3 ms·
Very well. Thank you for that. I feel I've probably exhausted your tolerance for this discussion at this time. However, I respectfully request that over the me
by torstenvl 4y ago
Very well. Thank you for that.
I feel I've probably exhausted your tolerance for this discussion at this time. However, I respectfully request that over the medium to long term you reconsider this unwritten rule. A specific substantive critique isn't namecalling nor is it shallow.
If HN feels that there's sufficient emotional baggage to certain accusations (such as that something is pseudoscience) that the allegation must be accompanied by detailed explanation to meet the guidelines, that's certainly your prerogative. But there's no way for anyone to know that from the guidelines as they are written. As a longtime member who tries to make positive contributions, I was frankly shocked at your reaction.
A data point, to use or not use as you see fit.
- dang 4y agoI appreciate what you're saying and I appreciate your positive contributions over the years. I know you're well-intentioned and that matters far more than any of the minutiae here. When the only available medium of communication is these little blobs of internet text, it's easy for things to sometimes get into a snag. If there's any remaining disagreement, it's most likely a simple misunderstanding. Let's not worry about it.