4 ms·

Isn’t that fine? Not all of those conversations have to be taken to the end.

by Aeolun 2y ago

appleorchard46 2y ago
Mm, as long as the edit is clear it seems like a good way to avoid unproductive arguments. Adam makes a statement, but the responses show the statement was unclear and/or leads into tangential arguments. An edit can clarify the initial statement for future readers without getting the original poster stuck in the back-and-forth necessary to escape whatever quagmire the unedited version created.
noduerme 2y ago
Imagine you're having an in-person conversation with someone in a crowded restaurant. Rather than addressing their next response to you, they wait until you go to the bathroom. Then they turn to everyone at the next table and say, "that guy doesn't get it, but fine." I personally think that in a no-holds-barred debate, you don't bother trying to convince your interlocutor of anything. You focus on persuading everyone else in the room. But it's rude to treat every polite conversation as a smackdown debate. Such a strategy can also backfire by turning off your intended audience, as evidenced here.
- motorest 2y ago
  > Imagine you're having an in-person conversation with someone in a crowded restaurant. You're not in a crowded restaurant chatting with someone. You're in an online forum broadcasting messages to the vast nothingness.
  - noduerme 2y ago
    This isn't twitter. You're in a highly moderated forum in which both moderator and participants are bound by rule and custom to maintain civil behavior, in the best interest of everyone involved. Even if you weren't, you should still act as if you were in a crowded restaurant. Without agreeing to conventions for how a conversation should be conducted, you can't have any productive conversation at all. So what would be the point? If you ever sense that you're in an online forum broadcasting messages to the vast nothingness then you are truly only wasting your own time. (Which is why this is the only site I ever post on). At that point, just stop, put it down, walk outside and engage in any kind of real interaction you can find.
    - motorest 2y ago
      > This isn't twitter. You're in a highly moderated forum in which both moderator and participants are bound by rule and custom to maintain civil behavior, in the best interest of everyone involved. You're trying to make a storm in a teacup. OP literally edited his post to clearly state its fine if anyone interprete something differently. This is hardly outrage bait. Try to direct your energy to something worth your time. Loudly complaining about vague subjective notions of netiquette in a moderated forum is certainly not it.
      - lukan 2y ago
        "Try to direct your energy to something worth your time. Loudly complaining about vague subjective notions of netiquette in a moderated forum is certainly not it." Maybe try not to tell other people what is important for them? That is part of the same debate, how we communicate and to me it also matters a lot.
elevaet 2y ago
I agree that it's poor form at least in the context of HN - we want to be able to trace the "commit history"

Isn’t that fine? Not all of those conversations have to be taken to the end.

by Aeolun 2y ago

Isn’t that fine? Not all of those conversations have to be taken to the end.

Mm, as long as the edit is clear it seems like a good way to avoid unproductive arguments. Adam makes a statement, but the responses show the statement was unclear and/or leads into tangential arguments. An edit can clarify the initial statement for future readers without getting the original poster stuck in the back-and-forth necessary to escape whatever quagmire the unedited version created.

noduerme 2y ago

Imagine you're having an in-person conversation with someone in a crowded restaurant. Rather than addressing their next response to you, they wait until you go to the bathroom. Then they turn to everyone at the next table and say, "that guy doesn't get it, but fine." I personally think that in a no-holds-barred debate, you don't bother trying to convince your interlocutor of anything. You focus on persuading everyone else in the room. But it's rude to treat every polite conversation as a smackdown debate. Such a strategy can also backfire by turning off your intended audience, as evidenced here.

motorest 2y ago
> Imagine you're having an in-person conversation with someone in a crowded restaurant. You're not in a crowded restaurant chatting with someone. You're in an online forum broadcasting messages to the vast nothingness.
- noduerme 2y ago
  This isn't twitter. You're in a highly moderated forum in which both moderator and participants are bound by rule and custom to maintain civil behavior, in the best interest of everyone involved. Even if you weren't, you should still act as if you were in a crowded restaurant. Without agreeing to conventions for how a conversation should be conducted, you can't have any productive conversation at all. So what would be the point? If you ever sense that you're in an online forum broadcasting messages to the vast nothingness then you are truly only wasting your own time. (Which is why this is the only site I ever post on). At that point, just stop, put it down, walk outside and engage in any kind of real interaction you can find.
  - motorest 2y ago
    > This isn't twitter. You're in a highly moderated forum in which both moderator and participants are bound by rule and custom to maintain civil behavior, in the best interest of everyone involved. You're trying to make a storm in a teacup. OP literally edited his post to clearly state its fine if anyone interprete something differently. This is hardly outrage bait. Try to direct your energy to something worth your time. Loudly complaining about vague subjective notions of netiquette in a moderated forum is certainly not it.
    - lukan 2y ago
      "Try to direct your energy to something worth your time. Loudly complaining about vague subjective notions of netiquette in a moderated forum is certainly not it." Maybe try not to tell other people what is important for them? That is part of the same debate, how we communicate and to me it also matters a lot.

elevaet 2y ago

I agree that it's poor form at least in the context of HN - we want to be able to trace the "commit history"