Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by supervacuo 4866 days ago
Sure. But "respecting Atwood's grief" was outweighed by "challenging his dangerous ideology", especially since (as he says in his post) he'd never met Swartz.

Don't think his suicidal thoughts are relevant to his chosen topic of noble activism. If anything, Atwood mentioning it came across a little "I beat suicide... but this guy couldn't".
1 comments
VikingCoder 4866 days ago
Someone's dealing with suicidal thoughts, and your message is "shut up."

I think your post is the dangerous one.

link
supervacuo 4866 days ago
"Dealing with suicidal thoughts" and "scaring off potential activists by being nasty" are two separate activities.
link
VikingCoder 4866 days ago
So respectfully empathize with him, and point out your differences about activism.

Telling him to "stick to coding" makes you an insensitive clod, and sends a dangerous message to others with suicidal thoughts that their feelings are not welcome.

link
supervacuo 4865 days ago
> So respectfully empathize with him, and point out your differences about activism.

There's no moral problem with being slightly irreverent to someone in such a strong position: Atwood is apparently financially successful and has a large readership. He is also — unlike the target of his own criticism — alive.

So maybe your concern is strategic. I happen to think "respectful empathy" would have been a worse way of making my point.

Finally, I think my article is pretty clear. The category of person I want to "stick to coding" is "Jeff Atwood", or, more specifically, "Jeff Atwood talking about something he knows nothing about in a socially-damaging way". I don't think anyone would come away with the impression that I don't want to hear from people who've thought about suicide (hence why I didn't mention that aspect of Atwood's post at all).

link
VikingCoder 4865 days ago
> being slightly irreverent to someone in such a strong position

You're also telling everyone who happens to agree with Atwood to shut up. And they don't all have the same strong position.

You're not WRITING AN EMAIL TO ATWOOD, you're broadcasting to the world that everyone who agrees with him is wrong. And you're doing it disrespectfully.

> (hence why I didn't mention that aspect of Atwood's post at all).

Don't you think, given the topic, that you should have specifically mentioned that category of people, and shown empathy? Perhaps starting with Atwood, and generalizing from there?

Fuck it - you don't care what I think, and you're casual about telling people to shut up, so my efforts are completely pointless.

link