3 ms·

I would suggest this speaks to the weight of your experiences coloring your view. It doesn't have to be this way, though, yours are just one set of lived experi

I would suggest this speaks to the weight of your experiences coloring your view. It doesn't have to be this way, though, yours are just one set of lived experiences, and the systems you live in are not necessarily objectively the best ones. The issue you're discussing is that aesthetic objections are being used as a hard roadblock to progress. This suggests that aesthetic input needs to be received without them being an opportunity to derail a project if the projects is passing all other measures it has been evaluated on. It could be said that such input should have achievable criteria for success/passability without being significantly at odds with the premise of the exercise. Anyway, I would encourage you to make a new submission about it as this is a pressing and heated american issue, and it's clear that you feel strongly on the matter.

yazaddaruvala 4y ago
> I would suggest this speaks to the weight of your experiences coloring your view. > Anyway, I would encourage you to make a new submission about it This is extremely condescending and unnecessary. There is no reason for the other poster to “create a new submission” for their points. If you disagree with them that is ok, feel free to respond to the points. If you’re having difficulty responding to their points, don’t respond. However, as far as I can tell their points are on topic for the example you provided and shouldn’t be dismissed in the way you keep trying multiple times.
- superchroma 4y ago
  There's no point going into the weeds in a discussion ten posts deep when we deviate from the broader topic. It discourages community engagement from the discussion we're having and the main thread and derails the thread as people have to scroll past it to see other comments. This is not why people are here, even if we feel passionate about the topic.
  - yazaddaruvala 4y ago
    > There's no point going into the weeds in a discussion ten posts deep when we deviate from the broader topic. That is up to the other person and what the downvote button is for. > It discourages community engagement from the discussion Then the community can vote via the down button. Meanwhile, you do not need to be condescending or singly try to shepherd a group conversation. > This is not why people are here, even if we feel passionate about the topic. I’ve been using HN for 10 years, other than trying to shut down the other commenter, the back and forth and deviation/tangentiality in this thread isn’t different than I normally have seen on HN.
hackerlight 4y ago
The only way that community input into aesthetics won't be used against housing is if land is decommoditized. Until then the financial incentives are such that this will be used as a weapon, as we've seen happen repeatedly. The hypothetical universe where aesthetics can be regulated and that government power isn't abused by the landowner lobby doesn't really exist pre-decommodification.

yazaddaruvala 4y ago

> I would suggest this speaks to the weight of your experiences coloring your view. > Anyway, I would encourage you to make a new submission about it This is extremely condescending and unnecessary. There is no reason for the other poster to “create a new submission” for their points. If you disagree with them that is ok, feel free to respond to the points. If you’re having difficulty responding to their points, don’t respond. However, as far as I can tell their points are on topic for the example you provided and shouldn’t be dismissed in the way you keep trying multiple times.

superchroma 4y ago
There's no point going into the weeds in a discussion ten posts deep when we deviate from the broader topic. It discourages community engagement from the discussion we're having and the main thread and derails the thread as people have to scroll past it to see other comments. This is not why people are here, even if we feel passionate about the topic.
- yazaddaruvala 4y ago
  > There's no point going into the weeds in a discussion ten posts deep when we deviate from the broader topic. That is up to the other person and what the downvote button is for. > It discourages community engagement from the discussion Then the community can vote via the down button. Meanwhile, you do not need to be condescending or singly try to shepherd a group conversation. > This is not why people are here, even if we feel passionate about the topic. I’ve been using HN for 10 years, other than trying to shut down the other commenter, the back and forth and deviation/tangentiality in this thread isn’t different than I normally have seen on HN.

hackerlight 4y ago

The only way that community input into aesthetics won't be used against housing is if land is decommoditized. Until then the financial incentives are such that this will be used as a weapon, as we've seen happen repeatedly. The hypothetical universe where aesthetics can be regulated and that government power isn't abused by the landowner lobby doesn't really exist pre-decommodification.