&dateRange=all&type=comme... Before anyone comes out with "dang says astroturfing doesn't exist"—no, the point is that there are two problems: real astroturfing, and imaginary internet accusations about it. Anyone assuming only the former is making a huge mistake. So what's the solution? Obviously we have to try to distinguish between the one and the other based on some sort of objective evidence. It's not enough to dislike someone else's view on a difficult topic like Covid and then say "brigading!"

This reads as the equivalent of an ad hominem argument - why not address your concerns with the merits of what was said, rather than just dismiss it as propaganda?

f38zf5vdt 6y ago

The same link has been posted several times in this thread by several accounts, all in a similar manner. Several days ago there was another COVID19 posting with "FREE MICHIGAN" and similar bizarre, anti-intellectual ramblings. Unfortunately HackerNews/YCombinator is the one controlling the identities on this website, so without access to more information I'm unable to discern much about the authorship of these comments.

roody15 6y ago
I posted the link. I a system admin for a organization with 900 employees. Think using anti-intellectual rambling is unfair and overly simplistic. No problem if you disagree about best response to covid but leave room to hear some opposing viewpoints without labeling them bizarre or rants.
dang 6y ago
That's why the site guidelines specifically ask people not to post accusations of astroturfing or brigading without evidence: "Please don't post insinuations about astroturfing, shilling, brigading, foreign agents and the like. It degrades discussion and is usually mistaken. If you're worried about abuse, email hn@ycombinator.com and we'll look at the data." https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html Users are overwhelmingly (as in, thousands of times) too quick to assume organized malice as an explanation for material that they don't like appearing on the internet. This is a symptom of how divided society is on divisive topics. People disagree, but they don't believe that the disagreements are legitimate. For a site like HN, accusations like what you posted are much more toxic than the problem you're complaining about. There's tons of past explanation here: https://hn.algolia.com/?sort=byDate&dateRange=all&type=comment&storyText=false&prefix=true&page=0&query=by:dang%20astroturf https://hn.algolia.com/?sort=byDate&dateRange=all&type=comme... Before anyone comes out with "dang says astroturfing doesn't exist"—no, the point is that there are two problems: real astroturfing, and imaginary internet accusations about it. Anyone assuming only the former is making a huge mistake. So what's the solution? Obviously we have to try to distinguish between the one and the other based on some sort of objective evidence. It's not enough to dislike someone else's view on a difficult topic like Covid and then say "brigading!"