12 ms·

Cause of death should be standard information when someone has passed away. If we're not supposed to talk about cause of death, then why should the age be menti

Cause of death should be standard information when someone has passed away. If we're not supposed to talk about cause of death, then why should the age be mentioned? Why should the location where the person passed away be said? Why include next of kin -- surely that's completely irrelevant unless you are part of the family? Every single Wikipedia entry for a person who isn't living gives cause of death. If it's so bad to talk about causes, then why isn't Wikipedia being criticized for this? We need to get over this taboo. It is not gossip. It is relevant and important information.

spoonalious 6y ago
House fire. https://www.reviewjournal.com/business/tony-hsieh-key-figure-in-downtown-las-vegas-revitalization-dies-at-age-46-2193165/ https://www.reviewjournal.com/business/tony-hsieh-key-figure...
homero 6y ago
Yeah every announcement keeps it a secret. I hate it. I find it disrespectful to us. We are fans and loved him but no we're not good enough to know why.
- ponker 6y ago
  You being my “fan” is an asymmetric relationship, not one created by mutual consent. If I want you to have my medical information while I’m alive or after I’m dead I will execute the proper legal document with you to ensure that you have it.
- rmk 6y ago
  Privacy in grieving is nothing disrespectful. It's having an expectation otherwise that is disrespectful.
- zentiggr 6y ago
  It's that false sense of entitlement from the fan side that makes me glad I'm nowhere near a celebrity. Disrespectful my ass. Unless you have a close, actually personal connection to him, no, you don't have any right to personal details. Be happy he chose to make anything public, and memorialize as you see fit. Anything more is just selfish.
- exzappos 6y ago
  He had developed a severe drug addiction to ketamine and nitrous oxide. He completely lost touch with reality. Ended up killing himself in an explosion/fire that he caused himself. The reason he "retired" from Zappos was due to the aforementioned drug addiction and was not voluntary.
  - Overtonwindow 6y ago
    The people of Silicon Valley and it’s offshoots seem to have a collective mindset of pushing the boundaries of pharmacology.
    - exzappos 6y ago
      Yeah unfortunately he was surrounded by too many enablers and sycophants. Though he did have a few people who tried to get him the help he needed.
      - deleted 6y ago
        [deleted]
    - deleted 6y ago
      [deleted]
  - asdf333 6y ago
    those are pretty wild claims. any way you can back it up?
    - smabie 6y ago
      Why do you ask this question? You know he doesn't. But that doesn't mean it is false. If his username is anything to go by, I'd say that there is probably a kernel of truth to his statement. After all, people don't just make up stories about ketamine and nitrous addictions. Especially since dying in a house fire isn't a usual route to go. It might make sense he was on ketamine and somehow a fire started (he probably didn't intentionally start a fire), and couldn't get out. It's very hard to walk straight on ketamine. You end up walking like a robot. Edit: but the real reason I believe these claims is because my gut says it is true. Not the best reason, of course. But not a bad reason either.
dvt 6y ago
A whole slew of reasons, but mostly because it's private, sensitive, and could have legal implications (in the cases of foul play, for example). I'm not sure what Wikipedia has to do with anything, as it's never been the arbiter of social norms, legal procedures, or even common decency -- much like reddit, its army of online sleuths often gets facts painfully wrong (sometimes with dire consequences).
- ceilingcorner 6y ago
  I wish the Personal Life section of Wikipedia didn't exist. It feels wrong and invasive, even for celebrities.
- cantrevealname 6y ago
  Wikipedia has a cause of death section for almost every deceased person. In your opinion, should Wikipedia remove cause of death from biographies? Remove them until legal implications are resolved? Remove some of them but not all of them? (I very much doubt that you think that all entries for cause of death should be removed, like how President John F. Kennedy died for example.) So where are you drawing the line?
  - dvt 6y ago
    > As I mentioned, Wikipedia has a cause of death section for almost every deceased person. Again, my question is "so what?" -- Wikipedia doesn't dictate social norms. I gave you a few reasons why cause of death may not be mentioned. Like mothers often say, if Wikipedia jumps off a bridge, would you?
wdr1 6y ago
Cause of death is public information, for reasons of public health. It's just not known yet. That said, now isn't the time. Let people grieve. There will be time for questions later.

spoonalious 6y ago

House fire. https://www.reviewjournal.com/business/tony-hsieh-key-figure-in-downtown-las-vegas-revitalization-dies-at-age-46-2193165/ https://www.reviewjournal.com/business/tony-hsieh-key-figure...

homero 6y ago

Yeah every announcement keeps it a secret. I hate it. I find it disrespectful to us. We are fans and loved him but no we're not good enough to know why.

ponker 6y ago
You being my “fan” is an asymmetric relationship, not one created by mutual consent. If I want you to have my medical information while I’m alive or after I’m dead I will execute the proper legal document with you to ensure that you have it.
rmk 6y ago
Privacy in grieving is nothing disrespectful. It's having an expectation otherwise that is disrespectful.
zentiggr 6y ago
It's that false sense of entitlement from the fan side that makes me glad I'm nowhere near a celebrity. Disrespectful my ass. Unless you have a close, actually personal connection to him, no, you don't have any right to personal details. Be happy he chose to make anything public, and memorialize as you see fit. Anything more is just selfish.
exzappos 6y ago
He had developed a severe drug addiction to ketamine and nitrous oxide. He completely lost touch with reality. Ended up killing himself in an explosion/fire that he caused himself. The reason he "retired" from Zappos was due to the aforementioned drug addiction and was not voluntary.
- Overtonwindow 6y ago
  The people of Silicon Valley and it’s offshoots seem to have a collective mindset of pushing the boundaries of pharmacology.
  - exzappos 6y ago
    Yeah unfortunately he was surrounded by too many enablers and sycophants. Though he did have a few people who tried to get him the help he needed.
    - deleted 6y ago
      [deleted]
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
- asdf333 6y ago
  those are pretty wild claims. any way you can back it up?
  - smabie 6y ago
    Why do you ask this question? You know he doesn't. But that doesn't mean it is false. If his username is anything to go by, I'd say that there is probably a kernel of truth to his statement. After all, people don't just make up stories about ketamine and nitrous addictions. Especially since dying in a house fire isn't a usual route to go. It might make sense he was on ketamine and somehow a fire started (he probably didn't intentionally start a fire), and couldn't get out. It's very hard to walk straight on ketamine. You end up walking like a robot. Edit: but the real reason I believe these claims is because my gut says it is true. Not the best reason, of course. But not a bad reason either.

dvt 6y ago

A whole slew of reasons, but mostly because it's private, sensitive, and could have legal implications (in the cases of foul play, for example). I'm not sure what Wikipedia has to do with anything, as it's never been the arbiter of social norms, legal procedures, or even common decency -- much like reddit, its army of online sleuths often gets facts painfully wrong (sometimes with dire consequences).

ceilingcorner 6y ago
I wish the Personal Life section of Wikipedia didn't exist. It feels wrong and invasive, even for celebrities.
cantrevealname 6y ago
Wikipedia has a cause of death section for almost every deceased person. In your opinion, should Wikipedia remove cause of death from biographies? Remove them until legal implications are resolved? Remove some of them but not all of them? (I very much doubt that you think that all entries for cause of death should be removed, like how President John F. Kennedy died for example.) So where are you drawing the line?
- dvt 6y ago
  > As I mentioned, Wikipedia has a cause of death section for almost every deceased person. Again, my question is "so what?" -- Wikipedia doesn't dictate social norms. I gave you a few reasons why cause of death may not be mentioned. Like mothers often say, if Wikipedia jumps off a bridge, would you?

wdr1 6y ago

Cause of death is public information, for reasons of public health. It's just not known yet. That said, now isn't the time. Let people grieve. There will be time for questions later.