Please do not use HN for nationalistic flamewar. This comment is a noticeable step into the flamewar style, which is exactly the wrong direction take here, regardless of how right you are or feel on an important topic.
Stepping into snark is also a very bad sign. If you find yourself typing things like "since you're so convinced" into comment boxes, please step away from HN until it subsides.
I would ask you to read my partner’s comments again. They are self-replying and mixing up comment replies between different comment chains. Their comments are not germane to the discussion. It feels like the entire thread is being trolled. I don’t feel bad for trying to debate in good faith.
> I’m open to your sources, since you’re so convinced of your side being the one deserving of trust.
This is cheap. To say "we shouldn't blindly trust this side" doesn't mean "we should blindly trust that side" at all. It just means we shouldn't blindly trust this side. It may well be that we shouldn't trust either side, because both have reasons to lie.
Both sides could also be right. I do not have a stance, I am just saying what the Tibetan stance is. Why shouldn’t we believe that narrative? There could be good reasons either way, but I haven’t really seen any good sources in this thread. Perhaps you have some to share? I admit this is not my area of study.
When both sides claim opposing things, that's pretty unlikely. My point is that to jump from "don't just blindly trust A" to claiming the person meant to say "blindly trust B" is a cheap shot. It's "so you're saying [insert something they absolutely didn't say]" and it's a meme mocking the person that does it for a reason.
Stepping into snark is also a very bad sign. If you find yourself typing things like "since you're so convinced" into comment boxes, please step away from HN until it subsides.
https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html