Grabblers
Oxford Professor Is Accused of Selling Ancient Texts
101–106 of 106 posts
Re: Oxford Professor Is Accused of Selling Ancient Texts
#102Earlier quoted context omitted.
You're saying that in order to enact such a policy, a person would have to feel "intense or passionate dislike" for certain people. I don't see the logical connection between the two. Could you explain how the one implies the other?
How on earth did you get that from what I said? I think they are a hateful group because they so vehemently wanted to deny medical access through their mandated healthcare program.
> How on earth did you get that from what I said?
You said you disagree with my statement that "having such a policy does not imply hate on their part" -- which I take to mean you think having such a policy does imply hatred. I just repeated that, but replaced the word "hate" with its definition -- "feeling intense or passionate dislike for (someone)".
> I think they are a hateful group because they so vehemently wanted to deny medical access through their mandated healthcare program.
You're using emotionally loaded terms that assume a particular attitude on their part. My point is that if you don't start by assuming any particular attitude and evaluate their actions alone, those actions don't necessarily imply an intense dislike for anyone (i.e. hatred).
Re: Oxford Professor Is Accused of Selling Ancient Texts
#103Earlier quoted context omitted.
Hey, dang, where are you, man? Gonna ban this guy for "ideological flamewar"? Nah, this Dan is a founder , a YC alum with 11,000 karma points. He can say whatever he wants. At worst, he'd get a "Well, yeah, you're right, they are religious bigots, but please be more subtle about it." But he won't even get that, because no HN user with >=500 karma's going to flag his comment. Of course, weberc2's comment is downvoted.…
I replied to that comment as soon as I saw it, which was before I saw your comment here. Also, plenty of users flagged it—it plainly breaks the site guidelines. Anyone worried about how we moderate this sort of thing is welcome to look through https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&qu... .
I'm glad to be proven wrong this time.
Re: Oxford Professor Is Accused of Selling Ancient Texts
#104Earlier quoted context omitted.
"but it points out that other museums could too" That's the bias right there. There is a broader problem here, but that's not indicated in the headline. Hobby Lobby was specifically targeted in the headline to create emotional engagement. Not the end of the world. Not a vast conspiracy - they need to sell clicks and paper. But not totally honest either.
That's a good point, but astute readers aren't likely to be misled by headlines alone. Unfortunately, headline scanning for confirmation bias of one's current beliefs is rampant. This means (a) biased headlines will get more clicks, and (b) such headlines do constitute a certain lack of honesty in journalism, because of the likelihood that they will mislead many readers.
You don't mislead in headlines for astute readers so there isn't a point in discussing that. You mislead in headlines for everyone else.
Re: Oxford Professor Is Accused of Selling Ancient Texts
#105Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
Since after repeatedly violating the site guidelines and ignoring our explanations and requests to stop, you keep bringing personal attacks and ideological flamewar into the threads, we've banned this account. Please don't create accounts to break the HN guidelines with. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
I get it, you're an unprincipled hack that cannot stand not hearing your favorite things to hear. You really should try to not be such a vile and horrible person. People around you suffer from what wretched of a person you are. Stop harming people and stop abusing the power you cannot constrain yourself from abusing. You are literally committing human rights abuses by suppressing free speech.
Did you ever think you would achieve that goal of yours, becoming a member of the list of human rights violators?
Re: Oxford Professor Is Accused of Selling Ancient Texts
#106Earlier quoted context omitted.
yet they settled out of court for $3m and had to return the goods... id say its pretty safe to say they are up to some shady stuff, otherwise why not fight in court to clear your name and save the $3m ?
The government was entitled to seize the goods under civil asset forfeiture regardless of whether Hobby Lobby did anything wrong. (All that matters was whether the goods were actually looted, not whether Hobby Lobby knew anything about that.) As to settling for $3 million, it could easily cost that much money to litigate the case. Critically, the government didn't get Hobby Lobby to admit to anything in the stipulate…
you just keep trying to excuse their actions... and i'll just sit here and judge their actions and intentions. They aren't on the up and up and have been caught time and time again, but you are welcome to ignore that if it makes you happy.