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

Thank you to dang and sctb

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 152 posts

Re: Thank you to dang and sctb

#131

Post by yesenadam »

tinkerteller wrote: post #120
yesenadam wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1. Because the comment didn't stop there. Why leave off the bit on the end? Because it would ruin your case? 2. Because, with what I've learnt of dang, the comment you quoted is certain to be not the whole story, to the point of being false. I'd wager a lot of money on that.

Hugh? “So, no thanks actually.” part was so important for you? I see how people like you and others have taken up to be the judge and jury and hang anyone who diverges from the echo chamber. It’s quite a shame that people who would like them to identify themselves as hackers have turned in to moral police and suppress any minority opinions however respectfully presented. Hope is that a new website would comes along a…

It was 'important' for me because you quoted only part of the comment, then made a point of how tiny and short the comment was, how there was no reason to downvote. The part you left off was why I downvoted. Now somehow that proves your conspiracy theory right.

It's unpleasant reading people taking out their axes to grind, especially on this page. "Boo hoo, they treat me so badly, it's a horrible place" etc.. That's why people downvote. The mods seem admirable here to me, very much so. And of course on this page you will find people who appreciate them, that's the theme of the page. No conspiracy theory needed. And most people here really like HN, don't think it's awful, or we wouldn't be here. So why are you here? If what you say is right, then life's too short to waste at a place like this, isn't it. Maybe look at what you've 'turned into'.

Yes, you're right about the moral police part, I'm trying hard to stop doing this. I try to help like this and usually just get downvoted. Plus it just adds more at-best-useless comments to the site. But it is hard not to want to refute what seem unjust, unfair accusations, of the site or people on here, when I see them. But the best answer is just to downvote and/or flag, as recommended in the guidelines, I guess. Ok bye.

Re: Thank you to dang and sctb

#132

Post by DonHopkins »

comesee wrote: post #130
DonHopkins wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Like presuming everyone male will act just like the chimpanzees in your study? Do you have any studies of female chimpanzees you want to claim predict the behavior of all the women on HN?

It's an observed and documented behavioral pattern, it's not a presumption of motive. No reasonable interpretation of my original comment implies that one should assume all males will act like chimpanzees. Interesting and productive discussion can't be had without paying attention to the nuance of what is being discussed.

Observed and documented behavior in chimpanzees or humans? So where's your observation based documentation that humans behave the same as chimpanzees?

Or is your point just baseless name calling and dehumanization: that you think the humans on HN behave like chimps, but you don't have any proof of that, just proof of how chimps behave?

If you just want to call people chimps, then just call people chimps and take your licks for that, but stop beating around the bushes like such a chimp.

Looks like you blew a seal!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R9ETlTZoF1E

Re: Thank you to dang and sctb

#133

Post by bdndndnndnd »

choot wrote: post #117
reitanqild wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think they don't shadow ban people anymore since sometime after pg left. I am somewhat rate limited it seems for reasons but I won't complain. I'm possibly more annoying than them.

> I think they don't shadow ban people anymore since sometime after pg left. That's false. They also take away your individual ability to post a thread or upvote. They do this silently.

I am shadow-banned, for instance.

Re: Thank you to dang and sctb

#134

Post by comesee »

DonHopkins wrote: post #132
comesee wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's an observed and documented behavioral pattern, it's not a presumption of motive. No reasonable interpretation of my original comment implies that one should assume all males will act like chimpanzees. Interesting and productive discussion can't be had without paying attention to the nuance of what is being discussed.

Observed and documented behavior in chimpanzees or humans? So where's your observation based documentation that humans behave the same as chimpanzees? Or is your point just baseless name calling and dehumanization: that you think the humans on HN behave like chimps, but you don't have any proof of that, just proof of how chimps behave? If you just want to call people chimps, then just call people chimps and take your…

It's well known that there is a lot of shared behavior among apes. We look for patterns in behavior across species to better understand that behavior. I never name-called or dehumanized anyone and to think I did is an unprovoked and uncharitible interpretation of my initial statement. My goal was to frame the behavior Jacques observed in an objective scientific context. My goal was never to "call people chimps." Do you think it's possible for someone to point out shared behavior between humans and other apes without malicious intentions?

Re: Thank you to dang and sctb

#135

Post by DonHopkins »

comesee wrote: post #134
DonHopkins wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Observed and documented behavior in chimpanzees or humans? So where's your observation based documentation that humans behave the same as chimpanzees? Or is your point just baseless name calling and dehumanization: that you think the humans on HN behave like chimps, but you don't have any proof of that, just proof of how chimps behave? If you just want to call people chimps, then just call people chimps and take your…

It's well known that there is a lot of shared behavior among apes. We look for patterns in behavior across species to better understand that behavior. I never name-called or dehumanized anyone and to think I did is an unprovoked and uncharitible interpretation of my initial statement. My goal was to frame the behavior Jacques observed in an objective scientific context. My goal was never to "call people chimps." Do y…

Wow, you really are the archetypal sea lion, aren't you?

You've seen the cartoon of course, haven't you? Of course you have, because you're acting exactly as the cartoon describes, and you are well aware of what you're doing, while pretending you don't know, and that you never heard of the term, even after it's been pointed out to you several times.

https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/sea-lioning

Now that I've given you a link and explained it to you yet again, your pretense of not knowing what we're talking about when we accuse you of sea-lioning is no longer valid, so give it up.

Failure to acknowledge that you've read the definition of that term, understand what it means, and how it perfectly describes what you're doing, constitutes an admission of guilt that you're not arguing in good faith.

Re: Thank you to dang and sctb

#136

Post by aaaaaaass »

anotherevan wrote: post #64

One feature on HN that was implemented a while ago now, but often crosses my mind to give thanks for is being able to collapse and expand comment threads. The fact that the site remembers them across page reloads is also a nice and useful touch. So thanks to those responsible.

Lol are you serious? That is a basic requirement of a thread. It’s embarrassing they didn’t have it before.

Re: Thank you to dang and sctb

#137

Post by comesee »

DonHopkins wrote: post #135
comesee wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's well known that there is a lot of shared behavior among apes. We look for patterns in behavior across species to better understand that behavior. I never name-called or dehumanized anyone and to think I did is an unprovoked and uncharitible interpretation of my initial statement. My goal was to frame the behavior Jacques observed in an objective scientific context. My goal was never to "call people chimps." Do y…

Wow, you really are the archetypal sea lion, aren't you? You've seen the cartoon of course, haven't you? Of course you have, because you're acting exactly as the cartoon describes, and you are well aware of what you're doing, while pretending you don't know, and that you never heard of the term, even after it's been pointed out to you several times. https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/sea-lioning Now that I've given you a…

So how do you expect me to respond now that I've seen this cartoon? I genuinely have no ill will towards you or anyone, I'm simply trying to defend what I think is right in what I think is the most reasonable and civil way possible. Accusing someone of "sea lioning" is creating a "damned if you do, damned if you don't" situation, if you're criticizing them for being reasonable and civil, how else should they defend themselves?

Is it possible to bring up ape behavioral studies without being accused of bad intentions? What do you propose is the best way to go about it?

Re: Thank you to dang and sctb

#138

Post by exolymph »

nolok wrote: post #109
tomcam wrote: post #76

They have both chastised me for "funny" (to me) or intemperate comments. Sometimes I agree, sometimes I don't. But I have never, never felt that they had anything but the interest of the HN community as a whole. I have never, ever seen any online community moderated better or even remotely close to as well as HN. I am deeply thankful for HN. It is a surprisingly important part of my life, almost solely because of the…

Generally very much enjoy the moderation here (enough liberty to let side things slide when needed, enough control that it remains of good quality), but in terms of community that is made to produce quality content through efficient moderation, the benevolent dictators of askhistorians are still far ahead of anything else though. The content of that sub would be worth paying a subscription for.

/r/AskHistorians is a very particular type of community. It's super interesting and I'm glad it exists, but if no other types of communities existed I would be very sad.

Re: Thank you to dang and sctb

#139

Post by AnimalMuppet »

monochromatic wrote: post #6

dang has (nicely) called me out a couple of times for making comments that were rude or not productive. I’m glad that they’re trying to keep this place civil.

He called me out at least once, too. But the time he did, well, I pretty much deserved it...

Re: Thank you to dang and sctb

#140

Post by DonHopkins »

comesee wrote: post #137
DonHopkins wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wow, you really are the archetypal sea lion, aren't you? You've seen the cartoon of course, haven't you? Of course you have, because you're acting exactly as the cartoon describes, and you are well aware of what you're doing, while pretending you don't know, and that you never heard of the term, even after it's been pointed out to you several times. https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/sea-lioning Now that I've given you a…

So how do you expect me to respond now that I've seen this cartoon? I genuinely have no ill will towards you or anyone, I'm simply trying to defend what I think is right in what I think is the most reasonable and civil way possible. Accusing someone of "sea lioning" is creating a "damned if you do, damned if you don't" situation, if you're criticizing them for being reasonable and civil, how else should they defend t…

Stop.
Post reply on HN