3 ms·

Of course I am blaming the minority here for the shutdown. They are the only ones you can blame when one party doesn’t control 60 seats in the senate and hold

Of course I am blaming the minority here for the shutdown. They are the only ones you can blame when one party doesn’t control 60 seats in the senate and hold the keys to a CR being passed.

johnnyanmac 1y ago
[flagged]
- kcplate 1y ago
  [flagged]
  - johnnyanmac 1y ago
    [flagged]
    - kcplate 1y ago
      [flagged]
      - johnnyanmac 1y ago
        https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html >Comments should get more thoughtful and substantive, not less, as a topic gets more divisive. >Eschew flamebait. Avoid generic tangents. Omit internet tropes. >Please don't post shallow dismissals, especially of other people's work. A good critical comment teaches us something. >Please don't use Hacker News for political or ideological battle. It tramples curiosity.
        kcplate 1y ago
        Probably shouldn’t post guidelines at me if you aren’t following the last bullet yourself.
        tomhow 1y ago
        We need both of you, like everyone, to make an effort to observe the guidelines, please.
- tomhow 1y ago
  Be kind. Don't be snarky. Converse curiously; don't cross-examine. Edit out swipes. Please don't fulminate. Please don't sneer, including at the rest of the community. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
  - johnnyanmac 1y ago
    Is there a paradox of tolerance situation here where you need to question curiosity in order to properly identity and engage with curiosity? I've definitely had many bad faith responses here that only reveal themselves after engaging with them.
    - tomhow 1y ago
      The Paradox of Tolerance may have been a valid idea as proposed by Popper, but the way it is generally invoked in contemporary internet debates is not really compatible with the HN guidelines. He was proposing it as a last step before a debate turns into violence. On HN we're not meant to act as though a hot war is about to break out unless we break the guidelines. The guidelines call on us to converse curiously, even if we think the other party is not doing so. They call on us to de-escalate, not find justifications for escalation. If someone else on HN is breaking the guidelines, we should flag their comments and move on. If we want discussions on HN to be more curious, we should lead by example.
      - johnnyanmac 1y ago
        >The guidelines call on us to converse curiously, even if we think the other party is not doing so. They call on us to de-escalate, not find justifications for escalation. That's fair, and I've flagged a few here. I don't think the above comment I replied to was flag worthy (having a bad take =/= having bad faith), but I do feel like it's a "borderline" comment that can either end in providing knowledge to someone, or devolving into a flame war. I just feel kind of icky that I may need to "bait out" a bad faith actor. I'm not trying to "gotcha" someone and flag their account. But I know just having that mentality by itself is a bad way to approach conversation. At the same time I also want to have have a charitable interpretation first and be able to point out certain points, no matter how seemingly obvious it is. It's an awkward balance.

Of course I am blaming the minority here for the shutdown. They are the only ones you can blame when one party doesn’t control 60 seats in the senate and hold the keys to a CR being passed.

johnnyanmac 1y ago

[flagged]

kcplate 1y ago
[flagged]
- johnnyanmac 1y ago
  [flagged]
  - kcplate 1y ago
    [flagged]
    - johnnyanmac 1y ago
      https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html >Comments should get more thoughtful and substantive, not less, as a topic gets more divisive. >Eschew flamebait. Avoid generic tangents. Omit internet tropes. >Please don't post shallow dismissals, especially of other people's work. A good critical comment teaches us something. >Please don't use Hacker News for political or ideological battle. It tramples curiosity.
      - kcplate 1y ago
        Probably shouldn’t post guidelines at me if you aren’t following the last bullet yourself.
        tomhow 1y ago
        We need both of you, like everyone, to make an effort to observe the guidelines, please.
tomhow 1y ago
Be kind. Don't be snarky. Converse curiously; don't cross-examine. Edit out swipes. Please don't fulminate. Please don't sneer, including at the rest of the community. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- johnnyanmac 1y ago
  Is there a paradox of tolerance situation here where you need to question curiosity in order to properly identity and engage with curiosity? I've definitely had many bad faith responses here that only reveal themselves after engaging with them.
  - tomhow 1y ago
    The Paradox of Tolerance may have been a valid idea as proposed by Popper, but the way it is generally invoked in contemporary internet debates is not really compatible with the HN guidelines. He was proposing it as a last step before a debate turns into violence. On HN we're not meant to act as though a hot war is about to break out unless we break the guidelines. The guidelines call on us to converse curiously, even if we think the other party is not doing so. They call on us to de-escalate, not find justifications for escalation. If someone else on HN is breaking the guidelines, we should flag their comments and move on. If we want discussions on HN to be more curious, we should lead by example.
    - johnnyanmac 1y ago
      >The guidelines call on us to converse curiously, even if we think the other party is not doing so. They call on us to de-escalate, not find justifications for escalation. That's fair, and I've flagged a few here. I don't think the above comment I replied to was flag worthy (having a bad take =/= having bad faith), but I do feel like it's a "borderline" comment that can either end in providing knowledge to someone, or devolving into a flame war. I just feel kind of icky that I may need to "bait out" a bad faith actor. I'm not trying to "gotcha" someone and flag their account. But I know just having that mentality by itself is a bad way to approach conversation. At the same time I also want to have have a charitable interpretation first and be able to point out certain points, no matter how seemingly obvious it is. It's an awkward balance.