Persuade xor Discover • Hacker News Board

Re: Persuade xor Discover

#41

Post by gregwebs » Tue, Sep 22, 2009, 11:11 PM UTC

pg wrote: post #29

paul wrote: post #18

This is a very interesting observation. It might be amusing if PG rewrote some of his more controversial essays in the second style, then made both versions available. Think of it as "skinning". Since the discovery version was written before the persuasive version, the persuasion needn't interfere with the discovery.

Intriguing idea, at least as a sort of practical joke. The problem is, it would change the ideas. For example, when I rewrote the paragraph about labor unions, I had to ditch the point about fallen civilizations overrating past eras; though I didn't make the link explicitly, the comparison to medieval history would be obvious to anyone who'd studied much of it. (People in medieval Europe felt inferior to the ancients…

How about a program to re-write for persuasion once you have written for discovery. I bet it wouldn't be to hard to program one that could make an essay sound more timid and nice. That is a fairly simple process that I usually go through before communicating electronically. However, as you stated you would still have to add the extra content.

Re: Persuade xor Discover

#42

Post by philwelch » Tue, Sep 22, 2009, 11:19 PM UTC

pg wrote: post #30

heuristix wrote: post #14

This is a strawman defence. PG is defending Arrington's curtness when you meet him in person and accepting the facts as presented (since I have no personal knowledge), the defense sounds reasonable. However, as many others mention below, most people dislike Arrington because Techcrunch has no journalistic scruples. The way they attacked Last.fm without even bothering to properly check into facts was yet another examp…

When people dislike something intensely, the reason is not always what they claim, or even believe themselves. Try this thought experiment: if Arrington seemed like the nicest, most self-deprecating guy in the world-- like Father Mulcahy, for anyone who remembers MASH-- would people be so angry about his supposed lack of journalistic scruples?

I suspect many people would still have no idea what Arrington's personality is in person, and thus continue to judge him entirely based upon the behavior of TechCrunch. How he greets people in person probably has no real impact.

This can extend even further--from everything I've gathered, George W. Bush is a very easy person to like once you know him in person. Yet he was very recently one of the most widely despised people in the world. Your actual personality doesn't seem to matter once you start doing things people don't like, or otherwise become famous outside people who know you in person.

Re: Persuade xor Discover

#43

Post by rw » Tue, Sep 22, 2009, 11:26 PM UTC

pg wrote: post #30

heuristix wrote: post #14

This is a strawman defence. PG is defending Arrington's curtness when you meet him in person and accepting the facts as presented (since I have no personal knowledge), the defense sounds reasonable. However, as many others mention below, most people dislike Arrington because Techcrunch has no journalistic scruples. The way they attacked Last.fm without even bothering to properly check into facts was yet another examp…

When people dislike something intensely, the reason is not always what they claim, or even believe themselves. Try this thought experiment: if Arrington seemed like the nicest, most self-deprecating guy in the world-- like Father Mulcahy, for anyone who remembers MASH-- would people be so angry about his supposed lack of journalistic scruples?

Maybe you are actually arrogant? How could you tell that you aren't just using your concise writing style as an excuse to offend people?

Re: Persuade xor Discover

#44

Post by run4yourlives » Tue, Sep 22, 2009, 11:41 PM UTC

"Great minds discuss ideas. Average minds discuss events. Small minds discuss people." -- Eleanor Roosevelt

That neatly explains my personal affinity towards pg, and my disinterest towards Arrington and many other "journalists" out there today.

Techcrunch is the Entertainment Tonight of Silicon Valley, and I don't find the gossip produced by either medium adds a lot to my life.

That isn't to judge him, and certainly not to "hate" the man, but it is to say that the content is not appealing.

Re: Persuade xor Discover

#45

Post by abstractbill » Tue, Sep 22, 2009, 11:53 PM UTC

I'd rather offend people needlessly than use needless words

Just out of curiosity, have you ever discovered something that you thought would offend enough of your audience that there was no point publishing it?

Re: Persuade xor Discover

#46

Post by shiro » Wed, Sep 23, 2009, 12:06 AM UTC

Interesting read, but somehow I sensed there's a touch of persuasion in this a lot more than other pg's essays. Maybe persuasion isn't the thing... explanation? It sounded like pg's trying to explain really hard why his essay was in that style, rendering the outcome slightly verbose than his usual essays.

Maybe this is just a false impression. But it may indicate that it is more difficult to talk about oneself than about something/someone else.

[EDIT]: I found why I felt it verbose. The latter part, about pg's essays' attitude to mention facts plainly and succinctly, hence they tended to offend some people, was obvious. So I felt it was unnecessary explanation. Probably it is necessary for different audience.

Re: Persuade xor Discover

#47

Post by pg » Wed, Sep 23, 2009, 12:06 AM UTC

rw wrote: post #43

pg wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When people dislike something intensely, the reason is not always what they claim, or even believe themselves. Try this thought experiment: if Arrington seemed like the nicest, most self-deprecating guy in the world-- like Father Mulcahy, for anyone who remembers MASH-- would people be so angry about his supposed lack of journalistic scruples?

Maybe you are actually arrogant? How could you tell that you aren't just using your concise writing style as an excuse to offend people?

How could you tell that you aren't just using your concise writing style as an excuse to offend people?

You ask friends you know are nice to read your drafts and warn you if you're being mean.

Re: Persuade xor Discover

#48

Post by pg » Wed, Sep 23, 2009, 12:18 AM UTC

philwelch wrote: post #42

pg wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When people dislike something intensely, the reason is not always what they claim, or even believe themselves. Try this thought experiment: if Arrington seemed like the nicest, most self-deprecating guy in the world-- like Father Mulcahy, for anyone who remembers MASH-- would people be so angry about his supposed lack of journalistic scruples?

I suspect many people would still have no idea what Arrington's personality is in person, and thus continue to judge him entirely based upon the behavior of TechCrunch. How he greets people in person probably has no real impact. This can extend even further--from everything I've gathered, George W. Bush is a very easy person to like once you know him in person. Yet he was very recently one of the most widely despised…

I didn't say people only dislike him because of the way he seems in person. How could all the random people who complain about him in comment threads have met him in person?

Re: Persuade xor Discover

#49

Post by run4yourlives » Wed, Sep 23, 2009, 12:19 AM UTC

pg wrote: post #30

heuristix wrote: post #14

This is a strawman defence. PG is defending Arrington's curtness when you meet him in person and accepting the facts as presented (since I have no personal knowledge), the defense sounds reasonable. However, as many others mention below, most people dislike Arrington because Techcrunch has no journalistic scruples. The way they attacked Last.fm without even bothering to properly check into facts was yet another examp…

When people dislike something intensely, the reason is not always what they claim, or even believe themselves. Try this thought experiment: if Arrington seemed like the nicest, most self-deprecating guy in the world-- like Father Mulcahy, for anyone who remembers MASH-- would people be so angry about his supposed lack of journalistic scruples?

When people dislike something intensely, the reason is not always what they claim, or even believe themselves.

That's a bit of an logic leap though. Common sense suggests that if someone is disliked by a person, the reason is most likely evident and known. Most don't dislike as a default response.

Assertions not following Occam's Razor need citation.

Re: Persuade xor Discover

#50

Post by [deleted] » Wed, Sep 23, 2009, 12:34 AM UTC

trunnell wrote: post #34

I disagree on the orthogonality of being ingratiating and discovering things. Sometimes discovery must be done collaboratively. When this is the case, it can be more effective to mind one's social graces. Otherwise, productivity relies on other people ignoring negative social cues. I wouldn't take that bet.

[deleted]