3 ms·
Their guidelines are hypocritical, i.e., bad. To spell it out explicitly: the -isms rule is probably fine as far as it goes, but if HN is going to be inspired b
by lexcorvus 12y ago
Their guidelines are hypocritical, i.e., bad. To spell it out explicitly: the -isms rule is probably fine as far as it goes, but if HN is going to be inspired by the Recurse Center's policies, it should go a step further and officially discourage the Recurse Center's brand of pious discrimination as well.
- tptacek 12y agoHow could this sentiment possibly have anything to do with Hacker News? Much to my disappointment, Hacker News doesn't offer financial aid to commenters.
- pain 12y agoMaybe that basic income, basic speechcome, could help make some sense of logic pains.
- lexcorvus 12y agoAssuming that you actually want to understand my position, I'll expand my answer one more time. You don't need to agree with me to see that my view has nothing to do with the literal-minded (and admittedly amusing) observation that "Hacker News doesn't offer financial aid to commenters." The Recurse Center's guideline against "subtle -isms" takes place in the context of offering financial aid only to favored groups. This suggests that "subtle -isms" against less-favored groups might be policed less vigorously. For example, many ordinary white men might reasonably consider the term "underrepresented" itself to be a "subtle -ism", but I doubt complaints to this effect would fall on sympathetic ears. This issue applies to Hacker News because being inspired by the Recurse Center's policies risks importing the expectation that "avoid subtle -isms" mainly applies to speech against their favored groups. If Hacker News is to adopt Recurse Center–style community guidelines but wants to avoid such bias, it should be explicit in disclaiming any notion of "protected classes", instead insisting that the guidelines be applied equally to all groups.