Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Abuse is indefensible

blog.mozilla.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 221 posts

Re: Abuse is indefensible

#201

Post by zzalpha »

thomashabets2 wrote: post #64
ZanyProgrammer wrote: post #19

Why is it that people who support Linus' tirades and mention freedom of speech, etc get so incredibly hurt when others exercise their own freedom of speech and point out how abusive they are?

Because one is saying "what you are saying is wrong" and the other is saying "you should stop talking". That's a fundamental difference. If they get hurt (big "if"), then they are still not saying "and that means you are not allowed to talk". Are you seeing an inconsistency that I'm not?

Because one is saying "what you are saying is wrong" and the other is saying "you should stop talking".

No, they're saying stop being a jerk.

The only way that translates to "you should stop talking" is if said person is incapable of communicating whilst not being a jerk.

Re: Abuse is indefensible

#202

Post by x1024 »

enneff wrote: post #165
x1024 wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If I have to choose between Linus yelling at me and you censoring any official discussion channels, I'd go with Linus every time. Now why don't you go back to your locked threads and enjoy the silence?

I find it flattering that you try to deflect from your embarrassment by talking about me. :-)

That is a bad attempt at provocation and it won't work, sorry.

Re: Abuse is indefensible

#203

Post by thomashabets2 »

zzalpha wrote: post #201
thomashabets2 wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because one is saying "what you are saying is wrong" and the other is saying "you should stop talking". That's a fundamental difference. If they get hurt (big "if"), then they are still not saying "and that means you are not allowed to talk". Are you seeing an inconsistency that I'm not?

Because one is saying "what you are saying is wrong" and the other is saying "you should stop talking". No, they're saying stop being a jerk. The only way that translates to "you should stop talking" is if said person is incapable of communicating whilst not being a jerk.

I'm sorry if my illustration of why there is no hypocrisy was unclear.

There may be jerk behaviour. I'm not saying there isn't. I did not mean to address that part at all. I'm saying there's no hypocrisy.

Re: Abuse is indefensible

#204

Post by byroot »

delinka wrote: post #199
byroot wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not the OP, and I think he makes a bad job at expressing his opinion being so confrontational and dismissive. That being said I agree with his core point. There is tons of things totally unacceptable in the US society that are just fine in other cultures, and US people tend to impose their moral view on other cultures. One example that come back very often is Facebook "censorship" of "l'origine du monde": http://…

But how's any of this relevant to the Linus rant?

It's relevant because OP find this rant unacceptable.

It's a judgement based on his own culture, not Linus'. In many cultures, mine included, such rants are ok.

Re: Abuse is indefensible

#205

Post by arguseyes »

norea-armozel wrote: post #185
arguseyes wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The recipient of Linus message understood all his points fairly well.

I didn't. And I can see others having the same issue.

So f...... what?

Is this serious? Are you kidding me?

He talked to a specific person. This person understood what he said. That's it.

Why should he care about your or other people's entitled whining? He isn't even talking to you.

Re: Abuse is indefensible

#206

Post by arguseyes »

delinka wrote: post #200
arguseyes wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I still don't see how this is relevant or contributes to the discussion. This is something you should definitely work on then.

Obviously, since your original post was downvoted to oblivion and flagged (neither of which I can do because you replied to me), I must be the one with the problem.

It has been downvoted and flagged because Americans can't deal with other people's opinion. I think that should have been clear by now.

That's exactly the issue I'm talking about. They need to grow up and learn that their culture isn't the only one that counts.

Re: Abuse is indefensible

#207

Post by arguseyes »

norea-armozel wrote: post #184
arguseyes wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or maybe he doesn't care about random cultural norms of some region on this planet ... and doesn't need to? Should he end all his messages with "Long live our dear leader Kim Jong-Un" to not offend North-Koreans?

This is not equivalent to what I've stated, but thanks for strawmanning my point entirely. :)

The example was intentionally far-fetched to encourage you to step out of your filter bubble.

Re: Abuse is indefensible

#208

Post by chasing »

mbrock wrote: post #198
chasing wrote: post #194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I might consider it a basic human right to use curse words, get angry, and come off as abrasive, and in fact I truly do. This is a common error, but you're mixing up the idea that the government shouldn't be allowed to penalize you for your free speech and the idea that no one at all should be able to react to you for using curse words, getting angry, or coming off as abrasive. If I think you're an asshole, I'm per…

I don't know why you think I made that error. Is it because I said "human right" that you think I was making a point about government censorship?

I read your comment above as saying this:

"It's a problem that women are socially punished for being abrasive because I consider being abrasive a basic human right."

It is a basic human right to use curse words, get angry, and come off as abrasive. That fact does not protect you from social punishment if you behave in a way that the people around you don't want to tolerate. Nor should it.

Re: Abuse is indefensible

#209

Post by dang »

anonbanker wrote: post #174
david-given wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would not want to work in an environment where strong emotional language used to criticize your work is not considered abusive. It's childish and counterproductive. I'm not your enemy, I'm your ally --- making me hate you isn't going to make me want to work with you. If I'm wrong, say so, but do it politely. I work with someone who has an amazing ability to tell people they're wrong and make them feel good about th…

And we can see your net contributions to the kernel source tree as an example of the environment you choose to work in. but thank you for telling us your opinion anyway.

Please don't post uncivil comments to HN.

Re: Abuse is indefensible

#210

Post by anonbanker »

dang wrote: post #209
anonbanker wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And we can see your net contributions to the kernel source tree as an example of the environment you choose to work in. but thank you for telling us your opinion anyway.

Please don't post uncivil comments to HN.

I'm normally pretty good with your moderation. This one's a little vague. I worry that if I apply this uniformly, it'll effectively ban snark from my postings.

I'll do my best to honor your request, though.

Post reply on HN