3 ms·

Let me tell you why I think this is an inappropriate comment: The point of it seems not to be collaboratively extending the line of thought proposed by the orig

by ipnon 4y ago

Let me tell you why I think this is an inappropriate comment: The point of it seems not to be collaboratively extending the line of thought proposed by the original post or the parent comment, but to make the parent commenter feel some kind of personal shame or stupidity. Good commenting is more like a team sport than a martial art.

avgcorrection 4y ago
Propagandistic anecdotes deserve a little bit of ridicule. But just a little bit.
kenned3 4y ago
So like telling "jokes" at Russia's expense by a man of questionable ethics? what is the point of his joke, if not to mock another country? The OP posted a quote, and i posted one too?
- MichaelCollins 4y ago
  > "jokes" at Russia's expense I'm not seeing it. That joke could just as easily be told for any other national leader and it would still work.
- hk__2 4y ago
  The author of the joke doesn’t really matter here; the point is that it’s funny, period. I’m not sure how you can see a mockery of any country in a joke that would work with literally any important person in any country.
  - kenned3 4y ago
    Comedy is subjective. Try telling a sexually charged joke at your place of employment and see what happens. World leaders freely slandering other countries like this is shameful, and not what you expect from a "world leader".
    - hk__2 4y ago
      There’s nothing slandering here. As I wrote above, the joke could work with literally anyone.
  - mhh__ 4y ago
    In that case there'd be no need to mention reagan at all? most of the "Soviet" jokes people tell seem to be made up anyhow.
mhh__ 4y ago
Perhaps, but equally that's a route to a monoculture - can we not question Reagan? Americans love to glibly propitiate to Reagan's spirit (in heaven I'm assured), there's no way they could be doing so out of ignorance of the more controversial aspects of his presidency?
- dang 4y ago
  Of course we can question Reagan but when it comes to political/ideological flamebait, it's best to (a) avoid it and (b) stay on topic. Whimsical off-topic stuff can be ok, but flamewar off-topic stuff isn't, and a greatest-hits of bad Reagan is definitely that. This is in the site guidelines (https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html) and there's lots of past explanation at https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&sort=byDate&type=comment&query=generic%20ideolog%20by:dang https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&sor... and https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&query=generic%20discussion%20by%3Adang%20-flamewars%20-flamewar&sort=byDate&type=comment https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que..., though you might have to scroll through boilerplate to get to the more substantial explanations.

by ipnon 4y ago

avgcorrection 4y ago

Propagandistic anecdotes deserve a little bit of ridicule. But just a little bit.

kenned3 4y ago

So like telling "jokes" at Russia's expense by a man of questionable ethics? what is the point of his joke, if not to mock another country? The OP posted a quote, and i posted one too?

MichaelCollins 4y ago
> "jokes" at Russia's expense I'm not seeing it. That joke could just as easily be told for any other national leader and it would still work.
hk__2 4y ago
The author of the joke doesn’t really matter here; the point is that it’s funny, period. I’m not sure how you can see a mockery of any country in a joke that would work with literally any important person in any country.
- kenned3 4y ago
  Comedy is subjective. Try telling a sexually charged joke at your place of employment and see what happens. World leaders freely slandering other countries like this is shameful, and not what you expect from a "world leader".
  - hk__2 4y ago
    There’s nothing slandering here. As I wrote above, the joke could work with literally anyone.
- mhh__ 4y ago
  In that case there'd be no need to mention reagan at all? most of the "Soviet" jokes people tell seem to be made up anyhow.

mhh__ 4y ago

Perhaps, but equally that's a route to a monoculture - can we not question Reagan? Americans love to glibly propitiate to Reagan's spirit (in heaven I'm assured), there's no way they could be doing so out of ignorance of the more controversial aspects of his presidency?

dang 4y ago
Of course we can question Reagan but when it comes to political/ideological flamebait, it's best to (a) avoid it and (b) stay on topic. Whimsical off-topic stuff can be ok, but flamewar off-topic stuff isn't, and a greatest-hits of bad Reagan is definitely that. This is in the site guidelines (https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html) and there's lots of past explanation at https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&sort=byDate&type=comment&query=generic%20ideolog%20by:dang https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&sor... and https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&query=generic%20discussion%20by%3Adang%20-flamewars%20-flamewar&sort=byDate&type=comment https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que..., though you might have to scroll through boilerplate to get to the more substantial explanations.