4 ms·

I respectfully disagree with your interpretation of my comment. I tried to be as deliberate with my choice of words as I could be. Don't introduce flamewar top

I respectfully disagree with your interpretation of my comment. I tried to be as deliberate with my choice of words as I could be. Don't introduce flamewar topics unless you have something genuinely new to say. The entire premise of the site is to have a list of candidates based solely on gender and national origin. Discrimination is core to the product, so I asked a core, targeted question about it. Please don't post shallow dismissals, especially of other people's work. I never dismissed it, merely sought to further understand. Turning (or trying to turn) a Show HN into a flamewar is obviously against the Show HN rules also I never introduced the topic or product, merely tried to understand its justification. The show hn rules also state "When something isn't good, you needn't pretend that it is, but don't be gratuitously negative."

dang 6y ago
If you were seeking to further understand, you shouldn't have used pejorative language (which "discriminating based on sex and national origin" — nobody uses such phrases except as part of a condemnation) and cross-examination questioning ("Why is this acceptable?"). You also should have included something specific about this particular post, instead of tossing off something cheap and generic. This is not a hard call. The comment was obvious flamebait. Every remotely similar thread gets these generic, indignant objections, and they lead to the same flamewar over and over again. That's not what HN is for. > I never dismissed it, merely sought to further understand. That does not seem to me a plausible interpretation of your comment. If it really was your intent, you needed to make that much clearer. When it comes to inflammatory topics on the internet, the burden is on the commenter to disambiguate intent: https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&sort=byDate&type=comment&query=disambiguate%20burden%20by:dang https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&so.... If a comment looks like a drive-by one-liner and quacks like a drive-by one-liner, then it's trolling, whether you meant it to or not. We have to judge these things by their effects: https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&sort=byDate&type=comment&query=troll%20effects%20by:dang https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&sor....
- robertlagrant 6y ago
  > discriminating based on sex and national origin Disagree fully that this is automatically pejorative. If it's false (the first test of whether something can be considered pejorative) then explain why. If you can't, then the accusation falls at the first hurdle. If you can, then why bother with all the BUT THE RULES! nonsense when you could just say why the statement is false?
  - TheAdamAndChe 6y ago
    I'm the one who made the comment, and it was pejorative. By that, I mean it purposefully had a somewhat negative connotation to it. It's the language used in anti-discrimination laws.
- TheAdamAndChe 6y ago
  I see your point. Thank you, I'll try to avoid being unproductively negative like this again.

dang 6y ago

If you were seeking to further understand, you shouldn't have used pejorative language (which "discriminating based on sex and national origin" — nobody uses such phrases except as part of a condemnation) and cross-examination questioning ("Why is this acceptable?"). You also should have included something specific about this particular post, instead of tossing off something cheap and generic. This is not a hard call. The comment was obvious flamebait. Every remotely similar thread gets these generic, indignant objections, and they lead to the same flamewar over and over again. That's not what HN is for. > I never dismissed it, merely sought to further understand. That does not seem to me a plausible interpretation of your comment. If it really was your intent, you needed to make that much clearer. When it comes to inflammatory topics on the internet, the burden is on the commenter to disambiguate intent: https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&sort=byDate&type=comment&query=disambiguate%20burden%20by:dang https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&so.... If a comment looks like a drive-by one-liner and quacks like a drive-by one-liner, then it's trolling, whether you meant it to or not. We have to judge these things by their effects: https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&sort=byDate&type=comment&query=troll%20effects%20by:dang https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&sor....

robertlagrant 6y ago
> discriminating based on sex and national origin Disagree fully that this is automatically pejorative. If it's false (the first test of whether something can be considered pejorative) then explain why. If you can't, then the accusation falls at the first hurdle. If you can, then why bother with all the BUT THE RULES! nonsense when you could just say why the statement is false?
- TheAdamAndChe 6y ago
  I'm the one who made the comment, and it was pejorative. By that, I mean it purposefully had a somewhat negative connotation to it. It's the language used in anti-discrimination laws.
TheAdamAndChe 6y ago
I see your point. Thank you, I'll try to avoid being unproductively negative like this again.