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

Legalize It All

harpers.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

271–280 of 293 posts

Re: Legalize It All

#271

Post by ufmace »

pbhjpbhj wrote: post #241
beedogs wrote: post #232

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Considering 20% of Trump voters think freeing the slaves was a bad idea[0], I'd say "a lot". [0] http://time.com/4236640/donald-trump-racist-supporters/

I looked for information about the poll but the page you linked and the linked page within the relevant section both appear to lack that information. The 20% is an approximation, apparently. It seems the question was: Should "the executive order that freed all slaves in the states that were in rebellion against the federal government" have been made, or something similar. Was that worded badly on purpose, it appears…

Thanks for looking that up, I was immediately suspicious of that number. Way for somebody to conflate the complex geopolitical question of exactly which slaves to free when while in the middle of a civil war with the question of whether the slaves should be freed at all.

Re: Legalize It All

#272

Post by dang »

samstave wrote: post #260
dang wrote: post #206

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'm literally convinced you're a paid government shill. Sam! You can't do this here! Please don't do it here anymore! All: Insinuations of astroturfing or shillage without evidence are not ok on HN. We detached this comment from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11333552 and marked it off-topic.

How would you prefer that I make my opinion known of Rayiner and the narrative that person has maintained over the years we have both been on HN? I've literally been in discussions with Rayiner for years and at odds with their position, why am I not free to disagree with the message she puts forth?

Obviously you did a lot more than disagree there, but I think we can come up with a simple heuristic:

> How would you prefer that I make my opinion known of Rayiner

Just don't. People making their "opinion" of other people "known" is basically pro wrestling without the fun.

Re: Legalize It All

#273

Post by samstave »

jessaustin wrote: post #265
samstave wrote: post #260

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How would you prefer that I make my opinion known of Rayiner and the narrative that person has maintained over the years we have both been on HN? I've literally been in discussions with Rayiner for years and at odds with their position, why am I not free to disagree with the message she puts forth?

HN is really picky about accusing even other HN users in general of being astroturfy. (Ask me how I know!) Accusing a specific user, as you've done in this case, is right out. You'll have better luck referring to other, non-HN sources or even humanity in general as e.g. "not disinterested". Besides it's not really important that we know your opinion of 'rayiner. You've been around awhile; we have some idea. 'rayiner…

This is a particularly interesting comment to me.

I've been around a few years prior to this account...

But your comments are interesting, I cannot tell if you understand/agree with my viewpoint (and it's totally ok if you even vehemtly disagree with me); I just think that HN in general, should allow for deeper meta-discussion. We have a TON of brilliant people in this community. But they appear to have a cloistered view of the world.

Shills exist. My opinion of Rayiner is based on nearly four years of commentary. I stand by my point, and unless you have read HN daily for nearly eight years, I don't give credence to your view over mine.

Just look at her whole position re Snowden when that shitstorm broke.

Do you have any single denial regarding the nefarious actions of the USG and the NSA? If you do, then I doubt various aspect of your make up.

Re: Legalize It All

#274

Post by dang »

samstave wrote: post #273
jessaustin wrote: post #265

Earlier quoted context omitted.

HN is really picky about accusing even other HN users in general of being astroturfy. (Ask me how I know!) Accusing a specific user, as you've done in this case, is right out. You'll have better luck referring to other, non-HN sources or even humanity in general as e.g. "not disinterested". Besides it's not really important that we know your opinion of 'rayiner. You've been around awhile; we have some idea. 'rayiner…

This is a particularly interesting comment to me. I've been around a few years prior to this account... But your comments are interesting, I cannot tell if you understand/agree with my viewpoint (and it's totally ok if you even vehemtly disagree with me); I just think that HN in general, should allow for deeper meta-discussion. We have a TON of brilliant people in this community. But they appear to have a cloistered…

> Shills exist. My opinion of Rayiner

You just can't make this accusation without evidence, and opposing opinions aren't evidence. I've posted this perhaps a hundred times in the last year.

I'm cutting you a ton of slack here because I know you mean well and (if I may say so affectionately) are a bit of a hothead. But please just don't do this. Otherwise, speaking of lawyers, the moderation-laywer faction among HN users is going to pile on me demanding to know under which subsection we let you off for things we punish others for.

Re: Legalize It All

#275

Post by samstave »

dang wrote: post #272
samstave wrote: post #260

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How would you prefer that I make my opinion known of Rayiner and the narrative that person has maintained over the years we have both been on HN? I've literally been in discussions with Rayiner for years and at odds with their position, why am I not free to disagree with the message she puts forth?

Obviously you did a lot more than disagree there, but I think we can come up with a simple heuristic: > How would you prefer that I make my opinion known of Rayiner Just don't. People making their "opinion" of other people "known" is basically pro wrestling without the fun.

Then give me a mechanism to PM a user and call them out on their bullshit.

It's pretty easy.

And I openly disagree with your perception: HN is. Core of this industry, do not censor it.

Thanks

Re: Legalize It All

#276

Post by samstave »

dang wrote: post #274
samstave wrote: post #273

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a particularly interesting comment to me. I've been around a few years prior to this account... But your comments are interesting, I cannot tell if you understand/agree with my viewpoint (and it's totally ok if you even vehemtly disagree with me); I just think that HN in general, should allow for deeper meta-discussion. We have a TON of brilliant people in this community. But they appear to have a cloistered…

> Shills exist. My opinion of Rayiner You just can't make this accusation without evidence, and opposing opinions aren't evidence. I've posted this perhaps a hundred times in the last year. I'm cutting you a ton of slack here because I know you mean well and (if I may say so affectionately) are a bit of a hothead. But please just don't do this. Otherwise, speaking of lawyers, the moderation-laywer faction among HN us…

Dang, you better let me buy you lunch/dinner/a beer...

I recognize that you're giving my slack, and I want to be sure that you know how fucking much I love HN.

I agree to your terms but I really want to meet you in person because you're awesome, and we both love this industry.

I'm in SF, tell me when and where and I buy.

Re: Legalize It All

#277

Post by jessaustin »

samstave wrote: post #273
jessaustin wrote: post #265

Earlier quoted context omitted.

HN is really picky about accusing even other HN users in general of being astroturfy. (Ask me how I know!) Accusing a specific user, as you've done in this case, is right out. You'll have better luck referring to other, non-HN sources or even humanity in general as e.g. "not disinterested". Besides it's not really important that we know your opinion of 'rayiner. You've been around awhile; we have some idea. 'rayiner…

This is a particularly interesting comment to me. I've been around a few years prior to this account... But your comments are interesting, I cannot tell if you understand/agree with my viewpoint (and it's totally ok if you even vehemtly disagree with me); I just think that HN in general, should allow for deeper meta-discussion. We have a TON of brilliant people in this community. But they appear to have a cloistered…

I may be misinterpreting your final paragraph. Do you think the 'jessaustin account is a sockpuppet, perhaps even one connected somehow to 'rayiner? I've identified as an anarchist in another thread on this page, and if you read my comments over the years it's clear that I do oppose arbitrary authority. It would be wonderful if the same person who writes my comments also wrote the comments of one of the more authoritarian-leaning HN users. I'd love to live in that world; it feels like Ender's Game.

I don't read HN daily for more than a few days at a time, and even that has been for far less than eight years. I'm not saying that anyone is "not a shill". They're all dogs, why couldn't they all be shills? (n.b. I'm not referring to HN users here, but rather to "everyone on the internet".) I say rather that we should strive to think anything without speaking everything. This is for our own good, but also for the comfort of others. Our gracious hosts have drawn a line. While the line might seem arbitrary, their standing to draw it is not.

Re: Legalize It All

#278

Post by tptacek »

samstave wrote: post #275
dang wrote: post #272

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Obviously you did a lot more than disagree there, but I think we can come up with a simple heuristic: > How would you prefer that I make my opinion known of Rayiner Just don't. People making their "opinion" of other people "known" is basically pro wrestling without the fun.

Then give me a mechanism to PM a user and call them out on their bullshit. It's pretty easy. And I openly disagree with your perception: HN is. Core of this industry, do not censor it. Thanks

Stop it. Patrick, Erin and I had dinner with Rayiner last year. He's a good guy, and also FOUR things HN can use a lot more of:

* A lawyer, ie, someone with real domain knowledge of how the law works, which is a topic that comes up a lot on HN and which generates about as much misinformed commentary here as crypto does,

* A compiler hacker --- in fact, he's part of a weird cabal of "people who graduated from law school and hack on compilers" on HN. Implicitly, he's also probably in the top 1% of programming ability among vocal commenters on the site,

* Someone who doesn't hold the modal political perspective of the vocal HN userbase, which means there's a point to discussing politically-tinged topics with him --- you might learn something surprising,

* A relentlessly, reliably civil commenter, despite being the routine target of a hailstorm of comments like yours upthread.

There are much cheaper ways to find shills than to source them from practicing lawyers with toddlers who hack on compilers in their spare time.

I'm not one of the "moderation lawyers" badgering Dan about you in private. I'm badgering you about it publicly. Please stop mistreating people on HN just because you don't agree with them.

Re: Legalize It All

#279

Post by samstave »

tptacek wrote: post #278
samstave wrote: post #275

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then give me a mechanism to PM a user and call them out on their bullshit. It's pretty easy. And I openly disagree with your perception: HN is. Core of this industry, do not censor it. Thanks

Stop it. Patrick, Erin and I had dinner with Rayiner last year. He's a good guy, and also FOUR things HN can use a lot more of : * A lawyer, ie, someone with real domain knowledge of how the law works, which is a topic that comes up a lot on HN and which generates about as much misinformed commentary here as crypto does, * A compiler hacker --- in fact, he's part of a weird cabal of "people who graduated from law sch…

Hmm. I have much to reply to this comment, but I have an appointment so I shall wait, but you and I have been in disagreement previously on this exact subect. First and foremost I apologigize for thinking Rayiner was a female.

But it's been nearly four years of reading their comments. I am not convinced that they are not pushing the totalitarian narrative.

I humbly ask you to prove me wrong, please show me how this person whom you claim to know personally is not pushing totalitarianism as j understand that HN is allergic to the word "shill"

Edit: I just want to point out that I really do respect what you have to say, as we have disagreed many times but I do respect your position.

Re: Legalize It All

#280

Post by therealdrag0 »

sreya wrote: post #119

This is unrelated but it would be nice if this site offered the ability to minimize sub-threads. I was genuinely curious about people's opinions as to how best legalize drugs in a responsible fashion. Instead I have to scroll through an obnoxious amount of comments bemoaning the short falls of the government long enough to lose interest.

I like "hckr news" plugin. The "Collapse Whole Thread" option is great after I've read a few comments in one root.
Post reply on HN