Who's Paul?
Dear Paul
131–140 of 184 posts
Re: Dear Paul
#132Earlier quoted context omitted.
Calling someone a stupid fuck is clearly corrosive and going to derail threads. Do you really not see that? And placing the blame for that on mental health problems? That's ignorant and lazy.
Why is the premises here that everything to the last letter has to be taken seriously? I'll be damned, but there's reddit? netsec and such places. They seem to fare pretty well. Relevant rules? - Don't create unnecessary conflict. - Keep the discussion on topic. - Limit the use of jokes & memes. Places a bit of trust in people's hands instead of slapping 'lel no this, lel no that'. I can't say I blame something or so…
You don't think that calling someone a stupid fuck is creating unnecessary conflict?
Re: Dear Paul
#133Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why is the premises here that everything to the last letter has to be taken seriously? I'll be damned, but there's reddit? netsec and such places. They seem to fare pretty well. Relevant rules? - Don't create unnecessary conflict. - Keep the discussion on topic. - Limit the use of jokes & memes. Places a bit of trust in people's hands instead of slapping 'lel no this, lel no that'. I can't say I blame something or so…
You don't think that calling someone a stupid fuck is creating unnecessary conflict?
> taken seriously
It absolutely does not always do that (although you've chosen a pretty harsh phrase which has a high chance to be considered extreme).
Re: Dear Paul
#134Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think you missed this part: "Apparently you will allow links to be posted repeatedly even after they’ve been voted down if it’s “gratuitously negative” of me, but take anything about one of your shitty startups down immediately. " (Emphasis mine)
Is there proof of this happening? It sort of sounds like conspiracies a paranoid person would come up with.
No one doubts that it's happening. But the reasoning and the mechanisms are opaque, which leads people to speculate.
Re: Dear Paul
#135"I would notice that about once every 6 months this video would get posted, and then the HN crowd would call me the worst shit ever."
That's a problem.
" I hate abusive fucks, and right now HN is so abusive and out of control that someone has to do something about it."
also a problem.
" I keep a low profile professionally, and personally because of HN."
Another problem.
"It’s now causing more damage than good, and a simple curated news site without comments or with only YC companies commenting is a better option."
Good solution.
HN really has been dropping in civility. The post quality seems ok and new is broken and can be improved (contact Dan if you have any good ideas) [0]
As for me, when I read about @Zed, a prolific hacker who gives so much away, being pissed-off enough to write this I think I'll spend less time here.
Re: Dear Paul
#136Earlier quoted context omitted.
Building things is nice and will get you respect for building things. Attacking people and being abusive will typically undo some of that. The tech community has a couple of other examples of people that built things and that managed to lose a lot or even all of the respect they deserved for that because of other things they did.
I would agree with that, definitely. But then I would expect both sides of the story to be expressed in a more balanced manner in the articles criticizing the contents of what has been produced. I've found that more often than not, people tend to be blindsided and go for blood because it's better shock value and helps create buzz and clicks. Something akin to: "Zed Shaw took on a complicated task, one that hasn't bee…
I agree with your opinion, but I also add: being accomplished gives you a microphone for both the insightful and the insulting things you have to say. It's unfortunate that sometimes smart people don't realize that not everyone's words are equally powerful.
Re: Dear Paul
#137Earlier quoted context omitted.
While I can't speak for zedshaw, I think the problem with HN is that while it, as you say, shuns and bans anyone who speaks in an aggressive tone or who directly vituperates others, it also allows (and often supports, with upvotes) one to completely slander someone as long as they do it in a calm and reasonable tone. As an example, specifically regarding anonymous accounts and zedshaw: https://news.ycombinator.com/it…
If that is an example of the "slander" Zed speaks of, his response is way overboard. It has that "more hacker than thou" tone that I find annoying in anyone (and most annoying when I catch myself using it, which is often), but I can't imagine anyone would consider it slanderous. And, it is by a no-name account, which, I suspect, makes everyone somewhat less likely to pay it any mind. The idea that something like that…
From what I can tell, I do believe that Zed Shaw has experienced abuse from a larger community over a few years, I think starting with members of the Ruby community. Some might say that Zed fans the flames of controversy by reciprocating with insults.
Perhaps he sounds paranoid because he has nobody concrete to point a finger at, which is part of the nature of being famous on the internet.
Re: Dear Paul
#138Might we be making the mistake of confusing neglect for malice?
Re: Dear Paul
#139This article speaks at the heart of online bullying and how mediums such as HN promote it even without being aware of it it seems. I am quite saddened that persons such as jacquesm[1] who are otherwise respectful individuals want to shove a fist in the mouth of persons who have been victims of bullying (such as he does on this thread). And this post has disappeared from the front page in less than an hour. I am disap…
Since you feel the need to address me by name:
I think you're mistaken about my intent, besides, calling Zed the 'victim of bullying' is in a way humorous given that Zed has personally driven a couple of good contributors away from HN.
I don't think leaving this post up does Zed any favours, it shows him as caustic, uncivil and downright hostile. For a professional that translates into 'hiring risk', and that's something Zed probably does not need more of.
Feel free to be disappointed but my memory regarding Zed's interaction with others on HN is definitely not lacking in resolution.
Zed is a fantastically productive programmer that is super sensitive to criticism of any kind and will come out swinging with all manner of insults whenever he perceives one of the conspiracies against him (for which I have yet to see proof), and this blog post is a nice example of that. It's a pity that Zed feels the need to periodically tear down the reputation he's building for himself but that seems to be his nature, this is just a re-run.
Re: Dear Paul
#140Is HN a thing that can be abusive? This is a serious question. Don't say yes or no yet. As far as I understand it: people are abusive. Places, or groups, can only allow for abuse, perhaps systematically, but cannot abuse anyone by themselves. On the other hand, places, or groups, can prevent abuse themselves. (I'll get to that in a moment.) In this case, specific people choose to act badly toward Mr. Shaw, anonymousl…
"Is HN a thing that can be abusive?"
Absolutely. In the past I've watched karma burn as much as 30/40 points drop because I made some point that isn't what was expected. That's not the real problem. The real problem is the stream of stupid non helpful and nasty comments.
"HN would be a very different place if it was trying to behave in a "role model" fashion toward the tech community."
Suggested this but what I've realised there is absolutely no way this will happen. THe site has its origin in one person and translated into code where the only metric is an UP or DOWN vote. What that vote means has drifted as the site has added users over the years.
"What I can't see is HN being shut down"
It will just become irrelevant.