3 ms·
> Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize. Assume good faith. https://news.y
by sixstringtheory 3y ago
> Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize. Assume good faith.
https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- wnevets 3y agoWhich of the two plausible interpretations is the strongest? Please enlighten me esteemed HN guideline expert. I am asking because I don't know the answer.
- sixstringtheory 3y agoIt's pretty obvious that the guidelines state you should treat them as though they're serious. You always have the option of not sending a response. The world will keep turning just fine without wnevets chiming in.
- wnevets 3y agoI find it incredibly difficult treat anyone who argues atomic bombs are good for your health seriously.
- pazimzadeh 3y agoSlow down.. "Low-dose radiation from A-bombs elongated lifespan and reduced cancer mortality relative to un-irradiated individual" Does not equal "A-bombs are good for your health" FYI, a small amount of DNA damage is thought to stimulate DNA repair pathways, which is protective. What's bad for you is massive amounts of damage that your body can't keep up with.