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

Sinead O’Connor has died

irishtimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 308 posts

Re: Sinead O’Connor has died

#131

Post by dang »

midnitewarrior wrote: post #125
teleforce wrote: post #89

"We belong to Allah, and to Him we return."[1] [1] Inna Lillahi wa inna ilayhi raji'un: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inna_Lillahi_wa_inna_ilayhi_ra...

We belong to ourselves, and only the weak-minded allow themselves to become enslaved by another. Free yourself.

Can you please stop taking HN threads further into flamewar? You've been doing it repeatedly lately, unfortunately, and we're trying for something different here.

I realize that the GP could be interpreted as a provocation in that direction but it doesn't have to be taken that way or responded to in this way.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Re: Sinead O’Connor has died

#134

Post by dang »

synetic wrote: post #30

I remember being outraged at her tearing up John Paul II’s picture. The media in the U.S. did a great job of hiding why she did it. I was not outraged at her when I found out her justified reasons for doing so. That was the first time I became consciously aware that news is a business and that that business thrives when it generates outrage. I no longer fall victim to this. She’s far more the saint than that bastard…

You started a religious flamewar and then poured fuel into it in multiple places. That's why your comment is flagged. Please don't post like that here.

Your comment was just fine in the first paragraph and broke the site guidelines with the second paragraph—not because we care what you think about popes, but because such swipes predictably lead to internet dreckfests and we're simply trying to have a forum that doesn't suck. At least to the extent possible.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Re: Sinead O’Connor has died

#135

Post by dang »

nailer wrote: post #112
michaelsbradley wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ratzinger / Benedict absolutely deliberately prevented investigation into, and facilitated (by moving rapist priests into new parishes), child sexual abuse. No, not really at all, actually: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pope_Benedict_XVI#Sexual_abuse...

[flagged]

Please stop. We don't want religious flamewars.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Re: Sinead O’Connor has died

#137

Post by [deleted] »

synetic wrote: post #104
dang wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It was flamebait, but please let's not take the bait because a religious flamewar is not what we need here. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

In honor of Sinead’s death it seems appropriate to tear to shreds the image of John Paul II. You are on the wrong side, morally speaking, in this Dang.

[deleted]

Re: Sinead O’Connor has died

#138

Post by dang »

synetic wrote: post #104
dang wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It was flamebait, but please let's not take the bait because a religious flamewar is not what we need here. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

In honor of Sinead’s death it seems appropriate to tear to shreds the image of John Paul II. You are on the wrong side, morally speaking, in this Dang.

It's simply the practical question of what type of site HN is trying to be. We want curious conversation, not people bashing each other, which is what flamebait leads to.

Commenters who get too sure of their moral positions tend to do a lot of this. I'm not saying the moral positions are wrong (I probably agree a lot of the time, certainly Sinead did a courageous thing, etc. etc.). But the quality of discussion this leads to is predictably poor, evokes worse from others, and tends to go straight to the bottom of the internet barrel. We're trying to not get sucked completely into that muck here—a difficult task to even partly achieve, so we need everyone's help.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Re: Sinead O’Connor has died

#139

Post by cmrdporcupine »

basisword wrote: post #103
hprotagonist wrote: post #96

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GzxTDHMQza8 To stand in the full blast of a crowd that hates you with that amount of poise, and have a voice that is still capable of song or even coherent speech, just beggars my imagination. i hope you have found peace. you were a voice crying out in the wilderness and we did to you what we always do to that.

Wow! The thing that surprised me most about this was it’s a Bob Dylan tribute concert? I’m shocked religion still had such a hold on the kind of people attending that type of concert at that point in time. The volume is insane. Incredible strength to be able to stand and take such abuse and continue to perform.

I think it speaks less to people's religious feelings and more towards the rather apolitical and apathetic alternative music culture at the time. If I recall the atmosphere at the time it was less "how dare she say that about the Pope?!" and more "how dare she co-opt the public stage for controversial/'political' speech?!" I also don't recall the outrage at her SNL performance even being particularly or especially by Catholics in particular, though I'm sure it was stronger among them.

The rage around her Pope-photo-tearing photo on SNL I think was about: we're trying to sell/watching a entertainment products here, and now you've just gone and made things intense. They just wanted the dancing bear.

She was an intense personality, an artist, not an entertainer. Maybe getting a billboard #1 single and becoming a sensation was the worst thing that could have happened for her. People just wanted to be entertained -- they wanted the fantastic voice but without the powerful emotions and convictions behind it -- and she didn't want to be a 'product'

I agree it's especially jarring in the context of a Bob Dylan tribute.

Re: Sinead O’Connor has died

#140

Post by wesleywt »

mynameishere wrote: post #55
amanaplanacanal wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Looking back 30 years later, it’s really hard to understand. If it was today, it would barely be a blip.

It's not hard to understand. I remember when it happened, and I remember thinking "publicity stunt". I wouldn't hold that against her--that's show business. Sometimes you eat the nipple and sometimes the nipple eats you.

We all thought that, because we did not realize at the time how corrupt the abusive the catholic church was.

What she did was real bravery to stand in the face of so much opposition and mockery from us at the time.

It seems for some people they are still from that time.

Post reply on HN