.io considered harmful • Hacker News Board

Re: .io considered harmful

#251

Post by evantbyrne » Fri, Nov 03, 2023, 2:36 PM UTC

zaphirplane wrote: post #249

evantbyrne wrote: post #246

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are valid and purposeful discussions about colonization. And then there's an awful lot of "decolonization" talk that is virtue signalling–or worse–a dog whistle. Calling out "people from former colonial powers" sure sounds like it falls into the latter.

Why is calling out convoluted arguments justifying horrible acts by colonial powers dog whistle ? The submission is about a colonial power (uk) forcibly relocating the occupants of those Islands with the uk high court and court of appeal ruling it wrong; so Did the UN You think this is virtue signaling dig whistle? Strange

If you want to be acknowledged as a scholar, then act like one instead of making suspicious statements about your opponents' demographics. It has been discussed ad nauseam at this point that the article provides a history lesson, but the suggestions are illogical or unactionable. It is just not that interesting or relevant.

Re: .io considered harmful

#252

Post by zaphirplane » Sat, Nov 04, 2023, 8:52 AM UTC

evantbyrne wrote: post #251

zaphirplane wrote: post #249

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why is calling out convoluted arguments justifying horrible acts by colonial powers dog whistle ? The submission is about a colonial power (uk) forcibly relocating the occupants of those Islands with the uk high court and court of appeal ruling it wrong; so Did the UN You think this is virtue signaling dig whistle? Strange

If you want to be acknowledged as a scholar, then act like one instead of making suspicious statements about your opponents' demographics. It has been discussed ad nauseam at this point that the article provides a history lesson, but the suggestions are illogical or unactionable. It is just not that interesting or relevant.

Where do I make a statement about my (your words) opponents demographics ?

I don’t really see substance in your statements just accusations, vagueness and attempts to shut the dialogue.

Someone wronged wants justice we don’t shut the conversation because it’s boring to you (assuming good intentions). No one is forcing you to participate.

I regret giving your words the benefit of the doubt.

Re: .io considered harmful

#253

Post by evantbyrne » Sat, Nov 04, 2023, 12:43 PM UTC

zaphirplane wrote: post #252

evantbyrne wrote: post #251

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you want to be acknowledged as a scholar, then act like one instead of making suspicious statements about your opponents' demographics. It has been discussed ad nauseam at this point that the article provides a history lesson, but the suggestions are illogical or unactionable. It is just not that interesting or relevant.

Where do I make a statement about my (your words) opponents demographics ? I don’t really see substance in your statements just accusations, vagueness and attempts to shut the dialogue. Someone wronged wants justice we don’t shut the conversation because it’s boring to you (assuming good intentions). No one is forcing you to participate. I regret giving your words the benefit of the doubt.

You said the quiet part out loud with the "people from former colonial powers" comment. Take it easy.

Re: .io considered harmful

#254

Post by hurrdurr56 » Sun, Nov 05, 2023, 3:22 PM UTC

zaphirplane wrote: post #249

evantbyrne wrote: post #246

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are valid and purposeful discussions about colonization. And then there's an awful lot of "decolonization" talk that is virtue signalling–or worse–a dog whistle. Calling out "people from former colonial powers" sure sounds like it falls into the latter.

Why is calling out convoluted arguments justifying horrible acts by colonial powers dog whistle ? The submission is about a colonial power (uk) forcibly relocating the occupants of those Islands with the uk high court and court of appeal ruling it wrong; so Did the UN You think this is virtue signaling dig whistle? Strange

>The submission is about a colonial power (uk) forcibly relocating the occupants of those Islands

No, the submission was about establishing a very tenuous connection between said horrible acts and the existence of a very specific TLD. Then essentially making the claim that everybody who uses said TLD is an evil monster who is actively supporting genocide while everybody who doesn't use said TLD is a shining example of saintly righteous purity who has demonstrated that they are genuinely morally outraged at historical injustices.

I don't own an .io domain so therefore I am morally superior. And I didn't even have to lift a finger in order to earn that claim to virtue.