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

Pills? If you're going to live broadcast your own death, make it more interesting than watching paint dry. Sheesh.



Seriously people? I didn't expect this to be taken well by most here (in fact it was an experiment to see if there was a limit to down-voting), but some of you seem to be on a war path now.

It doesn't really matter what the Justin.tv CEO said. He pasted some boiler plate because there's nothing more to be said; the deed had been done. What do you want? An apology for not finding the video? For not policing the Internet? Prosecution of anybody "egging him on?" Come on.

Someone broadcast their suicide. That fact doesn't make it any more tragic than any other suicide. It also doesn't mean anybody more than usual was responsible. There's really no story here which is why I chose to make a comment that didn't acknowledge there was.

You may return to being irrationally sanctimonious now.


This reminds me of something that happened to me after 9/11. In my teenage immaturity, I made a comment insinuating that America got what was coming to it. I'm not sure why I did that (the mind is good at rationalizing behavior after the fact, so I can't trust my own memories on the matter), but I think it was a reaction to the complete unanimous sorrow going on in the forum. Everybody thought that the attacks were a horrible thing, that the deaths were such a tragedy. It might have been that I was struck by the complete irrationality of their reactions -- people don't feel so angered about annual traffic accident fatality numbers. After their angered reactions, I apologized and gave an excuse somewhat like the parent comment.

Having been in this situation, I'd say that tdavis probably posted that under the same state of mind as I did. And now that I look back, I can't help but conclude that taking that state of mind is the right thing to do. After events like these, certain ideas become treated like "correct viewpoints" that good-thinking people have to have. Such as that America is the good guys, or that this event here was so tragic and that you should be mournful. And now that somebody has come along with a different attitude on the matter, we get to witness a hailstorm of people who don't simply disagree on the matter, but who hate him because his reactions are different to theirs.


"America" did get what was coming to it. Its foreign policy of the last 50 years has been brutal.

However, the people in the towers weren't "America", they were people like you and me, and they were not guilty of "America"'s foreign policy any more than you and me are, and it is a tragedy that they ended up being the victims of this event.


And is it similarly irrational to mourn your Father's death more than the death of some random guy in a hospital you never knew?


My comment was not about the question of which views are correct or rational or make sense.


Is it wrong to NOT mourn your father's death more than the death of some random guy in a hospital you never knew?

Just because most of us would, does not necessarily give us the right to judge someone who doesn't.


This is really the most honest response here.

I guess I'm the only other person who can't see why a pseudo-sentimental canned response is so much superior to any other canned response.

When Pepsi, or the Whitehouse, the police, or whoever else (aside from those who knew the person, weeping or outraged) gives the canned response about caring, does anybody actually believe them when they say "all of us are deeply saddened...", or whatever you're proposing?

By now, people are immune to any type of official response to anything tragic[1], and don't expect (and really wouldn't want) a candid response of any type.

I know it was broadcast live on the internet, which is why it made the news at all but no normal well-adjusted adult (or child, for that matter) will go from "happy go lucky" to killing themselves live on the internet over the course of an afternoon flame war on bodybuilding.com, of all places.

[1]except perhaps missing child, axe murderer on the loose type thing... and then only in Podunk, really.


I agree. The sentimentalists are denying it. The idea that site operators have to be responsible for the live-feed user-content on their sites is absurd. Yes, this kid killed himself, but if I was the CEO of justin.tv I wouldn't feel bad for the kid. I'd feel bad for the tarnished name of my company. Honestly, people commit suicide ALL THE TIME. And it sucks.... for their friends and family, but suddenly it's broadcast across the internet and I'm supposed to have an interest in this specific incident?

But this story is a sensationalized love-in because other people witnessed the 'suicide'. I'm certainly not calling 9-1-1 every time I read a post trolling some web forums. 99% of the internet is NOT serious business. Most of the internet is people trying to piss each other off and cause trouble.

Honestly, the best this CEO can hope for is if people forget his company was involved, and worse case is the family ends up on Opera bemoaning how horrible the internet is and calling the CEO out to get involved in suicide prevention and better moderate his company's web properties.

_This story shouldn't be about how the internet is a cruel place that forced someone to kill himself. It should be about the real world being so cruel that not a single person in this kid's life cared enough to notice his problems._


It matters if you're trying to build a good reputation for your startup in the public marketplace. As much as we like to think that it's all about the code, these public perception things matter. Ill-considered comments - and even well-meaning comments that have the tone-deaf dissonance of stock boilerplate - have a direct, adverse effect on the public's image of your company. If you run a company like Justin.tv, that should matter to you, regardless of your personal feelings about the suicide itself. That may seem calculated and political, but it's a reality in the unpure world of business.


Seriously people? I didn't expect this to be taken well by most here (in fact it was an experiment to see if there was a limit to down-voting), but some of you seem to be on a war path now.

Oh, so now I'm a guinea pig in a sociology experiment when I come to hacker news?

Nice. That makes it so much better. Don't think I'll be using ticket-bumbler either.

Edit: Note for future.

Ask HN: Paul, Is there a downvote limit on HN?

See, isn't that better?


Or, surely he could check out the arc source? Doesn't add much to his argument.


They say there's no such thing as bad press, but I'm not so sure anymore.

I came to this forum to escape the Reddit mentality. I'm glad to see that griefers are still being aggressively downmodded here. It gives me hope that the HN community can maintain its quality status.


It's harder to be anonymous here. As long as that remains, there's hope.


Are you kidding? You don't even have to input your email to sign up. It's easier to be anonymous here than anywhere else, it's just that more people choose not to be.


Well, I meant it more that nobody will really take an anonymous profile seriously here, unlike other sites.


I don't know about you, but I take everyone seriously until I have a reason not to.


You think the people on here are dumb enough to believe that what you posted was an "experiment"? You're an asshole.


Just apologize for the comment, man. You're not going to change anyone's mind with a childish rant like this.


Posting comments irrelevant to your initial insensitivity will not help save face, especially when you throw in an attack towards the entire crowd.


An interesting, but rather unanticipated (I expect), side effect of your experiment is that even when you post something that's not too contentious, you're getting voted down to oblivion.

That shows there are plenty of HN users who do not understand HN policy. PG himself has said don't to crazy levels (such as under -10) unless it's obviously spam or the like..


This happens to people all the time... it almost never works to reply to massively downmodded posts to try and salvage them. I wouldn't even recommend he apologize as that will probably be downmodded.


Agreed. Besides, this post will blow over quickly (as they all do).

One thing I've noticed a lot in the past is that I'll post something I truly believe or feel but that's slightly contentious. I'll get downvoted to, say, -4 or so in the first few hours, but then voted up into positive territory over a day or two.

Perhaps those who aren't always trawling the site for new items are more realistic in their voting, whereas those who spend more time on the site are hastier and more damning.


If he intends to experiment with the downvote threshold as he states, I certainly won't stand in his way.


how does this have anything to do with what you posted? your comment was insensitive, regardless of what justin.tv executives did or didn't do.


Please keep your sanctimonious righteousness at home.


So?


Lesson here: When you make a mistake, buck up and say admit as much, especially when you're fronting a business.


I have since apologize for this stupid comment here: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=371638

I didn't reply here because I doubt the down-vote wave has crested.


You shouldn't have apologised. Shame on you for giving in to the righteous hordes, from a moral standpoint. From a business standpoint, it may have seemed the only practical action, but in my mind you compromised your personal integrity by apologising to these people, and I'm sorry that you did.


I believe in the end it was something that deserved an apology, but doing so certainly did compromise my personal integrity. I guess compromising it one time won't kill me.


I don't see any problems with dark humor, much worse is said around my office. No one could possibly be serious when saying that sort of stuff.


I'm guessing your day job involves creating content for greeting cards?


Actually he's a cofounder of ticketstumbler.


Which makes his comment even more confounding.


This reply makes every down-vote worth it. Good show, sir!


I actually had to scroll up to the banner to make sure I was still on Hacker News and not reddit.


memo to self: stop using ticketstumbler.com


> memo to self: stop using ticketstumbler.com

That this comment got modded so high is downright shameful. Rather than disagree and state your reasons you would choose to escalate this into an attack on someone's livelihood. This is intended to be a community where we can speak freely among our peers, and you and your little cheerleading posse have perverted that.

I'm really trying to understand where you're coming from. I don't know if this is simply a last resort because you're unable to articulate exactly why you so vehemently disagree or if this is a threat you intend to follow through with. I can assure you that if you do, in fact, intend to avoid doing business or associating with those you have disagreed with at one time or another you are going to be living in a very lonely world.


There was an additional cheap comment from another ticketstumbler founder that has since been removed showing a similar sentiment, mocking the Justin.tv statement.


No offense, but this brings new meaning to the expression "OH NOES". I mean seriously, who cares?


memo to self: start using ticketstumbler.com.

I'm glad the guy has an actual personality. I agree with his statement, too. Pills + webcam = boredom.


Thank you.


user: tdavis created: 287 days ago karma: 911

it really disappoints me to see users with very high karma levels making such obscene, unnecessary and completely non-hacker-news-esque comments. you are hurting this community: please stop.


I think it's great that people in this community still feel they can comment without a chastity belt of righteousness strapped around their mouth.

Shame to see that going away thanks to people like you.


I think most people here are probably a little too ramen-profitable to buy tickets from ticket brokers anyway


indeed.


Such a shame, but I won't be using it either.


What's a shame? That you won't be using it? I'm sure we'll all survive.


Man you got downvoted like anything! I wonder how it was done though, as HN seems to lack any control downvoting in my browser.


You aren't worth enough to see a down arrow I believe.

There is some threshold of karma you need before it appears. I guess; I'm not worthy either.


There's a karma minimum for downvoting.


Seriously?


TicketStumbler founders - Get a life.


I'm sure they have no problem in that area. Do you?


Why are you defending this thread so bad?


Because I have a thing against sheep-like waves of self-righteousness colimating on a single hapless victim. It could have been me - hell, I made a comment just as caustic as tdavis, but somehow I got "lucky" and ignored by the masses of supposedly terribly offended users.


You're an idiot.


Honestly, I think your account should be revoked after that comment, unless you see it fit to properly apologize.

Also, when you have your (and your partner's) business linked in your profile, you should think twice about what you say. Your concern about your reputation may be little, but I'm sure your livelihood is a little more important.

I'm left questioning not only your maturity, but that of user fallentimes, also from ticketstumbler, and even PG and YCombinator itself. I certainly do not want to be associated with people that feel another individual's suicide is a joke. Your business will not see any revenue from me, ever.


You should think about your own maturity level before engaging in self-indulgent posts such as the one you just wrote.

The funny thing about the sentence I just wrote is that you could validly echo it back to me. At least the self-indulgence part. Unfortunately for you, I have been thinking about my maturity level while writing this post.

In all seriousness (and my first sentence was serious too), what we have here is that your comment's parent was written by a person who is comfortable with making light of human tragedy, something which you are uncomfortable with. I'm not sure what that has to do with maturity, and in fact I'm not sure what maturity is or why you think that attribute would be a sign of immaturity.


I'm not sure how my post is self-indulgent, to be honest.

Most people would consider black humour regarding a suicide that basically just happened as inappropriate and immature. After a certain period has elapsed, some venues will allow for such an expression. (The fact that the parent is a -50 in rating as I write this confirms this social norm.)

People who make inopportune remarks tend to be those that are either not able to properly grasp the magnitude of a situation and deal with it in a dignified and respectful way; or even worse, can't pick up on the general consensus of others as to the degree of magnitude.

How well a person can read social situations is by definition, maturity.


I think if you find this community offensive to your sense of maturity you should leave.




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

Search: