4 ms·

You're reading too far into this. OP is just saying that Amazon's propaganda is slimy. Everyone else is on the same page here.

SilasX 6y ago
So, it's only as slimy as every other organization that gives you ballot instructions. Not sure that's the message you were trying to send.
- jakelazaroff 6y ago
  Someone noted that it's different when your employer tells you to vote in a certain way vs. a random political party. That's where you entered the conversation, so I'm not sure how that's getting lost.
  - SilasX 6y ago
    I guess what's "getting lost" is the fact that the original comment says nothing about that, and how that part has nothing to do with all the kvetching about "omg six detailed pages!" -- you know, the focus of that very comment.
    - jakelazaroff 6y ago
      At this point I don't really know how to respond other than, again, everyone else is on the same page here.
      - SilasX 6y ago
        All such people are so blinded by the outrage they can't take a few seconds to make clear what they're actually outraged about in way that can convince others to join them? Yeah, sounds about right.
        wizzwizz4 6y ago
        You don't need to make things clear if everyone already knows what everyone else is talking about. After an explanation that you clearly understood, I'm not sure why you're still complaining about conversational opacity.
        SilasX 6y ago
        No, I didn’t get any coherent explanation of what the OP was objecting to, after offering charitable interpretations that were rejected. Edit: I did get some completely separate, independent arguments, if that’s what you mean, but I’m saying I got no explanation of the original comment.
        wizzwizz4 6y ago
        The original comment (at least, I think I went far enough up-thread) said that teaching somebody how to vote and to vote in your favour, when you have power over them, is sleazy.
        SilasX 6y ago
        This is the original comment: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26263369 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26263369 There were others that gave different reasons, but none that made any sense of the "OMG six pages of instructions! Horrible!"
        wizzwizz4 6y ago
        Maybe you didn't understand because you're focusing on a bit that the original comment didn't emphasise. The complaint is not about six pages of instructions. The complaint is about combining education with manipulation. Imagine a handy guide from your bank that included instructions for how to wire money to its author.
        SilasX 6y ago

SilasX 6y ago

So, it's only as slimy as every other organization that gives you ballot instructions. Not sure that's the message you were trying to send.

jakelazaroff 6y ago
Someone noted that it's different when your employer tells you to vote in a certain way vs. a random political party. That's where you entered the conversation, so I'm not sure how that's getting lost.
- SilasX 6y ago
  I guess what's "getting lost" is the fact that the original comment says nothing about that, and how that part has nothing to do with all the kvetching about "omg six detailed pages!" -- you know, the focus of that very comment.
  - jakelazaroff 6y ago
    At this point I don't really know how to respond other than, again, everyone else is on the same page here.
    - SilasX 6y ago
      All such people are so blinded by the outrage they can't take a few seconds to make clear what they're actually outraged about in way that can convince others to join them? Yeah, sounds about right.
      - wizzwizz4 6y ago
        You don't need to make things clear if everyone already knows what everyone else is talking about. After an explanation that you clearly understood, I'm not sure why you're still complaining about conversational opacity.
        SilasX 6y ago
        No, I didn’t get any coherent explanation of what the OP was objecting to, after offering charitable interpretations that were rejected. Edit: I did get some completely separate, independent arguments, if that’s what you mean, but I’m saying I got no explanation of the original comment.
        wizzwizz4 6y ago
        The original comment (at least, I think I went far enough up-thread) said that teaching somebody how to vote and to vote in your favour, when you have power over them, is sleazy.
        SilasX 6y ago
        This is the original comment: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26263369 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26263369 There were others that gave different reasons, but none that made any sense of the "OMG six pages of instructions! Horrible!"
        wizzwizz4 6y ago
        Maybe you didn't understand because you're focusing on a bit that the original comment didn't emphasise. The complaint is not about six pages of instructions. The complaint is about combining education with manipulation. Imagine a handy guide from your bank that included instructions for how to wire money to its author.
        SilasX 6y ago