4 ms·
You are simply placing an absurd requirement on the reader. The article is pretty clear. New exemptions are being added to the law. Is this true or false?
by random314 5y ago
You are simply placing an absurd requirement on the reader. The article is pretty clear. New exemptions are being added to the law. Is this true or false?
- alex_smart 5y agoFalse. Also, I figured out why your username seemed familiar and I do not want to discuss anything with you. Not this. Not anything else. Ever. I hope you will respect my choice. Have a good day. There is already another person who I am discussing this with, and we are already much along into the discussion that we ever got here. So you can follow that thread to understand more. >You are simply placing an absurd requirement on the reader I admitted so much in the previous comment, no? Ignore and move on.
- native_samples 5y agoHe is not imposing any requirements on the reader, just reporting his own experience and indicating how his claims can be double checked, should you so wish. A claim of "lots of liberal media are lying about an Indian law" cannot be refuted by citing that same media, and making him say it repeatedly doesn't seem likely to yield any further insight.
- random314 5y agoHe could just quote or reference the particular part of the bill/law in question instead of asking the reader to read the entire thing. He also does not respond to simple yes/no questions. Does the law relax the restrictions on child labour for family businesses- yes/no? Several paragraphs about programmer brain, but no answer to simple yes/no questions. How absurd is it that several dozen media articles cant be trusted, but an hn comment about programmer brain debugging the law, with no citations, must be trusted.