4 ms·
some hn guidelines, in case you might find them helpful: Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's
by rizpanjwani 6y ago
some hn guidelines, in case you might find them helpful:
Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize. Assume good faith.
Be kind. Don't be snarky. Have curious conversation; don't cross-examine. Please don't fulminate. Please don't sneer, including at the rest of the community.
Comments should get more thoughtful and substantive, not less, as a topic gets more divisive.
- amznthrwaway 6y agoThis would be more persuasive if Paul Graham followed them. But he routinely responds to the weakest, easiest to criticize version of people's arguments. (see his billionaire essay for an especially egregious version of this. If he allowed for candid feedback, he wouldn't have published, but he only allows yes-men into his life). He is also snarky and mean, quite often. The real rules are that you can be as big of a dick as you want, so long as you are supportive of billionaires, white people, and men. If, on the other hand, you want to criticize them, you may only use the meekest possible language, or dang will ban you permanently. As a meta-point, you are being a snarky asshole with the way you quoted the rules, but you won't get in trouble for it.