|
|
|
|
|
|
by atombender
4291 days ago
|
|
|
You don't consider condescension and hostility to be "wrong"? To be explicit, then, I think your comment's tone was inappropriate for HN. You're taking a generalization and expressing displeasure in the fact that the generalization seems to have inadvertedly included you, and then blaming the commenter for having done so. You have to be deliberately obtuse to assume that the parent's statement was intended as absolute fact. It doesn't matter if we're discussing technology, this is a conversation, not a textbook; it's a normal part of discourse to give the other party a little slack and not treat every utterance literally and in absolute terms. |
|
|
Huh? I used "wrong" in the sense, "your argument is incorrect," not, "you shouldn't do that," precisely because your comment explained how you disagreed with me (not why you thought I was being a jerk). In that way, "wrong" and condescension/hostility are orthogonal concepts.
> You have to be deliberately obtuse to assume that the parent's statement was intended as absolute fact. It doesn't matter if we're discussing technology, this is a conversation, not a textbook; it's a normal part of discourse to give the other party a little slack and not treat every utterance literally and in absolute terms.
I stand by what I said. I don't know what textbooks have to do this. I'm not asking for rigorous debate here. I'm asking for a modicum of clarity in a type of conversation where clarity is important.
I agree that we should give each other a little slack. But I also think we should encourage clarity where we think it is necessary. I think it is necessary in this context.
> You have to be deliberately obtuse
But thanks for the insult all the same. Do you think that is appropriate for HN?