3 ms·

I generally agree with your diagnosis but this comment violates multiple aspects of the HN guidelines. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https:/

I generally agree with your diagnosis but this comment violates multiple aspects of the HN guidelines. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html > Be kind. Don't be snarky. Have curious conversation; don't cross-examine. Please don't fulminate. Please don't sneer, including at the rest of the community. > When disagreeing, please reply to the argument instead of calling names. "That is idiotic; 1 + 1 is 2, not 3" can be shortened to "1 + 1 is 2, not 3." It could be improved by removing the "lmao" for starters.

giraffe_lady 4y ago
Someone is in here literally blaming some of the most dispossessed people in our society for their own suffering and you're going after the one saying "lmao." This says a lot about what these rules are for and what they accomplish imo.
- baobabKoodaa 4y ago
  > This says a lot about what these rules are for and what they accomplish imo. Civil discussion even when people strongly disagree with each other?
- s1artibartfast 4y ago
  Nobody is blaming the homeless. You are the one bringing that to the table.
- rectang 4y ago
  OT but since it's giraffe_lady whose comments I've often appreciated... In most cases, I just flag comments that violate the guidelines and move on, regardless of whether I agree with their substance. In this case, I agreed with the substance of the comment more than usual, so I tried to offer constructive criticism (in addition to flagging). Civility isn't appropriate in every context, sometimes incivility is important, but I think it's for the best here. I've had a lot to say about my disaffection with how HN is structured, particularly how "assume good faith" makes HN unfriendly for outgroups (e.g. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31215998 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31215998 ) and frankly would love an alternative. But my ideal alternative would also emphasize civility.

giraffe_lady 4y ago

Someone is in here literally blaming some of the most dispossessed people in our society for their own suffering and you're going after the one saying "lmao." This says a lot about what these rules are for and what they accomplish imo.

baobabKoodaa 4y ago
> This says a lot about what these rules are for and what they accomplish imo. Civil discussion even when people strongly disagree with each other?
s1artibartfast 4y ago
Nobody is blaming the homeless. You are the one bringing that to the table.
rectang 4y ago
OT but since it's giraffe_lady whose comments I've often appreciated... In most cases, I just flag comments that violate the guidelines and move on, regardless of whether I agree with their substance. In this case, I agreed with the substance of the comment more than usual, so I tried to offer constructive criticism (in addition to flagging). Civility isn't appropriate in every context, sometimes incivility is important, but I think it's for the best here. I've had a lot to say about my disaffection with how HN is structured, particularly how "assume good faith" makes HN unfriendly for outgroups (e.g. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31215998 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31215998 ) and frankly would love an alternative. But my ideal alternative would also emphasize civility.