4 ms·

What would be the ideal "HN-friendly" way to point out that the parent does have serious misunderstandings of the topic at hand? I'm struggling to parse that f

• dang 5y ago
  The ideal way would be to simply omit that sentence. If the comment began with the sentence "King did not [etc.]", it would have exactly the same information content and would not contain a personal swipe at the other user. Win-win.
• Igelau 5y ago
  It's essentially flamebait. > You don't understand blah, here's a quote! is quickly followed by > No, YOU don't understand blah, here's my quote! It's not offensive, but it's a subtle bit of rhetorical judo to rile somebody up. And in a political thread that's probably going to get locked in 10 minutes anyway because it's got other flame wars going on.
• jfengel 5y ago
  Use "I" phrasings. Instead of "You think X, where X is wrong", say, "I think Y." Describe Y in detail, contrasting it with X where necessary but not making the wrongness of X the point. The original poster may well see that as talking about them and reply in the usual flamebait way -- possibly with an extra dig for failing to engage them or trying to hide it. That's the risk you take when arguing on the Internet. But if everybody really is interested in discussion rather than arguing, it sets up a reply more along the lines of trying to merge X and Y, or even changing their minds, or other constructive behavior. It starts with making it about the issues and a clear understanding of how different viewpoints lead to different conclusions based on the same facts -- all of the facts, not just the ones that support your arguments and diminish theirs.