Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

I agree it is not as bad as the DDR was, but it is way more decadent and that may end up being every bit as effective as a police state. No one wants to tip over this apple cart under some vague notion of ethics or actual equality - my goodness no, we want to keep on being entertained and to buy crap we don't need and have stuff. We have more attachment to stuff than we have to any sense of rights let alone normative behavior for leaders. It's a classist system of neo-feudalism and any attempt to moderate it is communism/socialism. Who needs a police state when most people believe the propaganda willingly and repeat it?



I gave up my car more than a decade ago. I spent nearly six years homeless. I have lived in an SRO for about 18 months or so.

Since getting divorced, I have mostly not owned a TV. I think I have been to one movie at a theater in the many years since my ex moved out.

I'm aware it is a classist, sexist, racist system in many ways.

I also seem to be the only woman to have ever spent time on the leaderboard of Hacker News. I hit the board under my original handle of Mz about a month or so after finally getting off the street, so a lot of the upvotes that got me to the leaderboard were gotten during the years I was homeless.

I bitch regularly about the classism and sexism both in the world and on HN. But I'm not really the right person to aim your remark at. Because if you imagine you are "talking about me," then you have absolutely no idea whatsoever who the hell I am.


>Because if you imagine you are "talking about me," then you have absolutely no idea whatsoever who the hell I am.

Making a point in a discussion is not about the personal circumstances of the one we're talking to. Doubly so if they're an outlier, and triply so if we don't know their circumstances to begin with, because the discussion happens in an online forum.


A. I made that inference based on the framing of the remark, not based on straight up stupidity.

B. Plenty of people here know plenty about my circumstances. I know because they routinely use that against me.

So it is not unreasonable on my part to assume some people here do have some idea who I am and what I'm about. I was, in fact, very recently told I'm full of shit if I assume they don't: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19776469


Well, I for one, never even knew the backstory. I wouldn't assume most do.

Could be a few that have grievances against you or something.

I've noticed that some people, on online forums, get an obsession with another they had a dispute with (and felt wronged or whatever), and follow them from post to post, gather intelligence, and act like stalkers. Then again, some people are cuckoo with no personal lives and compensate in all kinds of bizarro ways online. Best to ignore those kind of people...


I'm not assuming most do.

I would thank you to stop trying to police my participation here. You have something of a history of treating me like an idiot.

If you want to engage some point I've made in a good faith manner: awesome.

If you want to continue your pattern of talking at me like I have no fucking clue how public discourse on HN works, please stop doing that. I view it as a form of harassment.

If you are not consciously aware of doing that, well, consider yourself notified that I have noticed a pattern of behavior here and it's something I don't like and don't want done to me.

And if you are suggesting I simply "ignore" jacquesm, I assure you I've tried. He's impossible to ignore. He's extremely influential here.


Hi,

No, I don't know you well at all. No, I don't have any wish to control you or silence you. With that out of the way, I've read a large amount of your comments on HN and you seem to have a habit of turning basically any discussion into a discussion about you. Not only a discussion, but one framed as "attacking" you.

It's why I initially didn't respond to your comment. I was a bit confused at how to relate your anecdote with my own post and eventually gave up.

It only related with a single sentence where you disagreed, and the rest was autobiographical stuff with which you put me in a position where I would have to disregard in order to move the conversation forward. I smelled a potential argument and moved on.

Just because someone has their own opinions doesn't mean they're trying to silence your own. And when you shift the conversation away from the topic at hand and act like a victim towards every single person that replies, it really just doesn't get anywhere at all. It just leads to cyclic, inflammatory posts.

I would suggest maybe reflecting upon this for a while, before replying to me with the standard, "you have no idea who I am". It's often said we can learn quite a lot about ourselves just by spending a few minutes with a stranger and asking them their thoughts.

To quote an esteemed member of HN:

If you are not consciously aware of doing that, well, consider yourself notified that I have noticed a pattern of behavior here

You have a defensive streak that gets in the way of constructive conversation, and that doesn't make you a crappy person. I myself have a problem with getting aggressive at times when I engage in discourse. But we owe it to ourselves to consider advice from others before disregarding it.


I engaged you in good faith elsewhere: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19891676

You have chosen to not respond to that and then you come here to describe me as basically playing the victim card every time I open my mouth. You further go out of your way to make sure that if I defend myself or disagree with your accusation, that's just further proof of how I'm the problem and I'm in the wrong and so forth.

Your comment is a personal attack and it's rather nastily framed to ensure that whether I reply or not, anything I do is agreeing with your ugly framing. Suffice it to say that I don't think it consitutes any kind of good faith attempt to be helpful to me and I have no plans to try to take your claimed "help" seriously.


>I would thank you to stop trying to police my participation here.

I'm not policing anyone, I'm offering my opinion. Likewise, I would thank you to stop being paranoid, and either respond to what I said or ignore it. Not respond on some imagined "intentions".

>You have something of a history of treating me like an idiot.

Actually, I have absolutely no recollection of who you are, and of having treated you like anything. I don't even remember the name "DoreenMichele" or having had a history of discussing with you, or whatever.

If I indeed have a history of treating you like an idiot, it's not because I go out of my way to treat that particular username (which I don't recognize and don't follow across threads) as an idiot.

It's either because I treat almost everybody like an idiot (which I might tend to), or because your individual (non-connected as belonging to a single person to me) comments over threads pushed the same kind of buttons on my responses (e.g. because you tend to make comments that I tend to disagree with and respond in a certain way to).

In any case, I don't go around keeping tabs. For most people I talk with on HN, I only ever remember the names/opinions of a few frequenter commenters which tend to commend often and on the same things so end up as identifiable, e.g. pjmlp has a soft spot for older languages, research compilers and so on, dang is one of the moderators, tcpatec is a security boffin, and so on. I only recognize as specific people on HN something like 10 persons or so, the majority are just opaque aliases that tell me nothing when I see them, even if I have engaged in threads with them at various times.

>If you are not consciously aware of doing that, well, consider yourself notified that I have noticed a pattern of behavior here and it's something I don't like and don't want done to me.

Well, the problem is I seldom ever check who I respond to. I mostly check what's written in their comment and whether it triggers a "somebody is wrong on the internet" / "I must respond to this" sentiment. I might glance at their username, but in most cases I wouldn't even remember it.

I could do some effort to check for your name and not respond in the future. In fact, if there's something like "block" I could use that and spare us the drama.


Well, this comment casts a lot of light on why you behave the way you do generally on HN. I will offer my opinion that it's a pattern of behavior that comes with an inherent set of problems.

If you aren't going to pay any attention whatsoever to social details, such as whether or not you have ever spoken to this particular person before, it's generally a best practice to refrain from any kind of personal commentary at all concerning their behavior. Behavior is influenced by context and you are making no effort whatsoever to understand context at all, so your opinions about such things are going to tend to be uninformed opinions that go bad places.


>Well, this comment casts a lot of light on why you behave the way you do generally on HN.

Well, you first accuse me on following you on HN and treating you this or that way repeatedly. And when I tell you I don't keep tabs, and I seldom know who is who I'm answering to (I'm just answering when I think some comment warrants an answer), you write the above that implies that you, instead, keep tabs on me and "how I behave generally on HN" (and, logically, on others too).

To me that's akin to stalking.

I'm not here talking with my friends or expecting long term camaraderie and rivalries, and going into who said what when. I'm on an open online forum with hundreds of users. Each new post is to me a new discussion, not a picking up from where we left, with animosities etc on what someone said.

>If you aren't going to pay any attention whatsoever to social details, such as whether or not you have ever spoken to this particular person before, it's generally a best practice to refrain from any kind of personal commentary at all concerning their behavior.

Well, I don't feel I offered personal commentary. I wrote a generic commentary on what you wrote to the grandparent, that can apply to anyone:

"Making a point in a discussion is not about the personal circumstances of the one we're talking to. Doubly so if they're an outlier, and triply so if we don't know their circumstances to begin with, because the discussion happens in an online forum."

>Behavior is influenced by context and you are making no effort whatsoever to understand context at all, so your opinions about such things are going to tend to be uninformed opinions that go bad places.

Sorry, the context here is technical, hacker-oriented discussion, and being informed (as in "informed opinions") rests on the technical, historical, etc knowledge of the issue in each TFA.

It's not about social subtleties, who is who, who said what in some earlier thread, etc. This is not Livejournal.


I don't keep tabs on you. I've just been here nearly ten years and you participate enough to be on the leader board. I made a mental note to try to avoid you due to a run in with you under my previous handle.

I haven't bothered to read your entire comment and may not bother. I got to the ugly and ridiculous accusation against me of stalking and stopped there.

I don't plan to continue engaging you.




Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: