3 ms·

You forgot the one just recently, where I called a person insane for stating the US is in a good position to win a nuclear exchange with Russia. I do not come

by Garvi 3y ago

You forgot the one just recently, where I called a person insane for stating the US is in a good position to win a nuclear exchange with Russia. I do not come to this site to have an open and fair debate with idiots. It is your job to have enough common sense and general education to tell whether something is worth debating over. For example I feel a topic that is heavily under-debated is abortion. Maybe we should have a fair and balanced debate whether it's right to force women to carry out our children and on how easy we want to make it for people to kill babies? (this whole paragraph is an attempt at irony, I feel the need to point this out) I understand you enforcing US exceptionalism to the extreme and removing any critique on it. But on the other side you're encouraging a debate on vaccine effectiveness as if it's apparently ambiguous. The consequences of what you are doing, especially on a site that is supposed to be full of point dexters, are making this so immoral, it sometimes simply takes extra words to express it.

dang 3y ago
This is the sort of high-indignation rhetoric that just doesn't work here. We want curious conversation here. Curiosity withers (fries, actually) under this sort of heat and pressure.
- Garvi 3y ago
  You're making an awful lot of assumptions about me. I understand your point but strongly disagree. I was about to reiterate my point with a different example, but I suspect you already getting me, as I see no discussion on gender identity theories on HN for this very reason. How about we discuss the currently trending Bin Laden letter? Also off limits. Not that I'd be interested. Still curious censorship. I'm sorry you feel vaccine effectiveness is debate worthy. What is debate worthy are the falsified US vaccine effectiveness trials, shown as such by comparison to the EU and UN parallel studies. I never had any illusions I would be allowed discussing that. High-indignation you say? An american philosopher once said "anger is a gift". Edit: Thinking about it, I would give my left arm to get the number of flat earthers with an active HN account and how that number changes historically with ever tightening censorship on Covid, Ukraine, various US wars, now Palestine.
  - dang 3y ago
    I'm talking about what you posted in your comments. That's the only thing we can know about, and also the only thing we care about. If you want to keep posting here, we need you to review https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.htmland https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.htmland stick to the rules from now on. HN isn't an anything-goes site—we're trying to have a particular kind of forum here. You can call that censorship if you like, or moderation, curation, etc.—people use those words in different ways. The important thing is that we're playing one kind of game and not other. Just as chess is not football, football is not boxing, etc., HN is not for the political battle game. This is not a judgment and we don't care about your views. It's just not the place for that type of commenting. We don't have a choice about this, because if we allowed that type of commenting, it would soon dominate the site, and then the forum would no longer exist for its intended purpose.
    - Garvi 3y ago
      Sounds reasonable the way you put it and I both understand and agree with it. The reason I went off topic is I saw an unrestricted debate on an off-topic subject and jumped in. I have read the rules thoroughly when I made my account. As my main focus of interest in propaganda and censorship in tech I would like a clear answer from you I can refer to in the future, whether I am allowed discussing this topic on this platform? "propaganda and censorship in tech" again for clarity.
      - dang 3y ago
        For HN purposes it's not a question of the topic, it's a question of the spirit in which you're discussing it, or (if you like) the place you're coming from. What we want is curious conversation. That's the intended spirit. 'Propaganda' and 'censorship' are hard to discuss from a curious place because people mostly use those words as weapons to fight against something they consider bad. If you're posting from a place of fighting badness, it's hard to get into the spirit of curiosity, which is lighter and more playful. Does that make sense? It's not a question of these things being "offtopic", "banned", or "not allowed". It's a question of whether it's possible to discuss them in a certain way. People sometimes think this is about "tone", but that's much too superficial. It has more to do with the state one is in when they're posting—I would almost say their physiological state, but that's maybe getting a bit strange.

by Garvi 3y ago

dang 3y ago

This is the sort of high-indignation rhetoric that just doesn't work here. We want curious conversation here. Curiosity withers (fries, actually) under this sort of heat and pressure.

Garvi 3y ago
You're making an awful lot of assumptions about me. I understand your point but strongly disagree. I was about to reiterate my point with a different example, but I suspect you already getting me, as I see no discussion on gender identity theories on HN for this very reason. How about we discuss the currently trending Bin Laden letter? Also off limits. Not that I'd be interested. Still curious censorship. I'm sorry you feel vaccine effectiveness is debate worthy. What is debate worthy are the falsified US vaccine effectiveness trials, shown as such by comparison to the EU and UN parallel studies. I never had any illusions I would be allowed discussing that. High-indignation you say? An american philosopher once said "anger is a gift". Edit: Thinking about it, I would give my left arm to get the number of flat earthers with an active HN account and how that number changes historically with ever tightening censorship on Covid, Ukraine, various US wars, now Palestine.
- dang 3y ago
  I'm talking about what you posted in your comments. That's the only thing we can know about, and also the only thing we care about. If you want to keep posting here, we need you to review https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.htmland https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.htmland stick to the rules from now on. HN isn't an anything-goes site—we're trying to have a particular kind of forum here. You can call that censorship if you like, or moderation, curation, etc.—people use those words in different ways. The important thing is that we're playing one kind of game and not other. Just as chess is not football, football is not boxing, etc., HN is not for the political battle game. This is not a judgment and we don't care about your views. It's just not the place for that type of commenting. We don't have a choice about this, because if we allowed that type of commenting, it would soon dominate the site, and then the forum would no longer exist for its intended purpose.
  - Garvi 3y ago
    Sounds reasonable the way you put it and I both understand and agree with it. The reason I went off topic is I saw an unrestricted debate on an off-topic subject and jumped in. I have read the rules thoroughly when I made my account. As my main focus of interest in propaganda and censorship in tech I would like a clear answer from you I can refer to in the future, whether I am allowed discussing this topic on this platform? "propaganda and censorship in tech" again for clarity.
    - dang 3y ago
      For HN purposes it's not a question of the topic, it's a question of the spirit in which you're discussing it, or (if you like) the place you're coming from. What we want is curious conversation. That's the intended spirit. 'Propaganda' and 'censorship' are hard to discuss from a curious place because people mostly use those words as weapons to fight against something they consider bad. If you're posting from a place of fighting badness, it's hard to get into the spirit of curiosity, which is lighter and more playful. Does that make sense? It's not a question of these things being "offtopic", "banned", or "not allowed". It's a question of whether it's possible to discuss them in a certain way. People sometimes think this is about "tone", but that's much too superficial. It has more to do with the state one is in when they're posting—I would almost say their physiological state, but that's maybe getting a bit strange.