2 ms·

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16131314 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16131314 Although, again, the guidelines are super-explicit about not going

by pvg 5y ago

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16131314 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16131314 Although, again, the guidelines are super-explicit about not going on about voting, not dingleberrypicking one thing that irritates you in a post, etc. And generally, you can just type author:dang [your topic of choice] into search and get a learned opinion. You'll find most of your interpretation of the guidelines above to be inaccurate.

giantg2 5y ago
"Although, again, the guidelines are super-explicit about not going on about voting" I merely asked for additionally context for a conversation. Others have instigated this longer conversation. They don't seem super explicit if two guidelines conflict with each other, especially if it conflicts the core principles of curiosity and discussion. "not dingleberrypicking one thing that irritates you in a post" Again, if you read back you can see that it wasn't one thing in my comment, but that others decided to engage on one part of my comment and largely ignore the other. "And generally, you can just type author:dang [your topic of choice] into search and get a learned opinion." Which I did, and posted the previous link that seems to indicate that downvotes are more for comments breaking guidelines than for disagreeing without comment. However, I do see that the links posted by you have pg stating that downvoting is used for disagreement. Seems a little odd though, that it's purpose is for disagreement but we can't downvote replies that we disagree with. This logical issue seems to indicate that it's not just for disagreement, and that debate and discussion is also valued (as stated in the guidelines). "You'll find most of your interpretation of the guidelines above to be inaccurate." Or perhaps you are misapplying the guidelines because you misunderstand the facts of this scenario.
- pvg 5y ago
  No, the facts are you dingleberrypicked, used a trope and complained about downvoting. You also think political discussions aren't allowed here, that the goal of 'curiosity' is more or less whatever you want, that downvoters owe you receipts, etc. You can literally find big dollops of moderator comments directly contradicting all of these - you simply happen to be wrong about these straightforward things. They aren't any less straightforward because you don't like them and you haven't even got around to acknowledging you are wrong about even the straightforwardest. Let's wrap up here.

by pvg 5y ago

giantg2 5y ago

"Although, again, the guidelines are super-explicit about not going on about voting" I merely asked for additionally context for a conversation. Others have instigated this longer conversation. They don't seem super explicit if two guidelines conflict with each other, especially if it conflicts the core principles of curiosity and discussion. "not dingleberrypicking one thing that irritates you in a post" Again, if you read back you can see that it wasn't one thing in my comment, but that others decided to engage on one part of my comment and largely ignore the other. "And generally, you can just type author:dang [your topic of choice] into search and get a learned opinion." Which I did, and posted the previous link that seems to indicate that downvotes are more for comments breaking guidelines than for disagreeing without comment. However, I do see that the links posted by you have pg stating that downvoting is used for disagreement. Seems a little odd though, that it's purpose is for disagreement but we can't downvote replies that we disagree with. This logical issue seems to indicate that it's not just for disagreement, and that debate and discussion is also valued (as stated in the guidelines). "You'll find most of your interpretation of the guidelines above to be inaccurate." Or perhaps you are misapplying the guidelines because you misunderstand the facts of this scenario.

pvg 5y ago
No, the facts are you dingleberrypicked, used a trope and complained about downvoting. You also think political discussions aren't allowed here, that the goal of 'curiosity' is more or less whatever you want, that downvoters owe you receipts, etc. You can literally find big dollops of moderator comments directly contradicting all of these - you simply happen to be wrong about these straightforward things. They aren't any less straightforward because you don't like them and you haven't even got around to acknowledging you are wrong about even the straightforwardest. Let's wrap up here.