5 ms·

Can we all agree to stop calling critics "haters"?

by oinksoft 14y ago

deleted 14y ago
[deleted]
- deleted 14y ago
  [deleted]
glomph 14y ago
Especially when many of them are making quite long and thought out points. Haters seems appropriate to me only when applied to the most vacuous of comments. Real points deserve real responses or at least the respect of being called comments or criticisms not hate.
- nchlswu 14y ago
  That's fair, but I feel like the majority of comments I've read through appear that the poster cannot separate the prospects of Svbtle with their perception of Dustin and his brand. Those aren't critics. They're haters.
  - deleted 14y ago
    [deleted]
  - Avshalom 14y ago
    The prospects of Svbtle are directly related to the brand of the people involved though.
    - nchlswu 14y ago
      If I understand you correctly, you're saying Dustin's reputation can negatively affect the prospects of Svbtle. While Dustin's brand own brand spills over into Svbtle's, I think the network's prospects can be sufficiently differentiated from Dustin's brand. Seems to me that the network is becoming large enough where the "tech blog" echo chamber opinion (about one individual) is inconsequential to Svbtle's fate
      - alexqgb 14y ago
        That also suggests that if Svbtle were to find its way into something good, Curtis may not be seen as essential to ongoing success, whatever that may be. It's founder as catalyst, rather than architect, making it more like Twitter, less like Apple.
geuis 14y ago
@teej No, but it makes you into one too.
kmfrk 14y ago
It's just baffling to see a public response so low on the taxonomic scale of debate. I couldn't agree more. It reminds me of pg's response to the Airbnb case.
- lobster_johnson 14y ago
  I must have missed that, what as "the Airbnb case"?
  - kmfrk 14y ago
    I'm away from my desktop computer (and Opera's bookmark sync doesn't work on my MacBook Air, the PoS), but these two articles seem to capture the imbroglio well enough: - http://www.pehub.com/114113/what-not-to-do-in-a-crisis-%E2%80%93-lessons-from-the-airbnb-fiasco/ http://www.pehub.com/114113/what-not-to-do-in-a-crisis-%E2%8... - http://techcrunch.com/2011/07/30/how-the-hell-is-this-my-fault/ http://techcrunch.com/2011/07/30/how-the-hell-is-this-my-fau...
    - lobster_johnson 14y ago
      Thanks!
pg 14y ago
I think not. Haters are distinctive enough that it would make the language less expressive to discard the word and merge it into "critic." I'm slow to adopt new words, but I think "hater" is a useful addition to the language, and not simply a pejorative version of "critic." The difference is that a critic is what you're called as a byproduct of being critical in a particular instance, whereas being a hater is an ongoing state of mind. So for example it is reasonable to say "he was sometimes a critic of the administration's policy" but not to say "he was sometimes a hater of the administration's policy." "Hater" is not a pejorative version of "critic" so much as a negative version of "fan." In fact the distinctive thing about a hater is how uncritical his responses are.
- diminish 14y ago
  but 'hater' smells like a categorical ad hominem attack which may kill any critical thinking against someone 'you' like. neither 'i hate', nore 'you are hater' belong to a mindful discussion where experiences and reasonings collide, imho. edit: despite saying that, i am indeed a curious follower of dustin curtis, which i learned during recent discussions, he was fiercely and mostly wrongly criticized. (namely, i have personal positive impression in my limbic system for him).
- waterlesscloud 14y ago
  Then isn't the word "haters" misapplied here? What I've seen in this thread is that people have reasons for disliking Dustin, some of which directly relate to Svbtle. To the extent that they don't directly relate, though, people are quite explicitly saying they evaluate Svbtle separate from Dustin. And by far the most common reaction expressed is a lack of understanding any valid business model for the network, which in your op you say is quite understandable. What I don't see in this thread is any willful misconstruing of the project. Which seems to be the requirement for a "hater".
  - deleted 14y ago
    [deleted]
  - pg 14y ago
    HN users are sophisticated enough not to simply post comments saying "I hate Dustin Curtis." Here they resort to something more akin to concern trolling. The way you can tell something is amiss is the volume of commenters who seem worried about e.g. how Dustin is going to make money. If most startups issued such a bland funding announcement, it would sink beneath the surface of HN with barely a ripple of comment.
readymade 14y ago
Perhaps instead of treating "haters" as a pejorative term one should feel inclined to stand by it. I don't see what's so odious about wanting to see assholes fail. If there's any justice or karma in the world, I'd expect it.

Can we all agree to stop calling critics "haters"?

deleted 14y ago

[deleted]

deleted 14y ago
[deleted]

glomph 14y ago

Especially when many of them are making quite long and thought out points. Haters seems appropriate to me only when applied to the most vacuous of comments. Real points deserve real responses or at least the respect of being called comments or criticisms not hate.

nchlswu 14y ago
That's fair, but I feel like the majority of comments I've read through appear that the poster cannot separate the prospects of Svbtle with their perception of Dustin and his brand. Those aren't critics. They're haters.
- deleted 14y ago
  [deleted]
- Avshalom 14y ago
  The prospects of Svbtle are directly related to the brand of the people involved though.
  - nchlswu 14y ago
    If I understand you correctly, you're saying Dustin's reputation can negatively affect the prospects of Svbtle. While Dustin's brand own brand spills over into Svbtle's, I think the network's prospects can be sufficiently differentiated from Dustin's brand. Seems to me that the network is becoming large enough where the "tech blog" echo chamber opinion (about one individual) is inconsequential to Svbtle's fate
    - alexqgb 14y ago
      That also suggests that if Svbtle were to find its way into something good, Curtis may not be seen as essential to ongoing success, whatever that may be. It's founder as catalyst, rather than architect, making it more like Twitter, less like Apple.

geuis 14y ago

@teej No, but it makes you into one too.

kmfrk 14y ago

It's just baffling to see a public response so low on the taxonomic scale of debate. I couldn't agree more. It reminds me of pg's response to the Airbnb case.

lobster_johnson 14y ago
I must have missed that, what as "the Airbnb case"?
- kmfrk 14y ago
  I'm away from my desktop computer (and Opera's bookmark sync doesn't work on my MacBook Air, the PoS), but these two articles seem to capture the imbroglio well enough: - http://www.pehub.com/114113/what-not-to-do-in-a-crisis-%E2%80%93-lessons-from-the-airbnb-fiasco/ http://www.pehub.com/114113/what-not-to-do-in-a-crisis-%E2%8... - http://techcrunch.com/2011/07/30/how-the-hell-is-this-my-fault/ http://techcrunch.com/2011/07/30/how-the-hell-is-this-my-fau...
  - lobster_johnson 14y ago
    Thanks!

pg 14y ago

I think not. Haters are distinctive enough that it would make the language less expressive to discard the word and merge it into "critic." I'm slow to adopt new words, but I think "hater" is a useful addition to the language, and not simply a pejorative version of "critic." The difference is that a critic is what you're called as a byproduct of being critical in a particular instance, whereas being a hater is an ongoing state of mind. So for example it is reasonable to say "he was sometimes a critic of the administration's policy" but not to say "he was sometimes a hater of the administration's policy." "Hater" is not a pejorative version of "critic" so much as a negative version of "fan." In fact the distinctive thing about a hater is how uncritical his responses are.

diminish 14y ago
but 'hater' smells like a categorical ad hominem attack which may kill any critical thinking against someone 'you' like. neither 'i hate', nore 'you are hater' belong to a mindful discussion where experiences and reasonings collide, imho. edit: despite saying that, i am indeed a curious follower of dustin curtis, which i learned during recent discussions, he was fiercely and mostly wrongly criticized. (namely, i have personal positive impression in my limbic system for him).
waterlesscloud 14y ago
Then isn't the word "haters" misapplied here? What I've seen in this thread is that people have reasons for disliking Dustin, some of which directly relate to Svbtle. To the extent that they don't directly relate, though, people are quite explicitly saying they evaluate Svbtle separate from Dustin. And by far the most common reaction expressed is a lack of understanding any valid business model for the network, which in your op you say is quite understandable. What I don't see in this thread is any willful misconstruing of the project. Which seems to be the requirement for a "hater".
- deleted 14y ago
  [deleted]
- pg 14y ago
  HN users are sophisticated enough not to simply post comments saying "I hate Dustin Curtis." Here they resort to something more akin to concern trolling. The way you can tell something is amiss is the volume of commenters who seem worried about e.g. how Dustin is going to make money. If most startups issued such a bland funding announcement, it would sink beneath the surface of HN with barely a ripple of comment.

readymade 14y ago

Perhaps instead of treating "haters" as a pejorative term one should feel inclined to stand by it. I don't see what's so odious about wanting to see assholes fail. If there's any justice or karma in the world, I'd expect it.