[nobody9999]

>I suspect you’d be much more effective

Effective at what, exactly?

I expressed my thoughts WRT the comment to which I replied. I just re-read my comment and I said exactly what I wanted to say.

As far as I'm concerned, that's the "effectiveness" I was going for, and have achieved same.

Thanks for your advice, I'll give it the weight and influence to which it's due.

[finiteseries]

I apologize, given the message of the comment and how personally addressed it was throughout, I had thought you’d meant to have a conversation with someone other than yourself.

[nobody9999]

>I apologize, given the message of the comment and how personally addressed it was throughout, I had thought you’d meant to have a conversation with someone other than yourself.

No apology is necessary or even slightly warranted. You expressed yourself clearly and, as I mentioned, I appreciate your point of view.

While you may (and I have no issue with that) disagree with my assessment, you appear to have ascribed some sort of broad-based attempt on my part to convince or "win over" some segment of HN readers to my point of view.

That's not the case. My goal was to express my thoughts. I did so. As such, my effort was (as I mentioned) quite effective in achieving my goal.

Whether or not that sparks further discussion isn't incredibly important to me, although I certainly have no problem having a conversation about the subject.

I disagree with your assessment that GP[0] was addressing their belief that "we hate" them to some narrow group in the US. Given the reach of "the media" and "mainstream silicon valley websites", it seems obvious that GP was, in fact, painting a huge swathe of the US population with a broad brush.

Given the DAUs of such "mainstream silicon valley websites" like Facebook, Twitter, Reddit, etc., as well as the broad reach of "the media" (newspapers, TV/radio networks, etc.), I don't see how GP's statement could be interpreted otherwise.

I'd be interested to understand the logic that leads you to a different conclusion. Thanks!

[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26206567

Edit: Added the "missing link."

[Izkata]

> Given the reach of "the media" and "mainstream silicon valley websites"

Their reach isn't the point, it's their source. Another name for the group/phenoma they're referring to is "coastal elites", who use the derogatory term "flyover states" to refer to where OP is from.

[rualca]

> Another name for the group/phenoma they're referring to is "coastal elites", who use the derogatory term "flyover states" to refer to where OP is from.

The term "flyover state" is not necessarily a derrogatory term, but a way for citizens of said states to underline an artificial division between rural central regions and urban coastal regions.

In fact, the "flyover" nature of said regions is due to the sparsely populated and low density of those territories, not because of some disdain towards inhabitants of rural regions.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flyover_country

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_states_and_territories...

[nobody9999]

I didn't realize that every post on twitter, Facebook and Reddit was exclusively posted by the owners of said sites. Oh, wait.

I'd also point out that almost 40% of the US population live in coastline counties[0]. So even if the OP's claim is that "those on the coasts hate" Texans, that's still painting an enormous group (~127 million people) with the same broad brush.

[0] https://oceanservice.noaa.gov/facts/population.html