3 ms·

I think he's done the greater service to everyone reading by not naming names. The likelihood that anyone on HN will end up doing business with these three is v

by aculver 15y ago

I think he's done the greater service to everyone reading by not naming names. The likelihood that anyone on HN will end up doing business with these three is very unlikely. However, there is a good chance one of us would run into someone employing the same tactics. That's what we should be on the lookout for.

endtime 15y ago
>However, there is a good chance one of us would run into someone employing the same tactics. That's what we should be on the lookout for. Being on the lookout for that would not be inhibited by knowing the names of three people who did it.
- tptacek 15y ago
  He said he's not going to name names. Let it rest. It's frustrating that we watch this same argument play out every time someone anonymizes the details of any story. We don't need to litigate this point. If someone says they don't want to reveal details, it's rude to try convincing them to change their mind.
  - endtime 15y ago
    I'm not asking for names (nor addressing the OP in any way whatsoever), I'm just trying to understand aculver's comment. It seems not to make sense.
  - daenz 15y ago
    He said he'd prefer not to. There's no harm in my gentle persuasion. If you're getting frustrated at a natural human interaction, maybe you need to step back and figure out a better way to handle that frustration.
  - yuhong 15y ago
    In the long term, the problems that led to it IMO should be fixed if possible.
- Wilduck 15y ago
  >Being on the lookout for that would not be inhibited by knowing the names of three people who did it. Only in the sense that you might think you're avoiding the entire problem by only avoiding these people.
  - endtime 15y ago
    I suppose that that is a...plausible irrationality. I wasn't attempting to account for such things. But sure, it's good to mention it explicitly.
- fpgeek 15y ago
  I'm not sure that's true. Without the names, "being on the lookout" means that you have to look at everyone and think about whether or not they're using similar tactics (i.e. "they could be anyone"). With the names, the first step of "being on the lookout" is checking the known-bad list, which could make you less vigilant with everyone else (i,e. "at least I know this person isn't one of them"). That It would be an irrational mistake to make, but I suspect it would also be a common one.

by aculver 15y ago

endtime 15y ago

>However, there is a good chance one of us would run into someone employing the same tactics. That's what we should be on the lookout for. Being on the lookout for that would not be inhibited by knowing the names of three people who did it.

tptacek 15y ago
He said he's not going to name names. Let it rest. It's frustrating that we watch this same argument play out every time someone anonymizes the details of any story. We don't need to litigate this point. If someone says they don't want to reveal details, it's rude to try convincing them to change their mind.
- endtime 15y ago
  I'm not asking for names (nor addressing the OP in any way whatsoever), I'm just trying to understand aculver's comment. It seems not to make sense.
- daenz 15y ago
  He said he'd prefer not to. There's no harm in my gentle persuasion. If you're getting frustrated at a natural human interaction, maybe you need to step back and figure out a better way to handle that frustration.
- yuhong 15y ago
  In the long term, the problems that led to it IMO should be fixed if possible.
Wilduck 15y ago
>Being on the lookout for that would not be inhibited by knowing the names of three people who did it. Only in the sense that you might think you're avoiding the entire problem by only avoiding these people.
- endtime 15y ago
  I suppose that that is a...plausible irrationality. I wasn't attempting to account for such things. But sure, it's good to mention it explicitly.
fpgeek 15y ago
I'm not sure that's true. Without the names, "being on the lookout" means that you have to look at everyone and think about whether or not they're using similar tactics (i.e. "they could be anyone"). With the names, the first step of "being on the lookout" is checking the known-bad list, which could make you less vigilant with everyone else (i,e. "at least I know this person isn't one of them"). That It would be an irrational mistake to make, but I suspect it would also be a common one.