[lutusp]

> There's never a reason on HN to be uncivil.

Fair enough, but this begs the question of what constitutes incivility. If present trends continue, telling someone that they're wrong will be regarded as uncivil behavior. To avoid censure it will only be possible to assert that they've posted "alternative facts."

I happen to agree that incivility represents a real problem in social media, and we've seen many sites abandon their discussion groups because of uncivil posts and people. But I think the argument can be made that definitions have changed as well as behavior.

> That goes back to Usenet as well.

Not really. Having posted there for many years, I can tell you from direct experience that the perceived threshold of incivility has changed completely. One need only review posts from that era to see the point that definitions and standards have changed.

But this is now, and an argument about what was once acceptable doesn't seem particularly persuasive even to me, especially now that we have an embodiment of incivility running the country.

[ClayFerguson]

Just to keep score: You called me a troll, because I called someone an a-hole, for calling me a liar. That's what just happened. What a totally PC Snowflake Soap-Opera. Of course that's based on the assumption that the 'Sock Puppet' burner accounts aren't BOTH YOURS to begin with. hahahahaha. omfg that would be hilarious. In case it doesn't even matter, i'm using my REAL identity.