4 ms·
Uh, are you including yourself in that 3/4? http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4604088 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4604088 > Peppered throughout the
by ender7 14y ago
Uh, are you including yourself in that 3/4?
http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4604088 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4604088
> Peppered throughout the post are cultural signs and signifiers that mark the author as an advocate for a fairly specific set of political and social beliefs. A reader could be excused for having concerns that the author was not an objective witness. On the other hand, those signifiers are so obvious that you could also question whether someone who had set out to unfairly tar the company would put them into the post.
The guy was rightfully incensed and his reaction is completely understandable. However, the style of the original post does make it hard to distinguish from embittered hyperbole. I think the important distinction is that there's a big difference between saying "I can't tell if this guy is for real" vs. "this guy is definitely lying".
- tptacek 14y agoNo, I don't. Read the rest of my comments in that thread. The post you're citing was my attempt to distill the controversy without advocating one way or another, because the author's post was long and easy to get side-tracked on. All you have to do is click that link, then hit "CMD-F" or whatever your search hotkey is, and type "t-p-t-a"; you should almost immediately land on a comment that makes my opinion about the veracity of the story plain. I won't spoil it for you.
- freehunter 14y agoThat actually sounds to me more like devil's advocate, or at the very least an attempt at logically walking through the issue from both sides of the argument. I wouldn't read that and think the author made a conclusive statement. He's toeing the line with reasonable skepticism.
- ender7 14y agoI'm just having trouble reconciling "A reader could be excused for having concerns that the author was not an objective witness" with the root comment of this thread. It seems that, in fact, the reader can't be excused for having such concerns. Maybe tptacek is solely referring to the more vitriolic comments that attempted to dismiss the original poster out of hand. If that's the case, I point to my original comment that there's a difference between "I can't tell if this guy is telling the truth; we need more info" vs. "this guy is lying".