[Letmesleep69]

I thought things always getting better is a relatively recent phenomenon. Things didn't get better for hundreds of years for the native Americans when Columbus came to America. Or after the fall of the roman empire was Europe as good the next few hundred years? Maybe there has been a general trend up but if the trend can drop drastically for the few years you're living in does the general trend up make a difference?

[johnwheeler]

I think it’s meant to be figurative more than literal.

[charlesism]

Is that a euphemism for "I think it’s wrong"?

[chickenfries]

You won't even defend the quote you posted from it's most obvious criticism?

[grzm]

To everyone in this thread: please step back and ask yourself why you're continuing to comment. Are you looking to be understood? To understand? To prove or show that someone else wrong? If it's not one of the first two, please just stop. If it is one (or both! which is what it should be) of the first two, take another step back and ask yourself what's the most constructive way of accomplishing that goal. Right now you're all just talking past each other, commenting at each other rather than with each other. It doesn't matter how any one else is commenting or how wrong they are: you can only change how you yourself do.

[chickenfries]

I like the quality of discussion on HN. I think we should discourage things like posting pithy quotes from comedians. Especially if you won't even stand behind the point you're trying to make.

And yes, I would like my perspective to be understood.

[grzm]

I'm glad that you're hoping to be understood. I think it's equally important (perhaps moreso) to also to seek to understand. Steelman† your opponent: interpret what they're saying in the most charitable way. Straw manning or taking pot shots with short questions rarely indicates that you're also seeking to understand or are engaging in good faith. Who knows? They may actually have an important point, perhaps not yet fully formed, and aren't expressing it well. And if others are doing the same, they may help you better express your own perspective.

† https://wiki.lesswrong.com/wiki/Steel_man

[chickenfries]

I'm familiar with the concept. I try to apply it. Especially when I think the person is arguing in good faith. Which I try to assume.

I understand their point, because they're just repeating the title of a blog post that hit the front page a while back. There was some good faith discussion in that thread between people who disagreed. They didn't start by throwing out a pithy quote and then refusing to respond to someone who presents a valid counter example (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16086244).

[ABCLAW]

I get that you have a pet project in attempting to create civil discussion - that's nice and very commendable. But...

Please apply your own formula to the post you're replying to. Are you understanding what he's telling you, or just trying to tone police?

What happens when your conversation partner is not actually interested in having a discussion, and simply posits a position then abandons it immediately? Is it fruitful to create a position for them? Is that a fair burden for a responder to bear to batter down weak, fallacious, but amply spread falsities?