You added that after I'd already posted my reply to that comment. I understand about editing comments - I do it all the time as well - but I don't think 'ignoring' is the right word for someone missing an after-the-fact addition.
Conflict is essential to human life, yes, but that doesn't mean everything that people do in conflicts is ok. Quite the contrary. Milner's point is that we need to figure out how to stay with and endure conflictual differences without resorting to the things that make conflict worse. In internet forum terms, that means not resorting to snark, flamebait, swipes, and the other things that the HN guidelines ask commenters not to do. Allowing the tension of differences without lashing out is, I think, the heart of tolerance, and is what gives a chance of finding solutions other than endless battle. Milner's point about that seems to me profound, original, and directly relevant to HN—that's why I put it in my About box.
I don't think that the people who flagged your GP comment did so because they have a problem with freedom of expression. I know the users who flagged it. I think they were simply, and rightly, reacting to the flamebait in the comment. It shouldn't be hard to understand why posts like "Y'all have no idea how fucked the US is and you're all cheering like it's not happening" get flagged here.
Btw, I did respond to this part of your argument already, when I said "If you want to make a case for yourself as a principled poster of dissident views, you need a better foundation to stand on than the GP comment and the other ones I linked to, which are just typical flamebait of the sort we're trying to avoid."
Have I answered your critique now? I'm not asking if you agree with my answer—I'm sure that is too much to hope for—but I'm curious to know if you at least feel like you got a response.
> I don't think that the people who flagged your GP comment did so because they have a problem with freedom of expression. I know the users who flagged it. I think they were simply, and rightly, reacting to the flamebait in the comment.
Gee, it's almost like instead of responding to me and challenging their own beliefs (or, ignoring it), they are flaming me through the reporting and moderation bots here at HN. Almost.
Is that really so hard for you to see...? How are those guidelines working out for you on that front?
I know you know the users who report comments. You give a lot of favoritism to subjective interpretation leading to a report from the established echo chamber, but you give little focus to the comments themselves when a commenter is happy to elaborate. It really couldn't be more backwards.
> It shouldn't be hard to understand why posts like "Y'all have no idea how fucked the US is and you're all cheering like it's not happening" get flagged here.
It shouldn't be hard to understand that there is no better way for me to call out an echo chamber that I see succinctly, relating to a topic I understand quite well from a few angles.
But hey, if it gets reported it must be breaking the rules, right?
You're a disgrace, my guy. Guess you can try again the next time you find one of my comments too spicy. I'm not a terrorist, stop treating me like one. I'm adding much needed perspective to a site filled with bots. Your subjective interpretation is always wholly inaccurate.
dang|2 years ago
Conflict is essential to human life, yes, but that doesn't mean everything that people do in conflicts is ok. Quite the contrary. Milner's point is that we need to figure out how to stay with and endure conflictual differences without resorting to the things that make conflict worse. In internet forum terms, that means not resorting to snark, flamebait, swipes, and the other things that the HN guidelines ask commenters not to do. Allowing the tension of differences without lashing out is, I think, the heart of tolerance, and is what gives a chance of finding solutions other than endless battle. Milner's point about that seems to me profound, original, and directly relevant to HN—that's why I put it in my About box.
I don't think that the people who flagged your GP comment did so because they have a problem with freedom of expression. I know the users who flagged it. I think they were simply, and rightly, reacting to the flamebait in the comment. It shouldn't be hard to understand why posts like "Y'all have no idea how fucked the US is and you're all cheering like it's not happening" get flagged here.
Btw, I did respond to this part of your argument already, when I said "If you want to make a case for yourself as a principled poster of dissident views, you need a better foundation to stand on than the GP comment and the other ones I linked to, which are just typical flamebait of the sort we're trying to avoid."
Have I answered your critique now? I'm not asking if you agree with my answer—I'm sure that is too much to hope for—but I'm curious to know if you at least feel like you got a response.
bobleeswagger|2 years ago
Gee, it's almost like instead of responding to me and challenging their own beliefs (or, ignoring it), they are flaming me through the reporting and moderation bots here at HN. Almost.
Is that really so hard for you to see...? How are those guidelines working out for you on that front?
I know you know the users who report comments. You give a lot of favoritism to subjective interpretation leading to a report from the established echo chamber, but you give little focus to the comments themselves when a commenter is happy to elaborate. It really couldn't be more backwards.
> It shouldn't be hard to understand why posts like "Y'all have no idea how fucked the US is and you're all cheering like it's not happening" get flagged here.
It shouldn't be hard to understand that there is no better way for me to call out an echo chamber that I see succinctly, relating to a topic I understand quite well from a few angles.
But hey, if it gets reported it must be breaking the rules, right?
You're a disgrace, my guy. Guess you can try again the next time you find one of my comments too spicy. I'm not a terrorist, stop treating me like one. I'm adding much needed perspective to a site filled with bots. Your subjective interpretation is always wholly inaccurate.