But it's fun telling pretentious HNers that they they are wrong.
You don't have to engage with people on the Internet
11–20 of 226 posts
Re: You don't have to engage with people on the Internet
#12But it's fun telling pretentious HNers that they they are wrong.
No it’s not
Re: You don't have to engage with people on the Internet
#13Reddit is great because someone can says 1 + 1 = 3, get fifty upvotes, you can point out that it's actually 2, get downvoted into oblivion, and then some other idiot will come along and say it's 4
Re: You don't have to engage with people on the Internet
#14Yeah, I do.
Re: You don't have to engage with people on the Internet
#15It's worth replying if someone gets a key detail wrong or simple misunderstanding and you can set record strait
I see what you did there.
Re: You don't have to engage with people on the Internet
#16I really struggle with this; to this day I haven't found a good resolution.
I'd say by analogy you could also say: "You don't have to pursue people romantically." It's really, really true: you don't. No one will blame you for keeping to yourself. In many settings it may even be better (example: a club, where the club organizers find the drama caused by romantic entanglements annoying).
But there's a problem behind this problem, which is: while it's not necessary, if I act is if I don't 'need' to do it all (again: strictly true), that also causes problems.
Basically I have an impulse towards sex, and towards being social, which exists in a hard to measure but much-more-than-zero state. The social impulse in particular needs attention daily.
So - put that way - I kind of do have to engage. Because I work remotely I spend too long away from other people in my opinion to not engage socially whatsoever, during work hours.
Like I said, I struggle with this. But my middle-of-the-road position is that, while any individual act of engagement (like a comment) is expendable, the general behavior of seeking community on the Internet is something which I can accurately treat like a need (especially in the sense that, if I haven't done it in hours, it's time to do it).
Re: You don't have to engage with people on the Internet
#17queue hundreds of hn commentators
Re: You don't have to engage with people on the Internet
#18Reddit is great because someone can says 1 + 1 = 3, get fifty upvotes, you can point out that it's actually 2, get downvoted into oblivion, and then some other idiot will come along and say it's 4
I mean hacker news has it too - I’ll come along and point out that 1+1 is 10 in binary or 11 if it’s ASCII.
Re: You don't have to engage with people on the Internet
#19I really struggle with this; to this day I haven't found a good resolution. I'd say by analogy you could also say: "You don't have to pursue people romantically." It's really, really true: you don't. No one will blame you for keeping to yourself. In many settings it may even be better (example: a club, where the club organizers find the drama caused by romantic entanglements annoying). But there's a problem behind th…
Oh, but this isn't even about that kind of engagement. It's just saying you don't need to comment in threads about your employer. I'll go one step further and say you shouldn't. Better not to find out you said the wrong thing as a company representative. And maybe it's good practice for seeing threads and not saying anything.
Re: You don't have to engage with people on the Internet
#20Reddit is great because someone can says 1 + 1 = 3, get fifty upvotes, you can point out that it's actually 2, get downvoted into oblivion, and then some other idiot will come along and say it's 4
I mean hacker news has it too - I’ll come along and point out that 1+1 is 10 in binary or 11 if it’s ASCII.
As the old joke goes, there are 10 types of people in the world, those that understand binary... and nine others.