Earlier quoted context omitted.
I’m curious to know why you thought it “sounded like this was a protest project ‘for the people’”? I’ve read the parent post above and looked at the website and see nothing that would make me think it’s a “protest for the people”. It just seems a little strange when you then go on to say “strive to address… what was said, not what you imagine the other person said”.
> I’m curious to know why you thought it “sounded like this was a protest project ‘for the people’”? See the sibling reply by another user, which I think explains it perfectly. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41179628 > It just seems a little strange when you then go on to say “strive to address… what was said, not what you imagine the other person said”. It’s not strange at all if you pay attention to the words…
I'm not sure if your highly condescending and somewhat reactive tone is intended or not, perhaps it's satirical, but in case you are unaware, your tone is highly condescending. Saying things like "if you pay attention to the words" and "you just have to make a genuine effort to understand" and your didactic "default to this" comes across rather badly.