3 ms·

Because it might be possible to stand out in a crowd of 500 but not 5,000. And it certainly is not possible to do deals other than "this is good for everyone".

Because it might be possible to stand out in a crowd of 500 but not 5,000. And it certainly is not possible to do deals other than "this is good for everyone". It would almost certainly end political parties. Lead to good ideas being debated openly by people who have no chance of hanging together long enough to force a direction. My god man what are you thinking ! (/s)

rootusrootus 4y ago
> (/s) IMO we should just drop this notation altogether and just let angry people get angry, and ignore 'em. Sarcasm is better when it doesn't have to be labeled.
- aidenn0 4y ago
  > Sarcasm is better when it doesn't have to be labeled. Which is why nobody ever uses a different tone of voice when speaking sarcastically.
  - haswell 4y ago
    This does not match my experience. One of the reasons /s exists is because it’s much harder to read the intent of a written paragraph than the intent of someone speaking directly to us. The hallmarks of sarcasm are subtle, and come in a few forms - sometimes it’s intentional emphasis on a particular word, sometimes it’s a quizzical look or raised eyebrow, etc. But at least in my experience, I can usually tell when someone is being sarcastic in person, but it gets harder and harder to tell on the Internet.
    - Tostino 4y ago
      I read GP's reply as a sarcastic one, and that they intentionally omitted the /s just to prove how hard sarcasm actually is to detect through text.
      - haswell 4y ago
        Hah, I think you are right. I bit hard, and maybe helped them prove their point.
        aidenn0 4y ago
        Exactly. Also it's different when you are talking to one person vs 1000s of people. Even when it is obvious, 0.1% of readers will read it just a little to quickly and get confused. Given that "/s" makes it more obvious, the intentional omission of it is intentionally requiring more effort of the readers. There are times and places when one might want to make the readers work harder, but HN comments doesn't seem to qualify.
christkv 4y ago
Why stop at 5000 make it 50 000 to make it even harder. It would mess with everything from party discipline to lobbying.
PaulDavisThe1st 4y ago
> Lead to good ideas being debated openly by people Do you have examples of any ideas at all being debated openly by 5000 people?
- lifeisstillgood 4y ago
  In UK we have a ratio of about 1 MP to 100k people (600 MPs 60M citizens). In US it's 1:1M (300:300M) (all calculations to order of magnitude and from memory) If you are literally one in a million, certain perks come with the trrritory. I think we might get better results if we see our elective representatives as "cattle not pets"
hemreldop 4y ago

rootusrootus 4y ago

> (/s) IMO we should just drop this notation altogether and just let angry people get angry, and ignore 'em. Sarcasm is better when it doesn't have to be labeled.

aidenn0 4y ago
> Sarcasm is better when it doesn't have to be labeled. Which is why nobody ever uses a different tone of voice when speaking sarcastically.
- haswell 4y ago
  This does not match my experience. One of the reasons /s exists is because it’s much harder to read the intent of a written paragraph than the intent of someone speaking directly to us. The hallmarks of sarcasm are subtle, and come in a few forms - sometimes it’s intentional emphasis on a particular word, sometimes it’s a quizzical look or raised eyebrow, etc. But at least in my experience, I can usually tell when someone is being sarcastic in person, but it gets harder and harder to tell on the Internet.
  - Tostino 4y ago
    I read GP's reply as a sarcastic one, and that they intentionally omitted the /s just to prove how hard sarcasm actually is to detect through text.
    - haswell 4y ago
      Hah, I think you are right. I bit hard, and maybe helped them prove their point.
      - aidenn0 4y ago
        Exactly. Also it's different when you are talking to one person vs 1000s of people. Even when it is obvious, 0.1% of readers will read it just a little to quickly and get confused. Given that "/s" makes it more obvious, the intentional omission of it is intentionally requiring more effort of the readers. There are times and places when one might want to make the readers work harder, but HN comments doesn't seem to qualify.

christkv 4y ago

Why stop at 5000 make it 50 000 to make it even harder. It would mess with everything from party discipline to lobbying.

PaulDavisThe1st 4y ago

> Lead to good ideas being debated openly by people Do you have examples of any ideas at all being debated openly by 5000 people?

lifeisstillgood 4y ago
In UK we have a ratio of about 1 MP to 100k people (600 MPs 60M citizens). In US it's 1:1M (300:300M) (all calculations to order of magnitude and from memory) If you are literally one in a million, certain perks come with the trrritory. I think we might get better results if we see our elective representatives as "cattle not pets"

hemreldop 4y ago