|
|
|
|
|
by latexr
106 days ago
|
|
If I believed it was a different opinion I wouldn’t even have written the first paragraph, or maybe the whole reply. The issue arises from it not being that person’s opinion but a talking point. People didn’t all individually arrive at this “democratisation” argument by themselves, they were sold what to say by the big players with vested interest in succeeding. I’m very much for discussing thoughts one has come up with themselves, especially if they disagree with mine. But what is not productive is arguing with a proxy. > I have not seen this level of community engagement and collaboration Nor this level of spam and bad submissions. |
|
> Nor this level of spam and bad submissions.
Your comments seem pretty aggressive for what you’re replying to. Maybe take a beat to assess your biases? I thought the main comment was pretty fair and sensible, yet somehow you landed on calling them a spammer/bad submitter/astroturfer/non-thinker. Maybe they are? I could be wrong, but that's quite a strong reaction for what they asserted at face value. Not really trying to police anything here, I just thought the initial comment had merit and this devolved quite quickly.