3 ms·
> I'm not certain that Hacker News really needs your defense. You're wrong. It does. People need to be told, flat out, the this isn't a board that wants nor
by jasonlotito 15y ago
> I'm not certain that Hacker News really needs your defense.
You're wrong. It does. People need to be told, flat out, the this isn't a board that wants nor appreciates mob-mentality. It promotes reason and rationality. As a long* time member of HN, threads like this are a blight. Not because of the parties involved, but because we are doing things we abhor in others.
> Either way, Daniella needs to respond to this allegation.
I hate that mentality. I understand the reasoning, but essentially we are requiring people to respond to trolls. I say this within the context of what we know: a unsubstantiated blog post is claiming certain things. There are numerous steps that could be taken to provide more proof, and I think it's important that evidence is provided to avoid these types of issues.
Basically, I see this as the same as me accusing Rachel of setting this all up as a marketing stunt. And then posting some italicized text and claiming it's from her. It's equally as credible as things stand now.
Edit: * I just want to add that I don't presume that it needs my help. Rather, every member is, in their own way, responsible for moderating HN. It can only be defended by it's users.
- deleted 15y ago[deleted]
- Dylan16807 15y agoI see no problem with expecting people to say "nope." to credible-seeming trolls. It takes mere seconds and provides strong evidence to discredit the troll in the future. And you calling it a marketing stunt is a very different situation because you have a clear motivation of rhetorical device to fake an email and you're not staking your reputation on it. Finally, I don't think anyone here is suggesting taking action against kickstarter without hearing what they say. It's a big "wow, this is a bad way to behave kickstarter". And they could reply "yes, good thing we didn't do that".
- jasonlotito 15y ago> And you calling it a marketing stunt is a very different situation because you have a clear motivation of rhetorical device to fake an email and you're not staking your reputation on it. Whoa. I never said that. I never suggested it, and suggesting I said that is completely dishonest and reprehensible*. I'm going to assume you misread what I've written. I've said that there are many possibilities that could explain these actions, besides the truth, one of those being a publicity stunt. That, however, is no where near an accusation, merely speculation, and does not represent my believe in any way. Edit: This sounds like I'm calling you dishonest and reprehensible. That's not accurate. That would be if you were doing it on purpose. I just believe you misread what I wrote. Just being clear.
- Dylan16807 15y agoI am sorry. I was unclear there and I think I got things a bit confused as I replied. What I meant to say there is that your italic fake-quote that the blog post was a lie was a very different etc. I think I misremembered there being a mention of it being a stunt inside the fake-quote. Either way, I'm sorry I worded that unclearly. I wasn't talking about your actual opinion there, I was talking about your fake-quote.
- chris_wot 15y agoKickstarter doesn't agree with your reasoning, as they have just apologized for their response. I think it's reasonable that they were called out on what they stated to Rachel Marone, and they have now apologized. Both Rachel and Kickstarter have done the right thing here.