4 ms·
This site might very well be crazy, but in this instance you did something that caused confusion and now people are confused, you yourself admit it's a poor jok
by neom 8mo ago
This site might very well be crazy, but in this instance you did something that caused confusion and now people are confused, you yourself admit it's a poor joke/poorly constructed point, it's not difficult to believe you - it makes sense, but i'm not sure it's a fair attack given the situation. Guessing you don't know who wrote the hit piece either?
- staticassertion 8mo agoThe assertion was that they're the bot owner. They denied this and explained the situation. Continuing to link to their profile/ real name and accuse them of something they've denied feels like it's completely unwarranted brigading and likely a violation of HN rules.
- verdverm 8mo agoMaybe they shouldn't have been so snarky? https://github.com/matplotlib/matplotlib/pull/31138#issuecomment-3890808045 https://github.com/matplotlib/matplotlib/pull/31138#issuecom... be snarky, get snarky in return or violate HN guidelines themselves? https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46991274 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46991274
- staticassertion 8mo agoThis is a shameful equivocation. This is "be snarky, get publicly dox'd and harassed".
- verdverm 8mo agoI'm not sure which way you are implying here, what is shamefully equated?
- staticassertion 8mo agoThe "snark" of opening the PR vs the "snark" of people dox'ing the guy who opened it.
- potsandpans 8mo ago"this abuser might be abusive, but in this case you did something that really did set the abuser off, so you should know about that next time you consider doing something."