3 ms·

That's pretty mean. There's a whole internet for personal attacks and I don't see why every forum has to trend to internet-level nastiness. PG mentions "nicenes

That's pretty mean. There's a whole internet for personal attacks and I don't see why every forum has to trend to internet-level nastiness. PG mentions "niceness" many times, and HN's niceness has always been an attractive and useful quality. Arguing about the ball rather than the man forces people to think more clearly about the ball. That's a good thing. I think PG's stated principles helped build HN. I don't know why you want to dilute them when everywhere-but-HN is already the forum you're pushing for.

forensic 14y ago
The question is not whether attacking the ball is preferred--it is. The question is whether the forum should censor topics that raise strong feelings about that ball. Pg said that flat insults without intellectual content (e.g. "you're gay") are not an issue because they quickly get downvoted. I believe in a curated forum, I just think meta-drama brought up by attention whores is the worst sort of drama--NOT the "uncivil" arguments about various platforms.