
What HN users don't mean to be - pg
http://www.hnsearch.com/search#request/all&q=%22I+don%27t+mean+to+be%22&sortby=create_ts+asc
======
DarkShikari
It's an old rule that whenever someone says "I'm not racist, but", they are
practically _always_ about to say something incredibly racist. I think this
can be generalized to all forms of "I'm not X, but" or, "I don't mean to be X,
but", and so forth. "No offense, but, <offensive thing>" seems to also be a
common variation.

Is there a word for this kind of linguistic construct?

( Possibly related: <http://www.notracistbut.com/> )

~~~
jacobolus
I think your analysis is too glib here. [And since PG seems to be implying the
same thing, that goes for him too.]

It’s typically a way of expressing anger/displeasure/etc. without turning the
comment into a personal insult. If I say “I don’t mean to be rude, but you
made a grammatical mistake”, or “I don’t mean to be harsh, but your idea
doesn’t make sense” what I mean in the former case is something like _“anyone
could make that mistake, please don’t take it personally, but I figured you’d
like to know”_ , or in the latter case, _“you need to clarify your idea,
because you’re losing your audience; I don’t want to imply it doesn’t have any
merit, but as currently explained the merit doesn’t shine through”_.

Being able to make quick softening caveats without taking up a paragraph is
very useful, and our language is more nuanced and powerful for having these
constructions.

~~~
sedev
I'd argue that "I don't mean to X ..." has actually fallen victim to the
euphemism treadmill (
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euphemism#Euphemism_treadmill> ). It can still
be used earnestly for its original meaning, but that usage has been overtaken
by the usage where someone essentially says "I'm not racist but - " and then
proceeds to make a racist remark. This leads to the situation that your parent
comment points out.

Language, of course, varies, and we should keep in mind that some uses tend to
crowd out others - but I definitely think that this is something like the
euphemism treadmill at work.

~~~
kijin
I think it's also a victim of political correctness, which is closely related
to heavy use of euphemisms. In many places these days, it's pretty difficult
to make certain kinds of observations or relate certain kinds of anecdotes
without somebody taking offense. _"I once had an African-American roommate in
college and he was..." "You racist!"_ _"I met this crazy girl the other day
and..." "You sexist!"_ No wonder people feel like they need to qualify their
statements.

~~~
ugh
Why do you explicitly point out race or gender? You don’t have to, you know.
It’s kinda irrelevant most of the time. (And if you think it isn’t when you
are telling some harmless anecdote it’s possible you might be racist or
sexist.)

~~~
sgt
I do mention that all the time, because it's simply part of the story, and
that is how I tell stories, with all kinds of (potentially meaningless)
details. If people think I am sexist or racist because I mentioned that a
"black girl pulled out a knife", then so be it.

~~~
carbocation
I have a friend from high school who had a marvelous response when someone
would start a story like that: "Why do I care about his race?"

It was nearly always totally irrelevant.

~~~
ajuc
Why do I care that he was your high school friend?

I don't mean to be rude, just saying - people use such descriptions
intuitively (because it makes the story flow better), and it's not always
because they are prjudiced towards some group of people.

~~~
carbocation
That he is a friend from high school tells you about his relationship with me.
It answers the question, "Why do you, carbocation, care what this person
thinks?"

Note that I didn't tell you about his skin color, the color of his hair, or
anything else that wasn't actually relevant. Prejudice is a tough nut to crack
and is not the same thing as bigotry.

~~~
ajuc
In that case, you could just tell me he was your friend, not high-school
friend. Or better yet - "Person I care about ...". If being too specific was
bad.

Anyway - I don't see what this has to do with prejudice or bigotry. People add
details to stories, because that makes stories better (at least in the opinion
of the people that tell these stories).

I live in Poland, there are very few people other than white here (like, I've
met black people maybe 10 times in my life), and when someone tells a story,
nobody mentions race (because it's assumed to be white), but people tell "So
this big bald guy says ...", or "And that gray old lady did ...". That's just
how people tell stories. Is this prejudice, too?

And if I met black person and something interesting happened, I'd tell in my
story, that this person was black, because I'd certainly remember that as a
distinguishing characteristic, exactly like being big bald guy, or being grey
old lady. Or I could skip "gray", because "gray" is the default visualization
for old ladies.

------
DanielBMarkham
"I don't mean to be" easily translates into "There's a hell of a long
conversation here, with a lot of qualifiers, but frankly I don't have the time
for it. Instead I'm just going to offer some generalization that you can
easily throw rocks at. I know that you will, and now I'm telling you to have
fun with it."

So if I say "I don't mean to be old grumpy guy" that means that what comes out
of my mouth next will be a generalization and summary of my feelings that I
fully know for all intents and purposes sounds like old grumpy guy. Sorry,
can't be helped. That's the way the summary looks.

Most of the time people do not use such linguistic qualifiers out of some
desire for self-protection or having some mechanism to inoculate them from
some horrible thing that follows. It's simply a shortcut. I always thought
this was pretty obvious.

I know pg posted this, and it's his site, but is there really something here
worthy of this being on the front page? Is this some kind of clever editorial
about the quality of the commenting? If so, I don't get it. People are trying
to be nice about their criticisms?

~~~
slewis
If you're about to submit a comment containing "I don't mean to be", stop and
consider whether what you're submitting adds any value (as defined by the HN
guidelines in this case) to the conversation.

This is telling: "There's a hell of a long conversation here, with a lot of
qualifiers, but frankly I don't have the time for it." If you don't have time
to contribute something meaningful why contribute at all?

The other problem with "I don't mean to be" is it's fundamentally dishonest.
If you don't mean to then why are you doing it? If you must do this, just say
"I'm about to be".

~~~
Dylan16807
Using more words to say the same thing isn't necessarily being 'meaningful'.
Especially when it's just to prevent a misunderstanding of intent. Intent is
not nearly as important as the point being made.

------
pg
This one produces an interesting list of offenses:
[http://www.hnsearch.com/search#request/all&q=%22far+be+i...](http://www.hnsearch.com/search#request/all&q=%22far+be+it+from+me%22&sortby=create_ts+asc)

~~~
Confusion
What do you consider offenses? I don't identify any on the first page of
results, so it seems we mean different things.

~~~
adnam
Cliche.

------
petercooper
A couple of years ago, we discussed pg's use of "it turns out" here on HN. It
turns out a lot of people enjoy the phrase still :-)
[http://www.hnsearch.com/search#request/comments&q=%22it+...](http://www.hnsearch.com/search#request/comments&q=%22it+turns+out%22&sortby=create_ts+desc)

And the old discussion for context:
<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1162965>

~~~
msutherl
Douglas Adams' final, and posthumously finished and published book, The Salmon
of Doubt, discusses in depth the great utility of the phrase "it turns out".

------
tokenadult
Comments asking for sources may be catching on.

[http://www.hnsearch.com/search#request/comments&q=%22cit...](http://www.hnsearch.com/search#request/comments&q=%22citation+needed%22&sortby=create_ts+desc)

After edit: I recall the brilliant use of "can be shortened to" in this
example from the HN Guidelines:

"When disagreeing, please reply to the argument instead of calling names. E.g.
'That is an idiotic thing to say; 1 + 1 is 2, not 3' can be shortened to '1 +
1 is 2, not 3.'"

<http://ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html>

Similarly, a comment that begins with "I don't mean to be [X]" can be
shortened to making the statement that follows the "but" in that sentence,
probably for better rhetorical effect and persuasive power, especially if the
statement is actually based on a reliable source mentioned in the comment.

------
thaumaturgy
Well, "rude" is the clear winner, with 54 occurrences (and one "intentionally
rude"). Runners-up:

    
    
        harsh                           21 ("overly harsh": 2; "too harsh: 1)
        negative                        13 ("unduly negative": 1; "completely negative": 1; "overly negative": 2; "negative Nancy": 2; "too negative": 2; "totally negative": 2; "intentionally negative": 1)
        snarky                          12
        overly critical                 11 ("too critical": 3; "critical": 3)
    

Other common phrases:

    
    
        an ass                          8
        pedantic                        8
        argumentative                   8
        insulting                       6
        a downer                        6 ("(a) Debbie Downer": 2; "down": 1)
        dismissive                      6
        flippant                        6 ("flip": 3)
        offensive                       7 ("blatantly offensive": 1)
        cynical                         5 ("overly cynical": 1)
        condescending                   5
        glib                            5
        a jerk                          5
        mean                            4
        pessimistic                     4 ("overly pessimistic": 1)
        that guy                        4
        crass                           3
        curt                            3
        a hater                         3
        disrespectful                   3
        patronizing                     3
        presumptuous                    3
        nit-picky / nitpicky            3
    

Terms that were only used twice: obnoxious, picky, insensitive ("culturally
insensitive": 1), discouraging, crude, impolite, preachy, a tease,
adversarial, coy.

HN has quite the vocabulary. There's a long tail of single occurrences: meta
(ed: ha-ha), naive, cheeky, shortsighted, dumb, hasty, racist (ed:
surprising!), stuffy, demeaning, snide, dense, nasty, personal, unhelpful,
contrary, contentious, fanboyish, cold, doom-and-gloom, frivolous, facile,
accusatory, callous, lame, inflammatory, hating, ironic, skeptical, trolling,
trollish, patronizing, spiteful, sexist, disagreeable, controversial, simple,
overly reductionist, hard on Aussies (ed: chuckle), antagonistic, off-topic,
crabby, crude, derogative (ed: think they meant derogatory), passing absolute
judgement, an idiot, an alarmist, an insensitive dick, a curmudgeon, an HN
curmudgeon, a troll, a jackass, a tweak, a word Nazi (ed: surely not), a
grumpy gus, a dick, a total dick, a stickler, a hardass, a killjoy, a huge
downer, a turd, a burden, the grumpy skeptic ...

...and my personal favorite:

"the next snarky Lisp guy in the room".

There were about 7 other things roughly fitting the pattern here, but not
quite within the spirit of the rest: e.g., "trashing Ballmer", or "overly
favorable towards Google".

Quoted text was ignored where possible; instances of "or", as in, "insensitive
or rude", counted as a point for each, except for "or anything", which was
ignored. Terms were very lightly massaged, for example, "so callous" would
have counted simply as "callous".

~~~
zlapper
Great job! May I ask how do you get to produce these kind of analysis? Thank
you!

~~~
thaumaturgy
Sure, but I'm afraid it'll be disappointing: I just used pen and paper. It was
a good pen, though. :-)

------
scottkrager
"to be honest"

One of my pet peeves...are you usually not honest with me?

[http://www.hnsearch.com/search#request/all&q=%22to+be+ho...](http://www.hnsearch.com/search#request/all&q=%22to+be+honest%22&start=0)

~~~
pgroves
I resisted posting my pet peeve because it's not really the point of the OP,
but now I can't help it. Let me explain...

[http://www.hnsearch.com/search#request/all&q=%22let+me+e...](http://www.hnsearch.com/search#request/all&q=%22let+me+explain%22&start=0)

The fact that there is more text in a comment let's the reader know more
explainin' is on the way. No need to point out that you're about to elaborate.
Are people worried we'll get to the end of their paragraph and not know if the
next paragraph is related?

~~~
cubix
It makes sense in face-to-face interactions, particularly when addressing are
group. Sometimes, if you say something controversial, people will respond
dismissively before you've had a chance to justify yourself. "Let me explain"
is used as a way to reclaim the floor, so to speak.

For better or worse, people are transferring this pattern to written language
as stylistic device.

------
primigenus
I used to start sentences with "No offense, but..." when I felt I was going to
say something controversial until a coworker pointed out that the only reason
what I was saying was controversial was because I prefaced it with "No
offense, but...".

So now I don't say that anymore. I just say what I mean and people aren't as
likely to be offended.

------
davyjones
Has happened to me more than once when my comments online have been construed
as hostile when I never had the intent. Especially on this medium, where one's
face and vocal tone cannot be communicated, I think such disclaimers are
necessary (evil?). Also, there is the "Be civil" HN doctrine. So there.

------
endtwist
From a cursory look, it seems like the most common (in order of frequency)
are:

1\. Rude

2\. Pedantic

3\. Snarky

4\. Negative

5\. An ass

6\. A downer

7\. A jerk

I'd love for someone to actually analyze the results and get the numbers,
though.

~~~
stevenspasbo
I'm writing a ruby script right now, I'll post it if I can finish it before I
leave the house.

~~~
bootload
possible to add karma & created? Might be interesting to see if there's a
relationship b/w users.

------
Herring
When someone says "but", it usually means "Ignore everything I said before the
but." It’s like "No offense".

~~~
kalid
Sometimes. I think it shows the person has enough empathy to realize what
they're saying could be hurtful. I see it as making a point which isn't meant
to be taken personally (and a signal the person is willing to engage in a
discussion, not an argument).

That said, it doesn't really apply for statements like "I don't mean to be
rude, but you're an <ethnic slur>".

------
bicknergseng
Amazing how this thread took over the whole first page of results from that
search.

There's a few things that are interesting about this whole thing though.

First, that HN's users are this good. Many other communities across the web
eventually degrade into a news entertainment troll parties, sometimes needing
to be removed in order to preserve some kind of dignity on the mother site.
I'm sure there are worst things said here, but they are very much the
exception.

The phrase itself also got me thinking about how people express things on the
web. I imagine the majority of comments with that phrase have some malicious
intent, but there is also the possibility that whatever idea the user is
trying to convey is something not easily expressed in text through the
internet impersonally. For example, a conversation on racial stereotypes will
inherently have racist undertones, but it is entirely possible that people
want to discuss it genuinely without meaning to offend people. Part of the
problem is that it's very difficult to communicate things like sincerity,
empathy, etc. via plaintext. Another part of the problem is that people are
very...willing...to be offended... though I haven't decided how much of a role
the internet plays from this angle.

One takeaway: if you aren't meaning to offend people, choose better words on
the internet. It's likely the easiest way of saying something is offensive and
will offend.

------
overcyn
I don't see anything wrong with this. There are a lot of posts on HN are
looking for feedback, and criticism can very easily be mistaken for
aggressiveness. Sure rudeness is rudeness but prepending "I don't mean to
be..." in front of your sentences don't make it so.

------
ck2
So this is data mining in that the poster clearly defines what they are about
to actually do.

In fact you don't even need the "be" part, though it gets more complicated,
you could even just analyze "I don't mean to" - whatever follows immediately
afterwards characterizes the post?

[http://www.hnsearch.com/search#request/all&q=%22I+don%27...](http://www.hnsearch.com/search#request/all&q=%22I+don%27t+mean+to%22&sortby=create_ts+asc&start=0)

------
benwerd
Related: questions that have been begged:
[http://www.hnsearch.com/search#request/all&q=%22begs+the...](http://www.hnsearch.com/search#request/all&q=%22begs+the+question%22&start=0)

(Features pedantry and inexplicably purple microbes.)

------
ChuckMcM
And the other one:
[http://www.hnsearch.com/search#request/all&q=%22that+bei...](http://www.hnsearch.com/search#request/all&q=%22that+being+said%22&start=0)

Interesting take on linguistic analysis.

------
kevinpacheco
Similar results here:
[http://www.hnsearch.com/search#request/all&q=%22I+hate+t...](http://www.hnsearch.com/search#request/all&q=%22I+hate+to+be%22&start=0)

The proper response to most of these statements is, of course, "So don't."

------
rfrey
Looking through this was interesting and fun.

I'm surprised at some of the comments that posit intent doesn't matter in
communication. Intent matters a great deal: a question can be sarcastically
rhetorical or earnest, a comment can be blunt-but-helpful or simply meant to
hurt, a reply can be a defensive knee-jerk or a clarification of position.
It's possible for the same string of words to be either of those alternatives,
the choice made only by intent of the writer.

In physical communication there are many cues to indicate the intent of the
speaker. Writers must provide those cues intentionally.

"I don't mean to be" is often (not always) lazy and meaningless, of course,
but that doesn't imply intent doesn't matter.

------
thought_alarm
The earliest use of "sheeple" was from user "stcredzero" almost 4 1/2 years,
in a comment that, unsurprisingly, mentions John C. Dvorak.

[http://www.hnsearch.com/search#request/all&q=sheeple&...](http://www.hnsearch.com/search#request/all&q=sheeple&sortby=create_ts+desc&start=90)

Gosh, this is a terrific resource. It's almost as much fun as Google's Usenet
archive, back when it actually used to work.

~~~
jacobolus
The earliest use of “sheeple” was decades ago:
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sheeple>

~~~
Mavyrk
When reading his comment it was apparent to me that he was speaking in context
to the matter at hand (delving into hnsearch.)

------
stevenspasbo
"I don't mean to be curt, but what's the point of this?"

;)

~~~
Alex3917
A) Demonstrates that HN now has a working search engine

B) It's art. It prods you into realizing new stuff about yourself and the
world around you. Start realizing.

~~~
stevenspasbo
I put it in quotes because it was the first result I saw on the page

------
anxrn
Sorting descending by time makes this a meta post:
[http://www.hnsearch.com/search#request/all&q=%22I+dont+m...](http://www.hnsearch.com/search#request/all&q=%22I+dont+mean+to+be%22&sortby=create_ts+desc)

It also makes this comment a meta^2 post.

------
hc12
Here's an interesting one Why you should blog posts
[http://www.hnsearch.com/search#request/submissions&q=why...](http://www.hnsearch.com/search#request/submissions&q=why+you+should&start=10)

I'm sure there are as many how-to's posts.

~~~
rsanchez1
I'd be more interested in "X is broken" posts. A few of those seem to pop up
every day.

------
ricardobeat
Related: what HN users don't want to sound like

[http://www.hnsearch.com/search#request/comments&q=%22if+...](http://www.hnsearch.com/search#request/comments&q=%22if+i+sound%22&sortby=create_ts+desc&start=10)

------
josiahq
HN goes self-referentially meta, and the slow transition to becoming reddit
begins...

~~~
abc3
[http://www.hnsearch.com/search#request/all&q=%22this+isn...](http://www.hnsearch.com/search#request/all&q=%22this+isn%27t+reddit%22&sortby=create_ts+asc&start=0)

------
TeMPOraL
What HN users hate to say, but still do:
[http://www.hnsearch.com/search#request/all&q=%22hate+to+...](http://www.hnsearch.com/search#request/all&q=%22hate+to+say+it%22&start=0)

------
joejohnson
What HN users are:
[http://www.hnsearch.com/search#request/all&q=%22I+am%22&...](http://www.hnsearch.com/search#request/all&q=%22I+am%22&sortby=create_ts+asc&start=0)

------
dazbradbury
Hackers are...

[http://www.hnsearch.com/search#request/comments&q=%22hac...](http://www.hnsearch.com/search#request/comments&q=%22hackers+are%22&sortby=create_ts+desc&start=0)

------
ElbertF
HN users that hate to be "that guy":

[http://www.hnsearch.com/search#request/all&q=%22to+be+th...](http://www.hnsearch.com/search#request/all&q=%22to+be+that+guy%22&start=0)

------
molecule
357 things HN users are "just sayin"

[http://www.hnsearch.com/search#request/all&q=%22just+say...](http://www.hnsearch.com/search#request/all&q=%22just+sayin%22&start=0)

~~~
joejohnson
And your comment is 358!

------
waitwhat
I am reminded of the classic "not here to make friends"
<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w536Alnon24>

------
andrewhillman
I think this shows that HN users are careful w/ words because they don't want
come off negative and be down voted.

------
staunch
I assume this is related to PG's disappointment with HN'ers ragging on
companies when they first launch.

~~~
primigenus
Why do you have to assume that? Can't it just be that PG was talking to
someone, this came up, he wondered what the results would be, did the search,
and thought it was interesting enough to share? You know, like any hacker
probably would?

~~~
staunch
Perfectly possible. Just seemed to coincide with this post:
<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3658797>

------
chrisacky
This is pretty awesome. Is this going to be included in the main HN pages?

~~~
notatoad
you mean the search tool? scroll down to the bottom.

~~~
chrisacky
I guess that's what happens when you are relatively new to HN, you miss the
blindingly obviousness. (Could also be down to subconscious blindness I guess
- It's not often _if ever_ , that you see a search box in the footer).

------
mattdeboard
Surprisingly there are more results for "viagra" than "autodidact"

~~~
redthrowaway
Not surprising in the least. Turn showdead on, then have a look at the new
queue.

------
mwerty
"Don't get me wrong."

I have to suppress "Then why don't you say it right?"

------
evanlong
I don't mean to be rude but was this really necessary :P

------
MortenK
Try also "strawman", "ad hominem" and "to be fair".

------
balsam
looks like pg's stumbled upon a way to find smart comments

------
donohoe
I don't mean to be in the first page of results, but I couldn't help it

------
silentscope
clever. and I mean it.

------
thekungfuman
I don't mean to be meta, but this comment now appears in this article.

~~~
digitalsushi
[http://www.hnsearch.com/search#request/all&q=%22probably...](http://www.hnsearch.com/search#request/all&q=%22probably+be+downvoted%22&start=0)

~~~
thekungfuman
It was faux-clever enough that I decided to take the risk. :-)

------
ktizo
..first, let me point out, I do mean to be cynical. ;p

------
shingen
I don't mean to be speculative, but I think it's always the "but" in the
opening sentence that is really interesting.

------
J3L2404
The eloquent being so obtuse.

