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

Some tactics for writing in public

jvns.ca

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 215 posts

Re: Some tactics for writing in public

#11

Post by sneak »

mjb wrote: post #3

This is really great, actionable, sensible, advice for folks who write on the internet. It agrees with my experiences, too. On the other hand, it's sad that the culture we have built on the internet forces talented people like Julia to censor themselves and narrow the scope of their writing. > So I have a weird catalog in my head of things not to mention if I don’t want to start the same discussion about that thing f…

When it's opt-in, it's called editing, not censoring. Nothing is forcing them to censor themselves, contrary to what you have asserted.

Re: Some tactics for writing in public

#12

Post by teddyh »

sneak wrote: post #11
mjb wrote: post #3

This is really great, actionable, sensible, advice for folks who write on the internet. It agrees with my experiences, too. On the other hand, it's sad that the culture we have built on the internet forces talented people like Julia to censor themselves and narrow the scope of their writing. > So I have a weird catalog in my head of things not to mention if I don’t want to start the same discussion about that thing f…

When it's opt-in, it's called editing, not censoring. Nothing is forcing them to censor themselves, contrary to what you have asserted.

Self-censorship is, in fact, a thing: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Self-censorship&o...>

Re: Some tactics for writing in public

#13

Post by lbotos »

sneak wrote: post #11
mjb wrote: post #3

This is really great, actionable, sensible, advice for folks who write on the internet. It agrees with my experiences, too. On the other hand, it's sad that the culture we have built on the internet forces talented people like Julia to censor themselves and narrow the scope of their writing. > So I have a weird catalog in my head of things not to mention if I don’t want to start the same discussion about that thing f…

When it's opt-in, it's called editing, not censoring. Nothing is forcing them to censor themselves, contrary to what you have asserted.

I get the pedantic line you are trying to draw here, but self-censorship is different than editing.

Editing == adjusting so the point is clearer or more easily understood.

Censorship/Self-censorship == avoiding a topic that the author wants to talk about due to fear or external forces.

Re: Some tactics for writing in public

#14

Post by ghaff »

sneak wrote: post #11
mjb wrote: post #3

This is really great, actionable, sensible, advice for folks who write on the internet. It agrees with my experiences, too. On the other hand, it's sad that the culture we have built on the internet forces talented people like Julia to censor themselves and narrow the scope of their writing. > So I have a weird catalog in my head of things not to mention if I don’t want to start the same discussion about that thing f…

When it's opt-in, it's called editing, not censoring. Nothing is forcing them to censor themselves, contrary to what you have asserted.

If you choose not to discuss something because you know it's an unpopular opinion in some circle and may lead to nasty and from your perspective unconstructive criticism, it seems reasonable to call that self-censorship even if it doesn't fit the dictionary definition of censoring (which primarily applies to the government or other authority body).

Re: Some tactics for writing in public

#15

Post by tayo42 »

wrp wrote: post #8

Summary of her rules for defensive posting: 1. Talk about facts 2. Tell stories 3. Ask technical questions 4. Fix mistakes 5. Ask for examples, not opinions 6. Start with a little context 7. Avoid flamebait triggers 8. Preempt common suggestions 9. Ignore people who challenge your viewpoint (my interpretation) 10. Don't pursue arguments 11. Pay attention to critical feedback Number 9 is I think not as defensible as t…

how did you come up with number 9 from this post?

fwiw, all the people who dont read the articles, 9 isnt in there.

its actually "set some boundaries"

Re: Some tactics for writing in public

#18

Post by tristor »

wrp wrote: post #8

Summary of her rules for defensive posting: 1. Talk about facts 2. Tell stories 3. Ask technical questions 4. Fix mistakes 5. Ask for examples, not opinions 6. Start with a little context 7. Avoid flamebait triggers 8. Preempt common suggestions 9. Ignore people who challenge your viewpoint (my interpretation) 10. Don't pursue arguments 11. Pay attention to critical feedback Number 9 is I think not as defensible as t…

Number 9 isn't there, and in my personal interactions right here on HN, Julie doesn't ignore people who challenge her viewpoint. She says "Set Some Boundaries" and in fact doing so is not only necessary, it's healthy. Setting boundaries, even blocking people, is not the same as ignoring people who challenge your viewpoint. You can be challenged without the challenger being an asshole, there's no point in engaging with assholes and you should absolutely block them.

Re: Some tactics for writing in public

#19

Post by hackmiester »

> I think I didn’t mention -n in that post because at the time I didn’t know why the -n flag was useful (it’s useful because it turns off this annoying reverse DNS lookup that tcpdump does by default so you can see the IP addresses).

Meanwhile, I remove -n from all tcpdump commands, because we use hostnames all the time at work, and I can remember them, and I can't remember a bunch of numbers.

Re: Some tactics for writing in public

#20

Post by n4r9 »

wrp wrote: post #8

Summary of her rules for defensive posting: 1. Talk about facts 2. Tell stories 3. Ask technical questions 4. Fix mistakes 5. Ask for examples, not opinions 6. Start with a little context 7. Avoid flamebait triggers 8. Preempt common suggestions 9. Ignore people who challenge your viewpoint (my interpretation) 10. Don't pursue arguments 11. Pay attention to critical feedback Number 9 is I think not as defensible as t…

I think you're being a little unfair about #9. Setting boundaries is different to ignoring challenges. If I made a comment about politics and someone demanded that I present a solid case that black people have ever been mistreated, obviously it's fine to ignore. It's tangential and agenda-driven, just like the example in OP.

Some conflicts are simply not worth pursuing. Even Bertrand Russell refused to debate Oswald Mosley.

Post reply on HN