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

71–80 of 215 posts

Re: Some tactics for writing in public

#71

Post by tptacek »

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…

Steering persuasive and technical writing away from topics like Emacs vs. Vim isn't censorship, it's just good writing.

Re: Some tactics for writing in public

#73

Post by gary_0 »

Julia's writing also just has nice-person energy (without any of the forced cutesy-ness that some blogs suffer from) and I think she's getting back what she puts out. She's clearly a skilled writer who knows how to set a tone.

The default tone people tend to assume on the Internet is more brash, and that's the source of a lot of unnecessary problems. On the other hand, I don't mind a little snark or old-school Torvalds-style feistiness either (forced politeness would be boring) but that's going to attract a rowdier crowd. Not everyone needs to emulate that style of discourse.

Re: Some tactics for writing in public

#74

Post by deadbeeves »

wpietri wrote: post #34
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…

"Groping for a light switch" would be a valid phrase in American English as well. But a "groper" on its own is going to have sexual connotations. E.g.: https://www.dictionary.com/browse/groper I think that would be especially true for women, who, being the common targets of sexual groping, are going to be more aware of it. So even if it weren't my first association, I would still think it a reasonable association for…

>I have to wonder about the resistance to mild change

That's easy to wonder when you're the one asking for the change. It's awfully convenient that "intent doesn't matter", as that puts the burden of action on the speaker/writer. If intent did matter, then the listener/reader would need to consider what the other person is trying to say and adjust their interpretation of the words accordingly. But since it doesn't, all that matters is that someone took offense at a particular word, and so it is the writer who needs to correct themselves.

Re: Some tactics for writing in public

#75

Post by noelwelsh »

teddyh wrote: post #66
noelwelsh wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nah. There are certain things that one might post that are worth saying, because they push back against bullshit, but are certainly not worth discussing with peddlers of such bullshit. Just think of any conspiracy theory (e.g. anti-vaxers) as really obvious examples.

So you claim the right to push back but also the right to block any responders who push back on your push back? Why the asymmetry? Because you’re right and they’re wrong? Sounds like people want to both get praise (or upvotes, depending on forum) for spouting the prevailing views (or the insular views of their bubble, whichever), but not having to deal with any inconvenient disagreements. Whatever that is, it is not…

There actually are objective facts in this world. Not everything is just the "prevailing views". People who want to debate objective facts are not worth talking to. It's also not worth talking to people who don't engage in good faith. Finally, one's time is finite. Internet randoms don't have an inalienable right to take up anyone's time.

Re: Some tactics for writing in public

#76

Post by samwillis »

karaterobot wrote: post #47

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…

This is a good list.

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

I do this maybe as much as 1/4 comments.

I would also add:

- Don't get into a back and fourth with a single other user, it's generally boring and goes nowhere.

- Don't rise to it if someone is trying to start an argument.

- Be generous, assume you are misunderstanding an apparent negative comment.

- Be complimentary, it makes peoples day.

Re: Some tactics for writing in public

#77

Post by hk__2 »

neerajk wrote: post #2

Embarrassingly, I was today years old when I learnt that dig used to be a) an acronym and b) what is stood for

I didn’t knew that either, and there’s nothing embarrassing about it: pretty much every CLI tool that doesn’t have a clear name is an acronym (grep, cd, pwd, dd, yacc, etc).

Re: Some tactics for writing in public

#78

Post by supazek »

globalreset wrote: post #57
lapcat wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Somehow we've built a culture where its socially acceptable, and even rewarded, to behave online in ways that would never be acceptable in other social settings. I don't think we've "built" the culture per se. I think it's more like humans evolved over millions of years for small, in-person groups, and we're not "built" (by nature) to handle the endless sea of online strangers. On the internet, the personal familia…

> fear of repercussions is mostly gone. Is it? Because AFAICT people censorship themselves online all the time for the fear of repercussion. It's like being on tape 27/7 where anyone that doesn't like you can watch your old tapes and loook for problems.

People are incredibly masked online, that is true. They run their posts before the “upvotable” heuristic before submitting. But in a small familial community you can’t just be technically correct while also being an ass in how you make your point. Most of the smarmy self-righteous posts you find on Reddit would be met with an open-palm smack, or worse, if delivered in the same way to a tribal leader 10,000 years ago. All of the human connection is gone in this form of communication. It is a system filled with ideologically mind broken serfs who all jockey for a small bit of clout in order to break free of their perceived chains. The things said here are as true as the statement “that is wet” when looking at a beautiful waterfall.

Re: Some tactics for writing in public

#79

Post by spondylosaurus »

deadbeeves wrote: post #74
wpietri wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Groping for a light switch" would be a valid phrase in American English as well. But a "groper" on its own is going to have sexual connotations. E.g.: https://www.dictionary.com/browse/groper I think that would be especially true for women, who, being the common targets of sexual groping, are going to be more aware of it. So even if it weren't my first association, I would still think it a reasonable association for…

>I have to wonder about the resistance to mild change That's easy to wonder when you're the one asking for the change. It's awfully convenient that "intent doesn't matter", as that puts the burden of action on the speaker/writer. If intent did matter, then the listener/reader would need to consider what the other person is trying to say and adjust their interpretation of the words accordingly. But since it doesn't, a…

Here's an example of why intent doesn't always matter:

In the Star Wars universe, the kind of music that Max Rebo plays is a lot like our Earth jazz. But they don't refer to it as jazz.

They call it jizz.

https://starwars.fandom.com/wiki/Jizz

Re: Some tactics for writing in public

#80

Post by deadbeeves »

wpietri wrote: post #70
haswell wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> So I blocked a few people and wrote a quick post: When I read the Mastodon thread, this jumped out at me as well. A couple of the guys who raised the point clarified that they fully agreed that the removal of “groping” was a good thing, but by that point, the author wouldn’t be able to see the clarification. I’m really torn on this. I fully support people’s choices to set boundaries and block abusive behavior. At t…

> insta-block [...] seems at the heart of the brokenness of online discourse. > having seen what some of the women in my life go through re: abusive behavior online, I also understand the hair trigger Even from your own words, it sounds like the heart is not in the reaction, but what people are reacting to. I am moderately mouthy on social media. I get a much, much smaller level of pushback than similar women do. Whe…

Sorry, but how is anything of what you've said an example of "putting women 'in their place'"? Do men not have their credentials questioned or their opinion dismissed online, or is it misogyny purely because it's men doing it to women?
Post reply on HN