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

Hacker News comments I'm tired of seeing (2013)

righto.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–39 of 39 posts

Re: Hacker News comments I'm tired of seeing (2013)

#31

Post by thomasmeeks »

628C6l0 wrote: post #23
thomasmeeks wrote: post #13

I’d add arguing by using inline quotes. Example: some snippet of text from parent comment I disagree because x, y, z. another snippet This is wrong because a, b, c. (End example) Doing so obliterates context from a position, especially long form comments (which is the main reason I’m here) in two main ways. First, the technique rarely reproduces the parent in its entirety, picking out black and white statements that…

> Generally I just see it as a big warning sign that the quoter is more interested in winning than learning or getting to the truth of the matter and thus is best ignored. But,to be fully honest, isn't it what this kind of conversation is about, ultimately speaking? There is a reason it happens mostly in low-stake contexts: dinner tables, casual conversation, comments section. Places where "bullshit pass" is implicit…

We differ on worldviews I think. I don’t find conversations interesting or fun if a bullshit pass has been granted. The point of a low stakes conversation to me is learning something about a person or subject — so distoring overmuch causes me to disengage (if & only if low stakes).

Re: Hacker News comments I'm tired of seeing (2013)

#32

Post by glitcher »

Felz wrote: post #29

I feel like a lot of 'platitudes' are worth repeating. Again and again, ad nauseum, long past where people are tired of hearing it. Because they're true, but they're very easy to forget. If platitudes can be used to dismiss most articles out of hand, well, maybe things that look like "interesting news" at first glance are often... not. My personal list: - From the article: Correlation IS NOT causation. This should be…

Alas, if we were to stop using these phrases solely because they have been "overused" despite their value, then we risk denying the lucky 10,000 of tomorrow.

https://xkcd.com/1053/

Re: Hacker News comments I'm tired of seeing (2013)

#33

Post by NeedMoreTea »

thomasmeeks wrote: post #21
NeedMoreTea wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe it's my age and having come up via years of Usenet where inline quoting was absolutely standard, but I find inline quoting of a discussion helps me keep the flow of discussion. I find it's easier to follow than trying to retain a lengthy parent that a commenter is replying to, also at length. If it's a long comment it's also likely some commenters are only able to address parts of it - again an inline quote cla…

I can see that, and perhaps my experience has just been unlucky. I missed usenet by a few years.

Hmm, actually something just came to mind where quoting may hinder, though I've seen it with and without. Quoting may help focus on misdirection. Where someone wants to have a good argument rather than have a discussion. More a reddit game than HN but it does sometimes happen here, e.g.

Someone making point with a couple of paragraphs.

Commenter takes one sentence or point to shred, maybe it was a weak example or poorly phrased, to invalidate the whole.

repeat. After a few rounds it's becoming clear they're intentionally avoiding the main point.

Have I just committed the cardinal sin of being wrong on the internet? ;)

Re: Hacker News comments I'm tired of seeing (2013)

#34

Post by lylecubed »

I agree with most of the list, except this one.

> Comments starting with "No." "Wrong." or "False."

What's wrong with that? If the post you're replying to is wrong and you go on to provide evidence of why it's wrong, then isn't this just clear, unambiguous communication?

I've noticed exchanges here where it's very difficult to tell if a particular comment is intended to agree, disagree or is completely irrelevent to what is being discussed. This is because a lot of comments here are not communicated well due to the programmer's tendency to abstract and ambiguate.

Re: Hacker News comments I'm tired of seeing (2013)

#35

Post by lylecubed »

thomasmeeks wrote: post #31
628C6l0 wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Generally I just see it as a big warning sign that the quoter is more interested in winning than learning or getting to the truth of the matter and thus is best ignored. But,to be fully honest, isn't it what this kind of conversation is about, ultimately speaking? There is a reason it happens mostly in low-stake contexts: dinner tables, casual conversation, comments section. Places where "bullshit pass" is implicit…

We differ on worldviews I think. I don’t find conversations interesting or fun if a bullshit pass has been granted. The point of a low stakes conversation to me is learning something about a person or subject — so distoring overmuch causes me to disengage (if & only if low stakes).

> The point of a low stakes conversation to me is learning something about a person or subject

That point of view is getting rarer and rarer, especially on the internet. Which is unfortunate. It has ruined online discourse for me almost completely.

Re: Hacker News comments I'm tired of seeing (2013)

#36

Post by thomasmeeks »

NeedMoreTea wrote: post #33
thomasmeeks wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can see that, and perhaps my experience has just been unlucky. I missed usenet by a few years.

Hmm, actually something just came to mind where quoting may hinder, though I've seen it with and without. Quoting may help focus on misdirection. Where someone wants to have a good argument rather than have a discussion. More a reddit game than HN but it does sometimes happen here, e.g. Someone making point with a couple of paragraphs. Commenter takes one sentence or point to shred, maybe it was a weak example or poo…

Well you comitted the blessing of helping me feel heard so hopefully that balances out the sin. :) Exactly my point.

Re: Hacker News comments I'm tired of seeing (2013)

#37

Post by brennebeck »

lylecubed wrote: post #34

I agree with most of the list, except this one. > Comments starting with "No." "Wrong." or "False." What's wrong with that? If the post you're replying to is wrong and you go on to provide evidence of why it's wrong, then isn't this just clear, unambiguous communication? I've noticed exchanges here where it's very difficult to tell if a particular comment is intended to agree, disagree or is completely irrelevent to…

For me, it’s just being (or seems?) more courteous by changing a common ‘No/Wrong. Your idea...’ to ‘I actually disagree. The reasons being...’

Text makes it difficult to parse tone and intent and we need to adapt accordingly.

Re: Hacker News comments I'm tired of seeing (2013)

#39

Post by eindiran »

dmfdmf wrote: post #3

When someone cites the Dunning-Kruger Effect I like to counter with the Dunning-Kruger Effect Effect.[1] This also illustrates my own pet-peeve of starting references with index [0]. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12918362

I think the first citation in the comment you link to gets something wrong. It states that there is a correlation "very closed to zero" between actual performance and perceived ability. If you take a look at the paper, it addresses that. The better-than-average heuristic accounts for the compression you see, and once you remove it's effects from the picture, the correlation appears.
Post reply on HN