Dear HN: Please don't start a response with the word "wrong."

[samd]

Example: Dave: The sky is green. Bob: Wrong. The sky is blue.

It just makes you look like an asshole. Be more tactful and civil in your discussions. I promise you people will respond more favorably if you don't come out the gate blaring a buzzer like a game-show host.

[seiji]

Be more tactful and civil in your discussions.

Not every opinion is valid or deserving of civil rebuttal. It's a result of modern "every opinion is equally valid as fact" syndrome. We don't have time to cordially try to rewire your brain to think the sky isn't green.

Also, when trolls are trolling, they want elaborate thought out responses to their drivel. It's easier to shut them down with "wrong." And, as we know, you can't distinguish an intentional troll from someone with sincerely warped views of the world.

In short, shut it all down. They should be inspired to research their wrongness to turn into more right-thinking apes.

[relevant life story: one of my high school math teachers had a big "WRONG" stamp (with red ink) he would enthusiastically smash onto your work if you were, well, wrong.]

[xauronx]

The problem is that some people think that being incorrect or having a different opinion = trolling. If I honestly think that PHP is a great backend language ( I honestly think it's a FINE one), and I say it on HN, I know at least one person will go: "WRONG. PHP is [some bad thing]. You should use [some new language]." They may even think I'm trolling for having that opinion.

The truth is that you don't know the other person, but you should respect yourself enough to be a civil human and speak online as if you were speaking in a public place. Even if you're not speaking to your next employer, he may be right behind you and hear you talking like an ass.

[mgallivan]

We should shut down other people who are being needlessly facetious.

But to suggest that rejection should be our default behavior is absurd. Discussion should be encouraged because, more often than not, neither side is 100% correct. The way we further ourselves is by talking to those people with dissimilar views.

[seiji]

more often than not, neither side is 100% correct.

You are very right. The problem is when one side stands up and says: "We are obviously right. We will never change our opinions or ideas. You must agree with us or die."

At that point, the reasonable side doesn't have any options left. You can't argue with crazy.

Take the current US Congress situation. One side is saying, "We want to hurt you." The other side isn't saying "Okay, how much do you want to hurt me? Let's find a compromise where you can just cut off my hand." No. The only way to stop American elected terrorists is to tell them "No."

If people have valid points, you can draw out truth. If they have points based on pride, ego, or falsely implanted childhood memories, you can't do anything productive except stop them. If that doesn't work, ignore them.

Topics of note which regularly draw out crazy people from one side: nobody needs college, X city is better for startups, religion Y is right, bitcoin is a "currency," (or anything else getting 400+ comments around here).

[ifyoumakeit]

I'm dealing with that right now. Completely negating someone's opinion only shuts down communication. It's all in the phrasing and makes it sound like you are on different teams, especially in a work environment.

[palidanx]

When doing consulting and engaging a sensitive issue, I always begin with, "Correct if I'm wrong, is this how this feature is supposed to work..."

What this does is diffuse a tense situation and allow the client to issue a correction without feeling bad.

[ifyoumakeit]

I think that's a great approach, especially when handling a new client. The worst situation is landing a client who also personally designed or developed the last iteration of their website or app. They need to be dislodged from the work they've done and sometimes that takes kid gloves.

[kohanz]

Of any of the proponents of the "Wrong. ..." response, I wonder how many would use this phrasing face-to-face as opposed to online. Unlike my younger days, I do my best now to converse online as I do and would IRL and I find that this is one of those phrases that does not pass that test. IRL it would be considered plain rude and obnoxious.

[frou_dh]

If this is pet peeve time then I'll go with the alarming number of sentences people want to start with the word "So". It makes you sound like you're in constant rebuttal mode and trying to lay out the one true world view.

[marssaxman]

Yeah, I've noticed this. It doesn't work.

[informatimago]

Wrong. People should learn to make the difference between an sentence they're issuing being wrong or false, and they being bad. "wrong" does not mean they're bad persons. Perhaps at most that they're lazy or bad thinkers. That's all. In any case when something is wrong, it would be wrong not to stop it immediately, telling it wrong.