3 ms·

I just edited it. Acceptable?

• dang 5y ago
  It's certainly better but the swipe at the end seems completely gratuitous to me, and breaks the HN guideline against snark. Moreover, you're still breaking this site guideline: "Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize." The author is not saying anything as stupid as "it's a bunch of people who just believe in a better future", and reducing other people's statements to stupid statements is a trope of poor internet comments.
  • danielmarkbruce 5y ago
    Actually, the author is doing something very close to that.They have redefined a reasonably well-defined term in a disingenuous way and then taken that as a given for the rest of the article. You can see several people point this out. This very thing - redefining terms to fit an agenda or argument - is often used in political arguments. It's destructive.