3 ms·

I am sorry, but I was factual. I am following social media very closely and this is how it will pan out based on my experience. Can somebody please rephrase it

I am sorry, but I was factual. I am following social media very closely and this is how it will pan out based on my experience. Can somebody please rephrase it in a way that will not violate the guidelines but stays factual?

dang 5y ago
"Factual" is neither here nor there when it comes to flamewar comments: https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&query=by%3Adang%20infinitely%20many%20facts&sort=byDate&type=comment https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&qu.... Also, the name-calling in your GP comment does not count as factual.
- nojokes 5y ago
  I am sorry, it is not name calling, but specific term that describes specific people. When I say Nazis, it is not name calling when I mean Nazis and not somebody who I may think is like them. Or should I use another term when I speak about Germans belonging to German Nationalist Party? I am not talking about people who prefer to not wear a mask when possible or who are afraid to vaccinate because they have heard too many fear stories about vaccines. I am talking about specific people who spread FUD about masks or vaccines. How should we call them? I think these are precise enough terms and are well understood and widely accepted. I have personally seen enough evidence that this kind of behavior is shared by the same people. I have also seen enough evidence to deduce that they will do exactly what I told that they will do. Shall I not write about this prediction? Even when this is based on very specific observations about said people over longer period of time? I just do not want to put too many details about myself into public so that I could not be easily identified. I know that this does reduce my credibility though. I am sorry. I understand that these are perhaps not a kind kind of terms and perhaps they do not like to be called like that but so did Nazis. I think it is not enough to stop using this term for them. I tried to be terse because I tend to write too much. As we can see, in the end it did lead to even more words. I try to be more explanatory in the future such that there is less misunderstanding in my writing.
  - dang 5y ago
    I hear you that your intention was not to call names or start a flamewar. Unfortunately, comments that are (a) on divisive topics and (b) don't include much information can turn into flamebait all too easily—in effect if not intent. (I've written about this at https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&sort=byDate&type=comment&query=troll%20effects%20by:dang https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&sor... and https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&sort=byDate&type=comment&query=disambiguate%20burden%20by:dang https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&so....) At a minimum, you should be careful to avoid swipey phrases like "wave of wailing" (and arguably also "anti-vaxxer crowd). Such pejorative phrases are sparks that can easily set fire to the fuel. I hope that helps a bit.

dang 5y ago

"Factual" is neither here nor there when it comes to flamewar comments: https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&query=by%3Adang%20infinitely%20many%20facts&sort=byDate&type=comment https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&qu.... Also, the name-calling in your GP comment does not count as factual.

nojokes 5y ago
I am sorry, it is not name calling, but specific term that describes specific people. When I say Nazis, it is not name calling when I mean Nazis and not somebody who I may think is like them. Or should I use another term when I speak about Germans belonging to German Nationalist Party? I am not talking about people who prefer to not wear a mask when possible or who are afraid to vaccinate because they have heard too many fear stories about vaccines. I am talking about specific people who spread FUD about masks or vaccines. How should we call them? I think these are precise enough terms and are well understood and widely accepted. I have personally seen enough evidence that this kind of behavior is shared by the same people. I have also seen enough evidence to deduce that they will do exactly what I told that they will do. Shall I not write about this prediction? Even when this is based on very specific observations about said people over longer period of time? I just do not want to put too many details about myself into public so that I could not be easily identified. I know that this does reduce my credibility though. I am sorry. I understand that these are perhaps not a kind kind of terms and perhaps they do not like to be called like that but so did Nazis. I think it is not enough to stop using this term for them. I tried to be terse because I tend to write too much. As we can see, in the end it did lead to even more words. I try to be more explanatory in the future such that there is less misunderstanding in my writing.
- dang 5y ago
  I hear you that your intention was not to call names or start a flamewar. Unfortunately, comments that are (a) on divisive topics and (b) don't include much information can turn into flamebait all too easily—in effect if not intent. (I've written about this at https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&sort=byDate&type=comment&query=troll%20effects%20by:dang https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&sor... and https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&sort=byDate&type=comment&query=disambiguate%20burden%20by:dang https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&so....) At a minimum, you should be careful to avoid swipey phrases like "wave of wailing" (and arguably also "anti-vaxxer crowd). Such pejorative phrases are sparks that can easily set fire to the fuel. I hope that helps a bit.