3 ms·
I was not being snarky, I pointed out that the argument was made about a statement that was never made.
by toxik 6y ago
I was not being snarky, I pointed out that the argument was made about a statement that was never made.
- dang 6y agoIt's fine to point that out, but the way you did it lands with me as snarky. There's a spectrum of how readers interpret such things (some would find it snarky, as I did, while others wouldn't)—but what's for certain is that the reader spectrum skews far more in that direction than commenters think it does. Objects in the mirror are closer than they appear. Since you only have to hit a small section of that spectrum to start a flamewar, we need comments to err on the side of not coming across that way [1]. There's another guideline that helps with this: "When disagreeing, please reply to the argument instead of calling names. "That is idiotic; 1 + 1 is 2, not 3" can be shortened to "1 + 1 is 2, not 3." Although "How fortunate that" isn't exactly calling names, your comment could have been shortened in just this way. "This was never claimed" would make the same point without hitting any of the snark spectrum. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html [1] 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...
- toxik 6y agoOn the other hand, I find that your suggestion sounds curt and impolite. I did not say idiotic, I did not suggest that the poster was in any way incapable. In fact I find it a bit rude to assume that I was acting in bad faith at all.