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

Shame Storm

firstthings.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–247 of 247 posts

Re: Shame Storm

#241

Post by cabalamat »

leereeves wrote: post #233
cabalamat wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, Medium, Disqus... all the same. Of the ones I've used I like Reddit the most. It allows long posts, uses Markdown, and is threaded. > We've explored so little of the design space. I've recently started writing a federated blogging platform which will use the ActivityPub protocol. One nice advantage of federated platforms, is they can share each others' messages meaning it's easier for th…

Reddit is no better. The majority of posts on /r/popular are shaming, harassment, mocking, etc. Whole subs are devoted to that.

This depends entirely on what subreddits you read.

Re: Shame Storm

#242

Post by dang »

pmarreck wrote: post #238
dang wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Religious flamewar isn't allowed on HN. Please don't post like this here.

If emphasizing rational discussion (even if it flaunts someone's non-empirical belief) is wrong, then I don't really want to be right.

It's not about being right or even rational—it's just tedious and leads to the self-destruction of the forum. That's a bad combo, so we ban accounts that do it here.

Re: Shame Storm

#243

Post by brodouevencode »

int_19h wrote: post #129
brodouevencode wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Shouldn't that office should be held to the same standards as the other three branches?

No, because the other branches have failsafes, such as periodic elections. But with SCOTUS, if you make a mistake and confirm the wrong candidate for the job, the only remedy is impeachment, which is very hard to pull off (by design). Thus, the standards have to be extremely high.

That was actually my point. The lifetime appointments are given because they want the appointees to act as freely as possible without consequence. This is a result of elections having consequences.

Re: Shame Storm

#244

Post by leereeves »

cabalamat wrote: post #241
leereeves wrote: post #233

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Reddit is no better. The majority of posts on /r/popular are shaming, harassment, mocking, etc. Whole subs are devoted to that.

This depends entirely on what subreddits you read.

Of course. That's true anywhere. I'm just pointing out that even when a platform allows people to write long essays, what most people really want to do is make fun of other people.

Re: Shame Storm

#245

Post by beat »

moduspol wrote: post #174
beat wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem with Kavanaugh isn't what he did as a drunken teenager. It's what he did as a sober adult - his angry, petulant outbursts at senators . A Supreme Court seat isn't just a question of experience or background. It's a question of temperament. Even if he was completely innocent (and being too drunk to remember or too arrogant to think it important isn't the same as innocent), he should have been completely ca…

Again: It is now objective fact that at least four of his accusers were lying, so we're legitimately evaluating how someone should react when being questioned surrounding false sexual assault and rape allegations after being in the media spotlight for weeks. Many of these senators opposed his nomination prior to his name even being selected, yet you're expecting him to sit back non-chalantly as senators try to trick…

"Objectively false".

I don't think that word means what you think it means.

Re: Shame Storm

#246

Post by beat »

warp_factor wrote: post #223
beat wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think that's the same thing. It does point to a basic intellectual failing of the modern right, though... conflating being judged with being censored. Nobody's taking away your right to free speech. We just reserve the right to think you're an asshole for saying it.

Well, this is why the country is so divided. Instead of having a debate, the new way of doing is to directly go to the conclusion that "you must be an asshole". Good Proof of openmindness... Not targeting a specific side btw, this is a trend on the left as well as on the right.

Some things aren't worth debating. If someone says that protesters should be shot, they're not worth debating. They're an asshole. If someone says Sky Daddy waved his hand and created the world 5000 years ago, they're not worth debating.

Re: Shame Storm

#247

Post by moduspol »

beat wrote: post #245
moduspol wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Again: It is now objective fact that at least four of his accusers were lying, so we're legitimately evaluating how someone should react when being questioned surrounding false sexual assault and rape allegations after being in the media spotlight for weeks. Many of these senators opposed his nomination prior to his name even being selected, yet you're expecting him to sit back non-chalantly as senators try to trick…

"Objectively false". I don't think that word means what you think it means.

> objective - (of a person or their judgment) not influenced by personal feelings or opinions in considering and representing facts: historians try to be objective and impartial.

It does mean what I think it means, actually.

Post reply on HN