[dang]

The phrase "call out" is already an indication that HN is not being used as intended (https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...). You can make your substantive points without any of this.

If you feel that someone else is posting incorrect information, it's sufficient to post correct information. Getting aggressive about it is unnecessary and damages the commons.

[IshKebab]

Well, I'll have to agree to disagree on that. What is moderation if not "calling out"?

[dang]

Calling out, as I understand it, is a tactic of online shaming. We try not to shame anyone, although it does still happen unintentionally.

[IshKebab]

Oh that's not what I understand it to mean. It's more like highlighting or challenging.

See meaning 4.3 here:

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/call_out

Like someone close to Trump could call him out by saying to him that Meloni didn't beg for a photo with him.

[dang]

That definition is close to what I mean! But I think you'll find that in online vernacular, to "call $person out for $thing" has the association of publicly shaming $person for some $thing that the caller-outer believes they did, considers bad, and wishes to punish them for and/or pressure them into not doing again.

[dredmorbius]

Seems to me that there's a distinction between calling out a practice or trope and calling out a person.

I do the former with ... some regularity (e.g., mis-statements of Weber's definition of government). Where trite/tired comments are frequent, push-back or corrections are also going to be somewhat repetitive.

In this thread, dropping "What a load of hogwash" from IshKebab's original reply would have left a perfectly cromulent point. That phrase itself does go against HN's civility guidelines. The comment it replies to is ... tired.

[IshKebab]

Oh yeah good point - that is definitely part of the woke movement. I didn't mean it in that sense anyway.