3 ms·

Is this article one of those super contentious things where people just downvote every comment even if you’re just saying innocuous things like “I wish we had o

Is this article one of those super contentious things where people just downvote every comment even if you’re just saying innocuous things like “I wish we had objective facts”? Because I want objective facts, and the truth, in every situation including this one, is that really such a controversial take? What is going on here? Edit: yep, it’s a flame war with crazy idealogues on both sides saying things that don’t really belong on HN, I flagged it, everyone else should too. Edit 2: I learned a valuable lesson today: don’t participate in a conversation where flamewars are happening, even if you are trying to advocate some reasonable middle ground. You’re just giving oxygen to the crazies. Flag and move on. Thank you everyone for helping me learn this.

La1n 6y ago
>What is going on here? An article that is basically flamebait for nationalistic flamewars and doesn't belong on HN.
ncann 6y ago
Every single discussion thread on this topic inevitably turns into a flame war.
edbob 6y ago
What specifically about this BBC report do you feel is not substantiated enough? You did not get downvoted for calling for moderation, but for making unsupported assertions that contradict the available evidence. You complained about the quoting of Zenz. Perhaps you are one of those who feel that his Christian faith disqualifies him, or perhaps it's something else. In any case, the BBC does not consider him disqualified, but they also performed many investigations of their own and have corroborated the reports of many people who are not named Zenz. The BBC has provided abundant evidence. They are widely considered to be a reliable source. If you think the BBC is lying, then say so. Otherwise, it seems like you are just throwing stones. The only way I can see your position making sense and seeming moderate to you is if you take the CCP's official propaganda as of equal weight with the BBC's reports. This seems absurd to me, but I will grant that you can choose to take this view and I do think that you make your arguments in good faith. Edit: It appears that you got downvoted for calling the ongoing genocide "soft cultural erasure". It would have been okay if you've said "cultural erasure", but the "soft" part is just wrong. There's nothing soft about concentration camps and rape.

La1n 6y ago

>What is going on here? An article that is basically flamebait for nationalistic flamewars and doesn't belong on HN.

ncann 6y ago

Every single discussion thread on this topic inevitably turns into a flame war.

edbob 6y ago

What specifically about this BBC report do you feel is not substantiated enough? You did not get downvoted for calling for moderation, but for making unsupported assertions that contradict the available evidence. You complained about the quoting of Zenz. Perhaps you are one of those who feel that his Christian faith disqualifies him, or perhaps it's something else. In any case, the BBC does not consider him disqualified, but they also performed many investigations of their own and have corroborated the reports of many people who are not named Zenz. The BBC has provided abundant evidence. They are widely considered to be a reliable source. If you think the BBC is lying, then say so. Otherwise, it seems like you are just throwing stones. The only way I can see your position making sense and seeming moderate to you is if you take the CCP's official propaganda as of equal weight with the BBC's reports. This seems absurd to me, but I will grant that you can choose to take this view and I do think that you make your arguments in good faith. Edit: It appears that you got downvoted for calling the ongoing genocide "soft cultural erasure". It would have been okay if you've said "cultural erasure", but the "soft" part is just wrong. There's nothing soft about concentration camps and rape.