6 ms·

I responded to the idea behind a specific statement, I did not make a generalized observation about the guideline. I even quoted the idea I was responding to.

I responded to the idea behind a specific statement, I did not make a generalized observation about the guideline. I even quoted the idea I was responding to. Perhaps you should practice some of that charitable interpretation.

shkkmo 12y ago
You did make a generalized observation about the guidline: "If HN has decided to be touchy feely than this most certainly isn't the place for me. I prefer actual discourse where bullshit opinions are called out as such." I also think you misunderstood the point the person was making with that statement: It's harder to make helpful critical statements when people let their feathers get ruffled, decide to treat you as a hater, and then disregard your comment. (I think that exact behavior is in play in this series of sub threads). I don't think your original comment should have been downvoted due to disagreement the way it has been so I am upvoting it to balance that out.
- mreiland 12y ago
  I can see the interpretation, but no, I didn't reference the guideline, I was referencing the community. This may no longer be the place for me and if that turns out to be the case I'll gladly leave. > I also think you misunderstood the point the person was making with that statement: It's harder to make helpful critical statements when people let their feathers get ruffled, decide to treat you as a hater, and then disregard your comment. (I think that exact behavior is in play in this series of sub threads). And I gave a reason for dismissing people that had nothing to do with ruffled feathers. An observation I like to make to people in politics. Do you know why those people do those things with absolutely no regard for how you feel about it? Because you're so biased against whatever group they fall into that absolutely nothing they do is going to be ok. You'll dismiss the good, you'll amplify the bad. So why wouldn't they dismiss you? The same can be said of the internet. There are too many idiots who think having an opinion is enough. I will not waste my time on them. Does that make me closed minded? So. Fucking. Be it, I'm closed minded. I learned that from experience.
  - ZenoArrow 12y ago
    "Does that make me closed minded? So. Fucking. Be it, I'm closed minded. I learned that from experience." I can't remember where I read it, but someone I believe was wise once said 'Our first approximation of other people is ourselves'. If I considered myself to be closed minded, it seems to be a burden. Sure, it would make some things simpler, but it's also quite isolating. Furthermore, it's too simplistic, no one is wise or a fool all the time, do you see the space in yourself for both?
    - tomjen3 12y ago
      Somebody said that the people who don't care are the people who once cared too much. Perhaps those who now consider themselves close-minded are those who have seen too many stupid ideas?
      - mreiland 12y ago
        I think that's somewhat true of me. I'm still apt to argue and discuss until the cows come home, but I have to evaluate the other person first to determine if it's worth the emotional effort. You never know if you're arguing with a 50 year old who has seen some shit or a 17 year old who has read some shit. One of those is more useful to argue with than the other.
  - chris_wot 12y ago
    You know, if you see a bullshit opinion or statement, there are ways of refuting it that don't need the level of aggression you are showing here. Here's an example: homeopathy. If someone believes in it, then you can give counter statements without calling them an idiot. You can explain that you believe it's without basis through reasoned argument, and you absolutely should show respect for the other person. You don't even have to respect their opinion - heck I have zero respect for homeopathy - but that other person might have reasons for their stance. At the end of the day, Hacker News works because it allows the free flow of ideas through discussion. HN knows that being wrong and failing are important to innovation because there are so many things that are non-intuitive that you need to give people space to think and act outside the box. To allow for innovation needs robust discussion where you freely share your wild and unorthodox thoughts in a safe environment. A safe environment is one where you invite criticism and allow others to point out the flaws of your ideas, but you do so in the knowledge that they are doing it out of respect to try to help you improve your theories, plans or projects - not to treat you like a complete idiot not worthy of any respect. On the other side of the coin, you should be able to freely and constructively criticise without fear that you will be penalised by the community and that your criticism is given to help the other party limit their failure, or think of ways of improving their idea by ironing out flaws. In essence, when you call another person an idiot, or treat them as such, you break the very model that makes HN successful. So with the greatest of respect, if you can't get your point or view across without denigrating the other party, I don't think HN was or ever will be the forum for you.

shkkmo 12y ago

You did make a generalized observation about the guidline: "If HN has decided to be touchy feely than this most certainly isn't the place for me. I prefer actual discourse where bullshit opinions are called out as such." I also think you misunderstood the point the person was making with that statement: It's harder to make helpful critical statements when people let their feathers get ruffled, decide to treat you as a hater, and then disregard your comment. (I think that exact behavior is in play in this series of sub threads). I don't think your original comment should have been downvoted due to disagreement the way it has been so I am upvoting it to balance that out.

mreiland 12y ago
I can see the interpretation, but no, I didn't reference the guideline, I was referencing the community. This may no longer be the place for me and if that turns out to be the case I'll gladly leave. > I also think you misunderstood the point the person was making with that statement: It's harder to make helpful critical statements when people let their feathers get ruffled, decide to treat you as a hater, and then disregard your comment. (I think that exact behavior is in play in this series of sub threads). And I gave a reason for dismissing people that had nothing to do with ruffled feathers. An observation I like to make to people in politics. Do you know why those people do those things with absolutely no regard for how you feel about it? Because you're so biased against whatever group they fall into that absolutely nothing they do is going to be ok. You'll dismiss the good, you'll amplify the bad. So why wouldn't they dismiss you? The same can be said of the internet. There are too many idiots who think having an opinion is enough. I will not waste my time on them. Does that make me closed minded? So. Fucking. Be it, I'm closed minded. I learned that from experience.
- ZenoArrow 12y ago
  "Does that make me closed minded? So. Fucking. Be it, I'm closed minded. I learned that from experience." I can't remember where I read it, but someone I believe was wise once said 'Our first approximation of other people is ourselves'. If I considered myself to be closed minded, it seems to be a burden. Sure, it would make some things simpler, but it's also quite isolating. Furthermore, it's too simplistic, no one is wise or a fool all the time, do you see the space in yourself for both?
  - tomjen3 12y ago
    Somebody said that the people who don't care are the people who once cared too much. Perhaps those who now consider themselves close-minded are those who have seen too many stupid ideas?
    - mreiland 12y ago
      I think that's somewhat true of me. I'm still apt to argue and discuss until the cows come home, but I have to evaluate the other person first to determine if it's worth the emotional effort. You never know if you're arguing with a 50 year old who has seen some shit or a 17 year old who has read some shit. One of those is more useful to argue with than the other.
- chris_wot 12y ago
  You know, if you see a bullshit opinion or statement, there are ways of refuting it that don't need the level of aggression you are showing here. Here's an example: homeopathy. If someone believes in it, then you can give counter statements without calling them an idiot. You can explain that you believe it's without basis through reasoned argument, and you absolutely should show respect for the other person. You don't even have to respect their opinion - heck I have zero respect for homeopathy - but that other person might have reasons for their stance. At the end of the day, Hacker News works because it allows the free flow of ideas through discussion. HN knows that being wrong and failing are important to innovation because there are so many things that are non-intuitive that you need to give people space to think and act outside the box. To allow for innovation needs robust discussion where you freely share your wild and unorthodox thoughts in a safe environment. A safe environment is one where you invite criticism and allow others to point out the flaws of your ideas, but you do so in the knowledge that they are doing it out of respect to try to help you improve your theories, plans or projects - not to treat you like a complete idiot not worthy of any respect. On the other side of the coin, you should be able to freely and constructively criticise without fear that you will be penalised by the community and that your criticism is given to help the other party limit their failure, or think of ways of improving their idea by ironing out flaws. In essence, when you call another person an idiot, or treat them as such, you break the very model that makes HN successful. So with the greatest of respect, if you can't get your point or view across without denigrating the other party, I don't think HN was or ever will be the forum for you.