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

41–50 of 215 posts

Re: Some tactics for writing in public

#41

Post by wpietri »

ghaff wrote: post #5
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…

I'm not sure I'd use censor in the context of Julia's post. It read more like the next thing you quoted. Something's well-trod and people have strong opinions but absolutely no one is going to change their mind or really make a novel point or learn anything new. I do think there are things that many people self-sensor, e.g. opinions that fall outside or on the edges of the orthodoxy of some bubble and is just going t…

If you're interested in the ways in which especially women receive strident pushback in a way that trains them to self-censor, I'd suggest reading Manne's "Down Girl: the logic of misogyny". She's an analytic philosophy professor, so it's a bit academic in spots. But I think it does a good job cataloging the many ways in which women are put "in their place", a place that very much includes a lot of self-censorship.

Re: Some tactics for writing in public

#42

Post by EthanHeilman »

ChrisSD wrote: post #21
ghaff wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure I'd use censor in the context of Julia's post. It read more like the next thing you quoted. Something's well-trod and people have strong opinions but absolutely no one is going to change their mind or really make a novel point or learn anything new. I do think there are things that many people self-sensor, e.g. opinions that fall outside or on the edges of the orthodoxy of some bubble and is just going t…

Imagine, for example, there's a really interesting scientific paper someone would love to talk about but it's in the field of Climate Science. Everyone knows the comments a blog post on it is going to get. And they're (almost) all going to be the same no matter what the paper is actually about. Every time. Should someone feel they have to self-censor just to avoid this?

> Should someone feel they have to self-censor just to avoid this?

I'm a little surprised to hear that people don't do this in person as well as online. There are numerous topics I avoid bringing up because I know nothing productive will result from the conversation. It is rarely about politics or religion, just topics whose novelty offer a low probability of productive insights and will probably require a sufficient time investment.

Choose your battles/topics of conversation, you only have so many hours in your life.

Re: Some tactics for writing in public

#43

Post by hirundo »

tristor wrote: post #18
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 wit…

It's a Russell Conjugation: "I'm setting boundaries, you're ignoring people who challenge your viewpoint, they're denying my existence."

Re: Some tactics for writing in public

#44

Post by wpietri »

halfinvested wrote: post #31
ChrisSD wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Imagine, for example, there's a really interesting scientific paper someone would love to talk about but it's in the field of Climate Science. Everyone knows the comments a blog post on it is going to get. And they're (almost) all going to be the same no matter what the paper is actually about. Every time. Should someone feel they have to self-censor just to avoid this?

People are going to feel all kinds of things. Asking whether or not they should feel them is a dead end in the context of public forums, because nobody controls anybody else's feelings, or how each individual reacts to a feeling. Sincere, productive conversations are mostly going to take place in more private forums like group chat or face to face. Public discussion threads are better suited for identifying friends a…

It's not a dead end, because public forums are not natural phenomena. They are things we design, build, maintain, and police. Personally, I want experts to be able to talk about their work without feeling abused, harassed, or threatened. I want it not just for myself, but so that we can have a society based on truth, not just on who can shout the loudest or who can be the biggest jerk.

Re: Some tactics for writing in public

#45

Post by [deleted] »

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…

[deleted]

Re: Some tactics for writing in public

#46

Post by [deleted] »

OJFord wrote: post #23

> Recently on Mastodon I complained about some gross terminology that I’d just noticed in the dig man page. A few dudes in the replies asked me to prove that the original author intended it to be offensive (which of course is besides [sic] the point) or tried to explain to me why it actually wasn’t a problem. > So I blocked a few people and wrote a quick post: Of course I understand no responsibility to 'prove' anyth…

[deleted]

Re: Some tactics for writing in public

#47

Post by karaterobot »

My rules for HN:

* Assume the person responding to you hasn't read the article, and has only briefly scanned your comment while mentally composing their reply.

* Anything abstract is going to get misunderstood; keep it concrete but vague.

* There is no consistent relationship between quality of a comment and how people respond to it.

* You can write a reply and then erase it without sending, and that's the best thing to do in most cases.

* When in doubt, collapse the thread and move on.

Re: Some tactics for writing in public

#48

Post by wpietri »

dkarl wrote: post #10
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…

I think it's fair that some people have stronger feelings about and more appetite for discussing a topic than I do. To pick one of her examples, I've done a couple of toy projects with Tailwind. I think it's pretty neat, and I don't mind saying so! But I accept that people working full time on huge Tailwind projects at work probably care way more deeply about the topic than I do, are much more impacted by aspects of…

Sure, but on the other hand people can learn to read the room. I am interested in lots of things, but that doesn't stop me from trying to fit the context and the interests of the other participants. E.g., I have a lot to say about cryptocurrency, but there was a time when it seemed like almost any HN discussion ended up with a tenuous cryptocurrency tangent. It was annoying and exhausting, and I'm glad we've mostly gotten past it.

Re: Some tactics for writing in public

#49

Post by xwdv »

OJFord wrote: post #23

> Recently on Mastodon I complained about some gross terminology that I’d just noticed in the dig man page. A few dudes in the replies asked me to prove that the original author intended it to be offensive (which of course is besides [sic] the point) or tried to explain to me why it actually wasn’t a problem. > So I blocked a few people and wrote a quick post: Of course I understand no responsibility to 'prove' anyth…

I don’t think it’s worth worrying about or changing your writing style. I’m tired of these people who blanche in the face when you write something in a way that isn’t how they expect and where they are haunted by the possibility of a double meaning in what you said. “Smoking a fag” for instance is a perfectly British phrase that will have an uncultured American clutching their pearls and groping around for any kind of downvote or report button.

If you’re scared, don’t read anything. Reading is scary and dangerous.

Post reply on HN