3 ms·
It may not be "trolling", but it definitely violates the spirit of the HN guidelines[0] (somehow hitting 3 out of 4 of the first comment guidelines -- failing t
by eindiran 3y ago
It may not be "trolling", but it definitely violates the spirit of the HN guidelines[0] (somehow hitting 3 out of 4 of the first comment guidelines -- failing the kindness test, snarkiness test, and editing out swipes test).
The comment OP called trolling would be much stronger and more interesting if it posted a "credible rebuttal" instead of being snarky and rude. If that hits an issue with the bullshit asymmetry principle[1] for you, downvote and move on with your life.
[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brandolini%27s_law https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brandolini%27s_law
- Nevermark 3y ago> And you’re pretty sure of that thanks to your expertise as a climate scientist? I see your points but this comes over very low on the snarky scale to me. More Socratic. It is also a point (expertise matters) that seems to be especially overlooked in climate change discussions. I also didn’t see how downvoting someone for not picking up on a point helps anything. And I don’t see anything written to be unkind. Directness isn’t unkindness.