mahranch

42 ms·

301.
by mahranch 12y ago
No, I wasn't referring to myself. I was answering his question. I myself went on to discuss what he said. I even quoted him verbatim. I didn't have to speculate or "think".
302.
by mahranch 12y ago
There are now 12 comments (and counting) complaining about this is being downvoted and the only ones actually discussing what they said (or being critical of it) are being downvoted... Hackernews is turning into reddit.
303.
by mahranch 12y ago
You don't see anything wrong someone "hoping they were found guilty" even though they admit themselves that the company "probably didn't discriminate"? If they're guilty, find them guilty. If they're
304.
by mahranch 12y ago
They were probably downvoted because they say bluntly that they wish KP would have been found guilty, but then go on to say that it isn't clear if they violated CPA and they probably didn't discriminate. Their bias is clearly outl
305.
by mahranch 12y ago
> So "should not be taken seriously" doesn't sit right with me. If you're a Japanese citizen, of course you should take them seriously. However, none of us are Japanese citizens. We can afford to not take them serious
306.
by mahranch 12y ago
> Now the Japanese people are understandably concerned about maintaining their traditions in the face of massive Western cultural influences. I lived in Japan for some time and this sentence is a gross generalization. Some right-winger
307.
by mahranch 12y ago
I don't think that's the case at all. There's social justice warriors (SJW) who do fight the good fight and try to point out (and/or stomp out) racism, bigotry and homophobia when they see it, but then there are also tho
308.
by mahranch 12y ago
I think the situation with KP should have pretty much disqualified her right off the bat. She shouldn't have been hired in the first place (though I think she got the job by default thanks to Yishan unexpectedly quitting). They shouldn
309.
by mahranch 12y ago
> But you are calling for her termination. For something unrelated to her current job. I am calling for her termination for something on-going with her current job and related to her old job. Did you not read the article? A Reddit empl
310.
by mahranch 12y ago
Thanks for stalking me instead of taking my comment at face value (I wonder if that's a new, evolving form of the ad hominem logical fallacy). It's funny, actually. I've never seen so many downvotes flying on hackernews as I
311.
by mahranch 12y ago
> Your only evidence is one letter sent by anonymous employee (assuming the NYT has accurately described the person in question and they were in fact at Reddit). Do you really need more evidence? Your CEO should be a pillar of stabilit
312.
by mahranch 12y ago
> By all accounts she's also doing very well as an operator at Reddit. That's completely the opposite of what the linked article claims. It says that a reddit employee sent the defense a letter asking to subpena reddit employ
313.
by mahranch 12y ago
> An anonymous Reddit employee sent a letter to Kleiner’s legal team, asking them to subpoena Reddit employees “for information regarding conflicts with Ellen Pao.” Wow. I had heard about the case, but didn't know the drama had sp
314.
by mahranch 12y ago
> This is flat-out not true. The standard interpretation is Unrelated Query: How can something be "flat out not true" if it's only an interpretation? Seems to be that what you're describing is a consensus or popular v
315.
by mahranch 12y ago
> Malice Have proof of actual malice being committed? Intelligence gathering in of itself isn't malicious. That's literally the very reason for the NSA's existence. It's like saying the FBI is malicious because they
316.
by mahranch 12y ago
> You clearly have never watched RT. I don't need to, to know that it's a state-run news agency looking to push their narrative out into the world. They don't even try to hide it. That's quite literally their sole rea
317.
by mahranch 12y ago
> Remember "war on terror" propaganda? Sure do. It was largely spun by a single entity which wasn't state-owned (Fox News). And it was criticized by other agencies for doing so (MSNBC, CNN, Hell the Dailyshow made it their
318.
by mahranch 12y ago
Are you really trying to equate CNN with a state-owned and operated news agency? Those news agencies are explicitly biased. Their sole goal in news reporting isn't profit or appeasing shareholders, but pushing their narrative of worl
319.
by mahranch 12y ago
I feel like you completely missed the point of his comment. Probably purposefully. To answer your question, just because something is "wrong" doesn't mean something can't be more "wrong". Just because I jaywalk
320.
by mahranch 12y ago
> if I got divorced my wife would automatically get custody because I would not legally be able to take custody, not being a person. This isn't true. You're still considered a person but you're not considered a citizen .
321.
by mahranch 12y ago
I disagree with literally everything said in this article. Virtually every point the author makes is based on false assumptions, inaccurate information, a misunderstanding or other fallacies. I really, really didn't want to break it do
322.
by mahranch 12y ago
> I find it extremely amusing to watch the US crow about IP Irrelevant nationalism. What does the U.S have to do with China's blatant IP theft? Plenty of my non-American friends have lost quite a bit due to China's underhanded
323.
by mahranch 12y ago
Bingo. It's pretty common for people to comment without reading the link on sites like reddit, but that was never the case here. Until recently, that is. They see the title, then head right to the comment section to give their "su
324.
by mahranch 12y ago
Looks pretty benign to me. Of course corporations are going to post to reddit. Anyone who thinks that is nefarious in of itself is deluding themselves. If those people were trying to game the system in some way, to subvert the organic proce
325.
by mahranch 12y ago
> is completely different from what has been ostensibly refuted in this thread. The OP never said anything about Reddit controlling moderation. As I explained in other comments below, I have extensive experience moderating large subred
326.
by mahranch 12y ago
Nobody forgot. Nobody was shilling there. This is a blatantly incorrect statement usually put forth by the tinfoil hat crowd. Technology's mods had automod (a bot) nuking a bunch of terms automatically because those submissions were ov
327.
by mahranch 12y ago
Never, not once. The thing is that when I became a mod, I thought for sure I would see offers or have people try to bribe me. I'm kind of disappointed it hasn't happened because it sounds interesting (I have a boring life). It wou
328.
by mahranch 12y ago
Shills and "spammers" (self-promotion/marketing) are two completely different things. Someone pushing links to their own websites/articles are not shills. I don't know why people conflate the two when they're n
329.
by mahranch 12y ago
They never do. They're baseless. I'm a default mod on reddit, have been for quite a while. I've never been approached by anyone looking to do shady things ever . I'm not saying it doesn't happen, SEO people would l
330.
by mahranch 12y ago
> here is little need for government takedown requests when the moderators of many subreddits are paid shills of various stripes. As someone who is a mod of one or more default subreddits, I promise you, this is certainly not the case. I

More ›