undefined | Better HN

0 pointsdang1mo ago0 comments

Two thoughts:

(1) the long-term health of the community has to be the priority here. Otherwise it won't survive—all the default internet vectors point the other way;

(2) it's possible to push back, express skepticism, etc., in way that respects the person on the other side of the conversation and isn't just venting the impulse to shame the other.

You guys (<-- by which I really mean all of us in this community) need to remember that you're not just addressing a $BigCo abstraction when you post replies to someone else's comments. You're talking to an individual human. Sure, they may be working for a large and powerful company; but in the HN context the power dynamic is actually quite the reverse. If you put yourself in their shoes for a minute, it shouldn't be so hard to recognize that.

Like I said upthread, I agree with you on the underlying issue. But we also have to preserve the container, and the latter has to take precedence.

0 comments

wswope1mo ago

It’s not about bigco at all in my eyes.

At the end of the day, if you want intellectual curiosity and openness, bad-faith dishonesty needs to be weeded out; thought-provoking and honest conversation should be promoted, regardless of where the contributor is employed.

The problem isn’t working for Microsoft. The problem is dishonesty.

You’re treating the root comment with kid gloves because it’s from a Microsoft employee. Please don’t do that.

dangOP1mo ago

Internet commenters massively over-attribute "bad-faith dishonesty" to others while denying it in themselves. There's enough bad faith to go around in all of us.

It's obvious that the dominant variable in the GP was that he was replying from within $BigCo. Your comment starts out by denying that and ends by confirming it.

I'm not asking for special treatment for anyone, but the opposite: I don't anyone on HN to be the target of a mob. That's the entire point.

wswope1mo ago

Internet or not, I post under my real name on here, and I fully stand by my words. Anything I say on here, I’m 100% willing to say to someone’s face. We can link up for coffee or a beer next time I’m in CA if you’d like, and I’ll prove it.

The root comment is an aggressive affront to the audience’s collective intelligence. You’re in full “rules for thee; not for me” territory, and undermining your own site guidelines if you wanna let the root comment stand unchecked but go after the rightful callouts, in my book.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse

0 comments

wswope1mo ago

It’s not about bigco at all in my eyes.

The problem isn’t working for Microsoft. The problem is dishonesty.

You’re treating the root comment with kid gloves because it’s from a Microsoft employee. Please don’t do that.

dangOP1mo ago

Internet commenters massively over-attribute "bad-faith dishonesty" to others while denying it in themselves. There's enough bad faith to go around in all of us.

It's obvious that the dominant variable in the GP was that he was replying from within $BigCo. Your comment starts out by denying that and ends by confirming it.

I'm not asking for special treatment for anyone, but the opposite: I don't anyone on HN to be the target of a mob. That's the entire point.

wswope1mo ago

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse